6 Ideas That Make a Difference 改變世界的6大創(chuàng)意

They can be as huge as a new constitution or as tiny as a medical microchip. In this special report， we explore innovations that are changing the way we work， live， and play.

Monitoring patients usually requires visits to the doctor， invasive tests and bulky1）， expensive devices. But what if getting a checkup were as simple as slapping on a Band-Aid？

Such is the potential of bioelectronics2）， an emerging field whose leaders are developing small， wearable， wi-fi-enabled sensors that can detect all kinds of vital information—heart rate， body temperature， hydration3） levels—and relay them to your doctor or your smartphone in real time. Once patients have the big data about their bodies， the thinking goes， they can be proactive about their health， cut care costs and foster better relationships with their doctors. “We want to change the world，” proclaims David Icke， CEO of bioelectronics firm MC10， which is leading the health-sensor charge.

He’s got a long way to go. Although consumers have embraced attachable devices like Fitbit4）， a digital pedometer5）， bioelectronics is for now a much smaller market. Most of its game-changing6） sensors are in development or just on the cusp of7） commercial availability. Still， researchers at firms around the world are working hard to make them as comfortable and affordable as possible. The price of MC10 sensors is typically $1 to $10， which means the most cost-effective doctor could be one that’s with you all the time.

Millennials8） are vital to an urban economy： they’re young， cheap and willing to work many of the jobs that help cities grow—medicine， tech， service， engineering. But as rents soar， that cohort is being locked out of living in many metropolises， which is bad for business. “We’re concerned about brain drain9），” says Richard Taylor， head of the real estate center at Suffolk University， of possible millennial flight from Boston.

To address this trend， several North American cities have jettisoned10） old zoning laws11）， like ones requiring that new units be at least 400 sq ft （37 sq m）， to allow smaller， cheaper microapartments. A typical studio in a San Francisco microcomplex that opened last year offers high ceilings， a retractable12） bed and foldaway tables—and rent under $1，600 a month. “We’re doing space plus utility plus functionality plus aesthetic inspiration，” says Patrick Kennedy， one of the developers. Projects in New York City， Boston and Seattle are following suit.

Stadiumgoers， prepare to be watched. Technology has already revolutionized the games themselves. Armed with video footage， analytics software and a loyal squad of geeks， pro teams can now know every strength—and weakness—of their players， prospects13） and opponents. “But what if you turn that technology around to the fans？” asks George Williams， a computer scientist at NYU’s Movement Lab. After all， the fans pay the bills， so teams would love to know which players get crowds jumping， which music makes them dance and whether or not the mascot14） entertains them during downtime15）.

Williams has all that information. He’s spent the past three years developing new camera software that scans facial expressions to identify fan behaviors—think cheering， jeering16）， talking on a cell phone—in real time at a stadium. So a company can measure， for example， how many eyeballs are attached to a Jumbotron17） ad （are fans looking？） and how well it’s being received （are they laughing？ Smiling？ Fiddling on their phones and ignoring it？）. Getting that kind of detailed feedback could encourage team owners to improve their ads and promotions—and， heck18）， even their teams—to create a more engaging experience and ultimately sell more tickets.

Keep the water out. For decades， that’s how cities have tried to prevent flood damage. In Venice at least $7 billion is being spent on sea gates. Post-Katrina New Orleans is building levees19） and flood walls. But as sea levels rise and storms get fiercer and more frequent， those costly， superficial barriers will not be enough.

With that in mind， some of the world’s biggest metropolises are starting to embrace “accommodation” architecture： building multipurpose structures to let water in during surges. For some structures， the proposed design tweaks are minimal： moving heat and electrical controls from the basement to the attic， for example， or ensuring that elevators start at the second floor. The more ambitious projects， however， do a lot more than manage floods. In Rotterdam， low-lying playgrounds made with water-resistant materials double20） as storage basins when heavy rainfall hits. In Singapore， new parkland helps funnel water through a purification system. And in New York City， so-called green roofs will absorb rainwater and recycle it to nourish grass， trees and other plants.

Of course， these projects are complicated and expensive and will likely need to supplement—not replace—existing water barriers. We know the water is coming. The sooner we accept that we can’t keep all of it out， the safer we will be.

The robotics revolution is set to bring humans face to face with an old fear—man-made creations as smart and capable as we are but without a moral compass. As robots take on ever more complex roles， the question naturally arises： Who will be responsible when they do something wrong？ Manufacturers？ Users？ Software writers？ The answer depends on the robot.

Robots already save us time， money and energy. But there are bound to be problems. Robot cars will crash. A drone operator will invade someone’s privacy. A robotic lawn mower will run over a neighbor’s cat. Juries sympathetic to the victims of machines will punish entrepreneurs with company-crushing penalties and damages21）. What should governments do to protect people while preserving space for innovation？

Big， complicated systems on which much public safety depends， like driverless cars， should be built， programmed and sold by manufacturers who take responsibility for ensuring safety and are liable for accidents. Governments should set safety requirements and then let insurers price the risk of the robots based on the manufacturer’s driving record， not the passenger’s.

But not every kind of robotmaker should be responsible for its creations. Ryan Calo of University of Washington Law School argues that to foster innovation in home and service robots， the platforms have to be open， meaning that any app developer can write a program that teaches your floor-mopping robot to clean windows too. The fault for some hiccups would be with the app developer or the user.

None of that means there won’t be accidents as we look to robots to improve life. But at least we’ll know who to blame.

In the days of the Arab Spring22）， we were all intoxicated by the sight of millions gathered in public squares to protest dictatorial governments. We hoped this would culminate23） in liberal democracy in the Arab world. Two years later， it’s clear the prospects in the region are mixed. It turns out the key is not people power but paper power； the focus should be less on elections and more on constitutions.

There is a vigorous academic debate about the conditions that allow democracy to flourish. The most powerful single correlation remains one first made by the social scientist Seymour Martin Lipset， who pointed out in 1959 that “the more well-to-do a nation， the greater the chances that it will sustain democracy.” But there are other intriguing correlations. Countries in Europe， even relatively poor ones， have done better than others.

Along with several others， I have argued that countries with strong traditions of the rule of law tend to develop a democratic culture that also protects individual rights. In the West， for example， legal protections for life， liberty and property developed in the 17th and 18th centuries. Only much later came universal adult suffrage. Liberty preceded democracy， not the other way around.

Poor developing countries should place an even greater weight on the rule of law. It’s crucial that before the first elections， before politicians gain enormous legitimacy through the polls， a system be put in place that limits governmental power and protects individual liberty and the rights of minorities.

這六大創(chuàng)意大到制定一部新憲法，小到發(fā)明一款微型醫(yī)療芯片。通過這篇特別報道，我們帶你探索那些改變我們工作、生活與娛樂方式的新創(chuàng)意。

要監(jiān)控病人的情況，通常需要看醫(yī)生，進行侵入性檢查，使用昂貴的大型醫(yī)療器械。然而，如果檢查身體變得如貼邦迪創(chuàng)可貼般簡單，那會是什么樣子呢？

這就是生物電子學的發(fā)展前景。生物電子學是一個新興領域，該領域的帶頭人正致力于研發(fā)體積小、可佩戴、能使用wi-fi的傳感器，它可以檢測到各種重要的生命體征，包括心率、體溫和水合作用水平，并且能將這些信息實時反饋給你的主治醫(yī)生或者發(fā)送到你的智能手機上。人們一般認為，患者一旦掌握了有關自己身體的各項數據，就會積極對待自身的健康問題，降低醫(yī)療支出，并建立更好的醫(yī)患關系。生物電子技術公司MC10公司是健康傳感器領域的翹楚，其首席執(zhí)行官戴維·伊克公開表示：“我們想要改變世界！”

戴維要實現這一目標可謂任重而道遠。盡管消費者已欣然接受了類似于Fitbit數碼計步器這樣的便攜式設備，但目前生物電子領域的市場還是小得多。大多數具有革命性的傳感器尚處于研發(fā)階段，或者只是剛剛投入商業(yè)使用。然而，世界各地公司的研究者正不斷努力使傳感器盡可能地讓人感覺舒適，價格也盡可能讓人負擔得起。MC10公司推出的傳感器價格基本上在1～10美元之間。這意味著你可以請到一位一天24小時圍著你轉的最經濟劃算的醫(yī)生。

千禧一代對于城市經濟的發(fā)展極為重要：他們年輕，對薪資要求不高，并且愿意從事多種對城市發(fā)展有益的工作，如醫(yī)藥、科技、服務、工程行業(yè)。但是，隨著房租飛漲，年輕一族卻被許多大城市拒之門外。這對商業(yè)發(fā)展而言可不是什么好事?！拔覀兒軗倪@樣會造成人才流失?！彼_?？舜髮W房地產中心主任理查德·泰勒在談及千禧一代可能會選擇“逃離”波士頓時說道。

為了應對這種趨勢，北美的幾個城市已經廢除了舊的區(qū)劃法中的一些規(guī)定，比如廢除新建公寓單套面積至少要達到400平方英尺（37平方米）這樣的規(guī)定，以允許新建面積更小、價格更低的小戶型公寓。舊金山去年開盤的一個小公寓建筑群推出的典型的工作室式小戶型就層高較高，并配有伸縮床和折疊桌，出租價格每月不到1600美元。作為開發(fā)商之一的帕特里克·肯尼迪說：“我們的設計集空間感、實用性、功能性以及藝術靈感于一體。”位于紐約、波士頓和西雅圖的很多樓盤也都在紛紛效仿這種設計。

喜歡去體育場看比賽的體育迷要做好被監(jiān)視的準備了。科技已經給體育運動帶來了革命性的變化。只要配備了視頻錄像、分析軟件以及一群忠實的技術高手，職業(yè)運動隊現在就可以掌握每位隊員、賽場新秀和競爭對手的優(yōu)勢和劣勢。“但如果把這種技術轉而應用到體育迷身上會發(fā)生什么呢？”紐約大學運動實驗室的計算機科學家喬治·威廉姆斯提出了這樣的疑問。畢竟是體育迷花錢買票，因此運動隊很想知道哪些運動員能引起觀眾的歡呼雀躍，哪首歌曲能讓觀眾手舞足蹈，以及吉祥物在中場休息時是否能給他們帶來歡樂。

威廉姆斯對那些信息了如指掌。他在過去的三年里研發(fā)了一款攝像軟件，通過掃描體育迷的面部表情來實時辨別他們在體育場中的行為，如加油、喝倒彩或拿著手機打電話。據此，公司就可以估測一些數據，比如：大屏幕上的廣告吸引了多少人的眼球（粉絲們看廣告了嗎？）；廣告在多大程度上被大家接受（他們看過廣告后是大笑，微笑，還是在搗鼓手機，然后直接把廣告忽略了？）。收集這種詳盡的反饋信息會促使運動隊老板不斷完善自己的廣告宣傳和促銷活動，甚至可以促使運動隊為觀眾創(chuàng)造更令人賞心悅目的體驗，最終售出更多門票。

把洪水擋在外面——這是幾十年來各個城市一直采用的防洪措施。威尼斯至少投入了70億美元用在防洪海閘上?？ㄌ乩锬蕊Z風過后，新奧爾良市正在建設防洪堤和防洪墻。但是，隨著海平面上升以及暴風雨變得愈發(fā)猛烈和頻繁，這種耗資巨大的表層屏障將無法滿足需要。

考慮到這種情況，世界上的一些大城市開始接受為洪水“安家”的建筑：興建多功能建筑，在洪水肆虐時讓水流進來。針對有些建筑物提出的設計調整較小，比如將熱電系統從地下室改裝到閣樓去，或者從二樓起才安裝電梯。然而，一些目標更宏大的項目所發(fā)揮的作用要比控制洪水多得多。在鹿特丹，采用防水材料制成的低洼游樂場在暴雨襲擊時可以兼作蓄洪區(qū)。在新加坡，新建的公用場地可通過凈水系統引流洪水。在紐約，所謂的綠色屋頂可以收集雨水，并能將其回收利用，用于澆灌草坪、樹木和其他植物。

當然，這些項目很復雜，成本也高，并且大概只能作為現有防洪屏障的補充措施，而非替代措施。我們都知道洪水就要來了，我們越早意識到自己不可能將其全部攔截在外，我們就會越安全。

機器人技術革命將使人類直面一個古老的擔憂：這些人造機器人和人類一樣聰明能干，卻沒有道德準則。隨著機器人在人類生活中不斷充當更為復雜的角色，一個問題自然凸顯出來：誰來為它們的過失負責？制造商？用戶？還是軟件開發(fā)者？答案取決于機器人本身。

機器人已經在為我們節(jié)約時間、金錢和能量了，但是也一定會出現問題。無人駕駛汽車會撞車；無人駕駛飛機的操作者會侵犯他人的隱私；自動割草機會碾到鄰居家的貓。對這些機器的受害者抱有同情心的陪審團將會對企業(yè)家處以足以使企業(yè)倒閉的罰金與賠償金。那么，政府如何做才能在為技術創(chuàng)新保留空間的同時保護公民呢？

諸如無人駕駛汽車這樣關系到公共安全的大型復雜系統，應該由對確保安全承擔責任并對事故負責的生產商來制造、編程和銷售。政府應該制定安全標準，并且讓保險公司根據生產商而非乘客的駕駛記錄來給機器人的使用風險估價。

然而，并非每一種機器人生產商都應該對他們創(chuàng)造的產品負責。華盛頓大學法學院的瑞恩·卡洛認為，為了在家用及服務類機器人領域培育創(chuàng)新發(fā)展，機器人研發(fā)平臺不得不開放。這意味著任何應用程序開發(fā)者都可以寫一個程序來教擦地板的機器人學會擦窗戶。因此，一些小問題方面的失誤應該由應用程序開發(fā)者或用戶來承擔責任。

所有這些并不表明，當我們指望機器人改進生活時沒有事故發(fā)生，但至少我們知道誰該為事故負責。

在“阿拉伯之春”運動爆發(fā)的日子里，我們看到幾千萬民眾聚集在公共廣場抗議獨裁政府，內心都感到欣喜若狂。我們希望這次運動最終能讓阿拉伯世界走上自由民主的道路。如今兩年過去了，顯然這一地區(qū)的前景變得很復雜。事實證明，實現自由民主的關鍵不是人民的力量，而是“紙上”的力量；焦點應少放在選舉上，而多放在憲法上。

關于“什么樣的環(huán)境會使民主得以繁榮”，學術爭論異常激烈。最強有力的一個相關性仍是由社會科學家西摩·馬丁·利普塞特首先提出的觀點。他在1959年指出：“國家越富有，維持民主的可能性越大?！钡沁€有其他吸引人的相關性。在民主方面，歐洲國家——即便是其中相對比較落后的國家——比其他大洲的國家做得都要好。

與其他一些學者一樣，我認為在法治方面有深厚傳統的國家更傾向于發(fā)展民主文化，這種文化也注重保障個人權利。例如，在西方，對于生命、自由和財產的法律保護在17、18世紀就發(fā)展起來了。成年人普選制度卻是很久之后才建立起來的。自由先行于民主，而不是民主先行于自由。

貧窮的發(fā)展中國家應該更重視法治。在首次大選前，在政客們通過投票獲得巨大的合法性之前，建立一個限制政府權力、保障個人自由和少數族裔權利的體制是至關重要的。

1.bulky [?b?lki] adj. 龐大的，體積大的

2.bioelectronics [?bai?u??lek?tr?n?ks] n. 生物電子學

3.hydration [ha??dre??（?）n] n. [化]水合作用

4.Fitbit：Fitbit計步器，2011年由美國公司Fitbit研發(fā)的一款創(chuàng)新型產品

5.pedometer [pe?d?m?t?（r）] n. 計步器，步程計

6.game-changing：打破格局的，具有革命性的

7.on the cusp of：在某事開始之時

8.Millennials：千禧一代，國外創(chuàng)造的專門術語，特指出生于1980～2000年之間的人，由于他們的成長與網絡交織在一起，因此又被稱為“網絡一代”（Net Generation）。

9.brain drain：人才外流

10.jettison [?d?et?s（?）n] vt. （故意）放棄（想法或機會等）；摒棄

11.zoning law：區(qū)劃法，指西方許多國家的地方政府用法律手段來管理土地利用和建設的一種規(guī)劃法。

12.retractable [r??tr?kt?b（?）l] adj. 能縮進的；伸縮自如的

13.prospect [?pr?spekt] n. 有可能成功的人，有希望的候選人，合適的人選

14.mascot [?m?sk?t] n. 吉祥物

15.downtime [?da?nta?m] n. 停工期；閑暇

16.jeer [d???（r）] vi. 嘲笑，譏諷，戲弄

17.Jumbotron [?dr?mb??tr?n] n. （電視機的）超大屏幕

18.heck [hek] int. [用以加強語氣或咒罵] 見鬼，該死（hell的委婉語）

19.levee [?levi] n. 防洪堤

20.double [?d?bl] vi. 兼任；兼作

21.damage [?d?m?d?] n. [律]損害賠償；損害賠償金

22.Arab Spring：“阿拉伯之春”，指自2010年年底在北非和西亞的阿拉伯國家和其他地區(qū)的一些國家發(fā)生的一系列以民主和經濟等為主題的反政府運動。

23.culminate [?k?lm?ne?t] vi. 告終