美网友问：如果中国的技术持续进步，美国将会发生什么？

中国的技术生态系统在未来五年内可能会发展壮大，并将在很大程度上成功地实现从客户网络向工业互联网的过渡。特别是，政府部门和私营部门将尝试利用人工智能（AI）和5G等强大的新兴技术来改造和更新中国城市和农业、制造业、电力和交通等传统行业。这种关注将表明过去十年基于微信、支付宝和抖音等程序的客户技术发生了显着变化。中国的技术格局可能会进入一个资本密集程度更高的阶段，因为它针对智能电网、影子工厂和自动驾驶汽车 (AV) 等工业用途。随着科学技术的不断发展，在科技方面与美国的差距也在不断地缩小，那么很多人都会好奇 ，中国的科学技术啥时候能赶超美国。在美国论坛上也有不少国外网友对此感兴趣，在Quora上就有网友提出这样的问题：如果中国的技术持续进步，美国将会发生什么?

我们选取了结果点赞比较多的网友的观点来分享，文章很长，但是内容很硬核，让我们来看看他们是怎么看待这个问题的吧。

论坛的话题

美国网友Ray的观点

There is no if ….. China’s technology will advance.

没有如果.....中国的技术将会进步。

What happens to the US is up to the US.

美国的命运取决于美国。

Since the US led by either war hawks or big corporations the future has a limited number of trajectory options.

由于由战争鹰派或大公司领导的美国，未来的发展轨迹选择有限。

Right now US and other foreign based industry is investing in China in several ways including in a lot of R&D centres, because they do not want to fall behind.

现在，美国和其他外国企业正在以多种方式在中国投资，包括很多研发中心，因为他们不想落后。

I don’t think anything detrimental will happen to the United States as a result of China’s technological advancements. When China gets on the same playing field with the U.S., naturally they will be in direct competition with one another. China, Russia, and the U.S. have long been keeping an eye on each other, and reasonably so. They’re all influential countries, and although the U.S. is certainly ahead in regard to influence and recognition, China and Russia aren’t far behind.

我不认为中国的技术进步会给美国带来任何不利的后果。当中国与美国处于同一竞争环境中时，他们自然会直接竞争。中国、俄罗斯和美国长期以来一直相互关注，这是合理的。它们都是有影响力的国家，尽管美国在影响力和认可度方面肯定领先，但中国和俄罗斯也没有落后太多。

As powerful, leading countries, they all continuously stride to outdo each other in many ways. They don’t do this for the sake of doing it, but because there’s obviously a great advantage in being more advanced than other places. It’s even better and advantageous when you’re included as one of the top 5 best countries of hundreds and hundreds of other countries that our quite stagnant in growth and development.

作为强大的领先国家，它们都在许多方面不断超越对方。他们这样做不是为了这样做，而是因为比其他地方更先进，这显然是一个巨大的优势。当你被列入数以百计的其他增长和发展停滞的国家的前五大最好的国家之一时，这甚至是更好和有利的。

韩国网友的观点

Surely it will happen sooner or later. No country can occupy the top position forever. Two thousand years ago, China already unified under Chin Dynasty with the most developed civilization on the planet at that time. Great Britain was the most advanced naval power after industrial revolution in the 1600’s. US became the great superpower only after WWI; and after WWII, it absorbed German scientists, and subsequently ‘stealing’ the brains from all over the world with the wealth came after WWII.

当然这迟早会发生的。没有一个国家能永远占据世界第一的位置。两千年前，中国已经统一了秦朝，拥有当时地球上最发达的文明。英国是17世纪工业革命后最先进的海军强国。美国在第一次世界大战后才成为超级大国;二战后，它吸收了德国科学家，然后用二战后获得的财富“窃取”了世界各地的大脑。

US is now at the peak (and on the decline right now). Logically once it is off peak, other country like China will regain its position as world number one as it was thousand years ago.

美国现在正处于顶峰(现在正在下降)。从逻辑上讲，一旦中国经济走出巅峰，像中国这样的其他国家将重新获得千年前世界第一的地位。

美国网友Masao的观点

I disagree with the answers so far. What is happening is a tsunami of technology capabilities by China that will put China in the lead in technology. Many have said China cannot innovate. Not true anymore. Some things to consider: graduating STEM students that form the technology workforce, graduating college grads that support business and education, patents, R&D investments, and a plan for the future.

到目前为止，我不同意这些答案。正在发生的是中国技术能力的海啸，这将使中国在技术上处于领先地位。许多人说中国无法创新。不真实了。需要考虑的是:即将毕业的STEM学生构成了技术劳动力，即将毕业的大学毕业生支持商业和教育，专利，研发投资，以及对未来的规划。

“China Is Innovating Faster Than You Imagine When I talked to a group of Chinese executives recently about their trip to Silicon Valley last year, the consensus was disappointment: “Honestly, I don’t know what all the hoopla is about,” said one. The world lauds Silicon Valley as a center of innovation, but many Chinese visitors, particularly from China’s growing technology sector – aren’t that impressed.” China Is Innovating Faster Than You Imagine

最近，当我和一群中国高管谈论他们去年的硅谷之旅时，他们的共识是失望:“说实话，我不知道所有这些喧闹是为了什么，”其中一人说。全世界都称赞硅谷是创新中心，但许多中国游客，尤其是来自中国不断发展的科技行业的游客，并不以为然。”中国的创新比你想象的要快

Future Tech dominance - China outnumber USA STEM Grads 8 to 1 and by 2030 15 to 1

未来的科技主导地位——中国STEM毕业生数量是美国的8:1，到2030年是15:1

Inside the world's largest higher education boom

世界上最大的高等教育热潮

“Even modest predictions see the number of 25 to 34-year-old graduates in China rising by a further 300% by 2030, compared with an increase of around 30% expected in Europe and the United States.

即使是最保守的预测也显示，到2030年，中国25至34岁的毕业生数量将进一步增长300%，而欧洲和美国的增幅预计在30%左右。“中国每周都在建一所新大学

So, unless the US can turn the fire up and get more students interested in STEM, bring R&D up front as a high priority, China will eat our lunch.

所以，除非美国能加大力度，让更多的学生对STEM（STEM是科学（Science），技术（Technology），工程（Engineering），数学（Mathematics）四门学科英文首字母的缩写）感兴趣，把研发作为重中之重，否则中国将吃掉我们的午餐。

美国网友Glenn Luk的观点

It really depends on how one views economic competition and global trade.

这真的取决于一个人如何看待经济竞争和全球贸易。

1. Some view it as a zero-sum, winner-take all game: “There is a finite supply of resources and only one of us can own it.”

一些人认为这是一场零和、赢者通吃的游戏:“资源的供应是有限的，我们中只有一个人可以拥有它。”

2. Some see the benefits of trade and collaboration: “I am good at A. You are good at B. Let’s trade and share in the value creation.”

一些人看到了贸易和合作的好处:“我擅长a，你擅长b。让我们交易并分享价值创造。”

My deeply held view is that the world has been shifting from (1) to (2) since the dawn of the industrial revolution. This is the nature of modern technology-driven progress and the difference between “finite” and “non-finite” goods and services (explained in more detail below). Over the past fifty years, the pace of this shift has only accelerated.

我深信，自工业革命开始以来，世界一直在从(1)向(2)转变。这就是现代技术驱动的进步的本质，也是“有限”和“非有限”商品和服务之间的区别(下文将详细解释)。在过去的五十年里，这种转变的步伐一直在加快。

In a world of relative “distributed plenty” — driven largely by technological progress — collaborating (trying to expand the pie together) becomes a more effective strategy than taking an adversarial stance (trying to grab a bigger share of said pie).

在一个相对“分配充足”(主要由技术进步驱动)的世界里，合作(试图共同扩大蛋糕)成为比采取对抗立场(试图在蛋糕中攫取更大份额)更有效的策略。

Technological-driven change inevitably results in disruption. Technology destroys old ways of doing things and replaces it with new, more efficient ways of doing things. Change and disruption almost always create both winners and losers, leading to social change. The countries that can handle the negative social effects of disruption best are going to be the ones that can best harness the associated positive benefits from technological-driven progress.

技术驱动的变化不可避免地会导致破坏。科技摧毁了旧的做事方式，取而代之的是新的、更有效的做事方式。变革和破坏几乎总是会产生赢家和输家，从而导致社会变革。能够最好地处理颠覆带来的负面社会影响的国家，将是那些能够最好地利用技术推动的进步带来的相关积极效益的国家。

From the perspective of a nation-state, this actually puts greater importance on inward focus (making sure the domestic economy is dynamic enough to handle change and proliferate said technology) as opposed to outward focus (trying to win every negotiation with trading partners).

从单一民族国家的角度来看，这实际上更重视对内关注(确保国内经济有足够的活力来应对变化和扩散上述技术)，而不是对外关注(试图赢得与贸易伙伴的每一次谈判)。

In other words, a country needs to first get its own house in order so that it can reap the benefits of technology-driven change — both internally and externally driven change. I am talking about social and domestic economic policies that ensure that our economy remains dynamic.

换句话说，一个国家首先需要把自己的房子收拾好，这样它才能从技术驱动的变革中获益——包括内部和外部驱动的变革。我说的是确保我们的经济保持活力的社会和国内经济政策。

How the U.S. is impacted by China’s (almost inevitable) progress in technology will largely be driven by how well we are prepared to handle disruptive change on the home front.

美国如何受到中国(几乎不可避免)技术进步的影响，很大程度上将取决于我们准备好应对国内颠覆性变革的程度。

If we learn how to handle change, we will benefit from Chinese advancements in technology by trading the inevitable technology advancements that we will be making — or even straight-up assimilating those new ideas and techniques. If we are unable to handle change, we run the risk of being isolated and left behind.

如果我们学会如何应对变化，我们将从中国的技术进步中受益，通过交易我们将取得的不可避免的技术进步——甚至直接吸收那些新的思想和技术。如果我们无法应对变化，我们就会面临被孤立和落后的风险。

As the world continues its inexorable march into the future, thinking with a zero-sum mentality becomes a bigger and bigger liability.

随着世界继续势不可挡地向未来前进，零和思维成为越来越大的负担。

Finite vs. non-finite goods and services

有限商品和服务vs.非有限商品和服务

There are certain types of goods that are finite, or limited by their very nature. Land is one example. Crude oil and most natural resources are another example. These types of goods can only be owned by one person or country at a time. They cannot be created magically out of thin air.

某些类型的商品是有限的，或因其本身的性质而受到限制。土地就是一个例子。原油和大多数自然资源是另一个例子。这类货物一次只能由一个人或一个国家拥有。它们不可能凭空创造出来。

Others are by their nature not limited by any physical constraints. These types of non-finite goods and services are largely the result of people getting together and collaborating.

其他的则不受任何物理限制。这些类型的非有限商品和服务很大程度上是人们聚在一起和合作的结果。

For example, consider semiconductors:

例如，考虑半导体:

• They are built on top of a physical resource that is widely distributed around the world and virtually unlimited: Silicon.
• 它们是建立在一种物理资源之上的，这种资源广泛分布在世界各地，几乎是无限的:硅。
• Improvements in chip design increase the efficiency and output of a chip without increasing the amount of silicon required.
• 芯片设计的改进提高了芯片的效率和输出，而不增加所需的硅的数量。
• In other words, it is mostly human creativity and ingenuity supplying all of the horsepower.
• 换句话说，主要是人类的创造力和独创性提供了所有的动力。
• And once a chip design is completed, it can be copied at nearly zero marginal cost.
• 一旦芯片设计完成，就可以以几乎为零的边际成本进行复制。

The shift from finite to non-finite as illustrated by the Dow Jones Industrial Average

道琼斯工业平均指数从有限向非有限的转变

Most economic development these days comes from non-finite goods and services like technology as opposed to finite goods and services. This is very evident when you look at how the component companies of the Dow Jones Industrial Average have changed over time.

如今，大多数经济发展来自于非有限的商品和服务，如技术，而不是有限的商品和服务。当你观察道琼斯工业平均指数成分股公司随时间的变化时，这一点就非常明显。

As you can see, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average was first formulated in 1896, all of its component companies involved some sort of limited resource whether it was land (for agricultural products), fossil fuels (for power plants) or physical commodity (rubber, cows/leather). General Electric is the only company on the list which relied on a significant technology component — and probably not a coincidence why it is the only recognizable name from that initial list today.

正如你所看到的，当道琼斯工业平均指数在1896年首次制定时，它所有的成份股公司都涉及某种有限的资源，无论是土地(用于农产品)、化石燃料(用于发电厂)还是实物商品(橡胶、奶牛/皮革)。通用电气(General Electric)是榜单上唯一一家依赖重要技术成分的公司——这可能不是巧合，为什么它是最初榜单上今天唯一被人认出来的公司。

In today’s list, most of the companies are from knowledge-driven industries that rely mainly on human ingenuity and collaboration (pharmaceuticals, financial services, information technologies, retail etc.). There are some natural resources companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron but these are a small minority at this point.

在如今的榜单中，大多数公司都来自主要依靠人类创造力和协作的知识驱动行业(制药、金融服务、信息技术、零售等)。有一些自然资源公司，如埃克森美孚和雪佛龙，但这只是少数。

The technology frontier, life at the “bleeding edge”

技术前沿，生活在“前沿”

At the edge of human ingenuity is the technology or innovation frontier, or something folks refer to as the “bleeding edge”[2]. Here we sit at the farthest limits of our achievements to date. Beyond this point, we stare into the abyss of the unknown and our best and brightest push on in a heroic effort to continuously advance and better ourselves. This is the front line of human civilization and development.

在人类创造力的边缘是技术或创新前沿，或者人们所说的“流血边缘”。我们现在所处的位置是我们迄今所取得成就的最远极限。越过这一点，我们凝视着未知的深渊，我们最优秀、最聪明的人以英雄般的努力不断前进，让自己变得更好。这是人类文明和发展的第一线。

The developed world (the U.S./E.U./Japan) have shouldered most of the burden for pushing the bleeding edge of the technology and knowledge frontier forward since the Industrial Revolution. For this, we have been rewarded with untold bounty and riches. We have been able to trade much of this technology and knowledge with less-advanced countries in exchange for them taking on some of the less-desirable types of human toil and labor. This trade has undoubtedly improved our quality of life.

自工业革命以来，发达国家(美国/欧盟/日本)承担了推动技术和知识前沿发展的大部分责任。为此，我们得到了数不清的奖赏和财富。我们已经能够与较不发达的国家进行大量的技术和知识贸易，以换取它们承担一些不太理想的人类劳动和劳动。这种贸易无疑提高了我们的生活质量。

For much of the last four decades, China has been squarely in catch-up mode. It has not contributed much directly to pushing that technology and knowledge frontier forward. Instead, it has traded the time and toil of its people, largely to rich, developed countries. By doing this, it frees up resources in rich, developed countries that can be used to continue pushing the human technology frontier forward.

在过去40年的大部分时间里，中国一直处于明显的追赶模式。它并没有对推动技术和知识前沿的发展做出直接贡献。相反，它把本国人民的时间和辛勤劳动卖给了富裕的发达国家。通过这样做，它释放了富裕发达国家的资源，可以用来继续推动人类技术前沿的发展。

In other words, China has focused on technology proliferation — taking technology that may not necessarily be considered “bleeding edge” and proliferating it in its own economy to move forward. Over time, China has gradually caught up and gotten closer and closer to the technology frontier. It is still not quite there but in many cases, the “bleeding edge” is within shouting distance and in certain cases it may even be standing at the very edge.

换句话说，中国一直专注于技术扩散——获取不一定被认为是“前沿”的技术，并在本国经济中扩散，以推动其发展。随着时间的推移，中国已经逐渐赶上，并越来越接近技术前沿。它还没有完全达到，但在许多情况下，“流血的边缘”就在大喊的距离之内，在某些情况下，它甚至可能就站在边缘。

Going forward, it is almost inevitable that China starts to help push that technology frontier forward. There is just too much inertia and momentum behind this push — one-fifth of humanity striving for a better quality of life. How much the U.S. can benefit from this depends on how well we handle ourselves.

展望未来，中国开始帮助推动这一技术前沿的发展几乎是不可避免的。在这一推动的背后有太多的惯性和动力——五分之一的人类在努力提高生活质量。美国能从中受益多少，取决于我们如何处理好自己。

Both efforts are important. Pushing the technology frontier forward increases the maximum potential for human civilization. Done right, proliferating the knowledge gained at the technology frontier into the rest of the population generally results in better lives for everyone.

这两项努力都很重要。推动技术前沿的发展会增加人类文明的最大潜力。如果做得好，将在技术前沿获得的知识扩散到其他人群中，通常会让每个人的生活变得更好。

A world of “distributed plenty”

一个“分配充足的世界

With all of the progress being made at the technology frontier, we are gradually moving towards a world of plenty:

随着科技前沿取得的所有进步，我们正逐渐走向一个富足的世界:

• The combination of solar technology and battery technology or other storage technologies can remove the former constraint of limited energy resources.
• 太阳能技术与电池技术或其他存储技术的结合可以消除以前能源资源有限的限制。
• Software will continue to play an increasing role in the efficient allocation of resources and matching supply of goods and services with demand.
• 软件将继续在有效分配资源和使商品和服务的供应与需求相匹配方面发挥越来越大的作用。
• Robots and automation technology will continue to remove the need physical human labor in the manufacturing of physical goods or provision of services.
• 机器人和自动化技术将继续消除制造实物商品或提供服务所需的体力劳动。
• Future technology advances may expand the scope of human civilization beyond this planet.
• 未来的技术进步可能会将人类文明的范围扩大到地球之外。

By and large, most innovation today is driven by the invention of or incremental improvements made in non-finite goods and services.

总的来说，今天的大多数创新都是由对非有限商品和服务的发明或增量改进所驱动的。

• Technology-driven plenty also tends to be more distributed around the world than finite-driven physical wealth of the past.
• 与过去有限驱动的实物财富相比，技术驱动的财富往往在全球范围内分布得更广。
• As opposed to a commodity like crude oil which tends to be somewhat random in where it can be found in great, economically extractable quantities, the sun shines everywhere.
• 与原油这类商品不同的是，它往往在某种程度上是随机的，在哪里可以找到大量的、经济的提取量，太阳是无处不在的。
• Moreover, the sun tends to shine brighter in places were historically disadvantaged (from an economics perspective).
• 此外，在历史上处于不利地位的地方(从经济学的角度来看)，阳光往往会照耀得更明亮。
• Solar power can smooth out some of the economic disadvantages wrought by geography and topography.
• 太阳能可以消除一些由地理和地形造成的经济劣势。
• Sand (the main ingredient in silicon) is also present virtually everywhere.
• 沙子(硅的主要成分)也几乎无处不在。
• Software is border-less and can be replicated virtually instantaneously at zero marginal cost.
• 软件是无国界的，几乎可以在瞬间复制，边际成本为零。

The implications of this shift to a world of plenty

这种向富裕世界转变的影响

Back in the late 19th century, economic output and wealth were determined far more by the ownership and acquisition of finite goods like land and oil and playing this game is much more zero-sum and winner-take-all. Hence, Colonialism as the dominant ethos of that era[3].

早在19世纪晚期，经济产出和财富更多地取决于对土地和石油等有限商品的所有权和获取，玩这个游戏更像是零和和赢者通吃。因此，殖民主义是那个时代的主导精神[3]。

But today, economic output and wealth are increasingly tied to the invention and proliferation of non-finite goods like semiconductors and software. These are products and services that are created primarily by unleashing the productivity of human capital/ingenuity.

但今天，经济产出和财富越来越多地与半导体和软件等非有限产品的发明和扩散联系在一起。这些产品和服务主要是通过释放人力资本/创造力的生产力而创造的。

There are several major implications of this shift:

这种转变有以下几个主要影响:

1. Technology and knowledge are much more difficult to hoard than physical commodities. It is relatively easy to copy software or a design but impossible to create a barrel of oil out of thin air.
2. 技术和知识比实物商品更难囤积。复制软件或设计相对容易，但凭空创造一桶油是不可能的。
3. It is easy to use military might to accumulate or protect physical resources. This strategy is far less effective with technology and knowledge-based non-finite-type resources.
4. 使用军事力量来积累或保护物质资源是很容易的。对于技术和知识为基础的非有限型资源，这一策略的效果要差得多。
5. The very nature of how the technology frontier is advanced, and how technology is proliferated relies on people talking to one another to come up with new and novel ways of doing things.
6. 技术前沿是如何发展的，技术是如何扩散的，其本质依赖于人们相互交流，提出新的、新颖的做事方法。
7. Collaboration and partnership are more effective in today’s game than taking an adversarial approach.
8. 在今天的游戏中，合作和伙伴关系比对抗更有效。
9. Because much of technology/knowledge-based wealth can be created literally out of thin air, even the relative losers can be much better off in absolute terms.
10. 因为很多基于技术/知识的财富都可以凭空创造出来，所以即使是相对的输家，从绝对价值上来说也会好得多。

Modern technology has modified the rules of the game and maintaining leadership means recognizing those rules and adapting to them.

现代技术已经修改了游戏规则，保持领导地位意味着认识到这些规则并适应它们。

Maintaining technology leadership in a “non-finite” world

在“非有限”的世界中保持技术领先地位

There is little debate about the United States’ dominant position in technology leadership today. The question in my mind is how we maintain this position. The following are some of the principles that I think we need to follow.

美国在当今科技领域的主导地位是毋庸置疑的。我脑子里的问题是我们如何维持这一地位。以下是我认为我们需要遵循的一些原则。

2017年，达芬奇手术机器人系统在中国合肥的一家医院进行心脏手术

First, we need to look forward, not backwards:

首先，我们要向前看，而不是向后看。

• I used run cross-country in high school. The races were long and it could be a lonely at times, especially if you were at the front of the pack. One of the key lessons my coach taught me was to always look ahead and not at the runners behind you.
• 我在高中的时候跑过越野跑。比赛时间很长，有时可能会很孤单，尤其是如果你跑在前面的话。我的教练教给我的最重要的一课就是永远要向前看，而不是盯着你后面的跑者。
• We need to focus on inventing the technologies of tomorrow instead of hanging on to the industries of yesterday.
• 我们需要专注于发明未来的技术，而不是执着于昨天的行业。
• That means making sure we are doing everything we can to be in the right position to succeed in emerging industries like AI, blockchain, robotics, renewable energy, genetics etc.
• 这意味着确保我们尽我们所能在正确的位置上取得成功，在新兴行业，如人工智能、区块链、机器人、可再生能源、基因等。

Second, we need to be adaptable:

其次，我们需要适应：

• We need to recognize that the rules have changed from a hundred or even fifty years ago when wealth and power were determined far more by the ownership and production of zero-sum, “finite” goods.
• 我们需要认识到，与100年甚至50年前相比，规则已经发生了变化，当时财富和权力更多地取决于零和、“有限”商品的所有权和生产。
• Using raw power and military might to control the narrative is simply a far less effective strategy than in previous eras.
• 使用粗鲁的力量和军事力量来控制叙事，是一种远不如以往有效的策略。
• Instead, being able to collaborate and build strong alliances is a far more effective strategy.
• 相反，能够合作并建立强大的联盟是一种更为有效的战略。

Third, we need to be introspective and humble:

第三，我们需要自省和谦卑:

• We need to recognize our own flaws and work to fix them.
• 我们需要认识到自己的缺点，并努力改正它们。
• For example, I think our biggest Achilles Heel is our massively inefficient healthcare system.
• 例如，我认为我们最大的阿喀琉斯之踵是我们低效的医疗保健系统。
• If we can fix our own flaws, we become a more productive and competitive economy, freeing up economic resources that can be used to maintain our technology leadership.
• 如果我们能解决自己的缺陷，我们就能成为一个更有生产力和竞争力的经济体，释放出可以用来保持我们技术领先地位的经济资源。

Fourth, we need to be empathetic … so that we can be dynamic:

第四，我们需要有同理心，这样我们才能充满活力:

• We need to recognize that technology-enabled changes are disruptive to society.
• 我们需要认识到，技术带来的变化对社会是破坏性的。
• Technology-driven progress effectively means forcing change on people, which impacts their communities and eventually shows up in our politics.
• 技术驱动的进步实际上意味着迫使人们改变，这影响他们的社区，并最终体现在我们的政治中。
• If we do not pay attention to the effects of technology-driven change on society, eventually those that are affected will start to push back.
• 如果我们不注意技术驱动的变革对社会的影响，最终那些受到影响的人将开始反击。
• While we should certainly reserve most of our empathy for our own citizens, it doesn’t hurt to share with the rest of the world either.
• 虽然我们当然应该把大部分的同理心留给我们自己的公民，但与世界其他国家分享也无妨。

Fifth, we need to recognize that military leadership is underpinned by economic leadership and alliance-building:

第五，我们需要认识到军事领导地位的基础是经济领导地位和联盟建设:

• Maintaining a strong military goes hand in hand with being a global technology leader.
• 保持强大的军事力量与成为全球技术领袖是密不可分的。
• But we need to recognize the fundamental truth that military leadership is ultimately underpinned by a strong economy.
• 但我们需要认识到一个基本的事实，即军事领导力最终是由强大的经济支撑的。
• We also need to recognize the increasing importance of building strong alliances vs. an isolationist approach.
• 我们还需要认识到，与孤立主义做法相比，建立强大的联盟越来越重要。

We need to recognize that the world is an increasingly complex place and the key to understanding complexity is communication and nuance. The biggest issue I see with society today is the increasingly pisive nature of the national conversation, which makes it incredibly difficult to come up with good, long-term solutions to the issues that we face.

我们需要认识到世界是一个日益复杂的地方，理解复杂性的关键是沟通和细微差别。我今天在社会中看到的最大问题是全国性对话日益割裂的性质，这使得为我们面临的问题提出好的、长期的解决方案变得异常困难。