2020年2月22日，一個很2的年份中很2的日子。這一天的經濟學人雜志，在封面文章中對美股的Big 5——谷歌、亞馬遜、蘋果、微軟和臉書——這科技五巨頭日益強大所帶來的風險和問題進行了討論，並且用到了一個詞彙 – "techlash"。本周末，全球市場再次陷入波瀾，對美股至關重要的big 5所帶來的爭議，值得關注。本所對照原文簡單翻譯了文章內容，供各位參考。
Investors think the techlash is over. That judgment is premature.
投資者認爲techlash已經結束。這個判斷爲時過早。
techlash: 即technology和backlash的混成詞，2018年被納入牛津辭典年度詞彙，翻譯爲"技術後沖"，是對大型科技公司日益增長的力量和影響力的強烈又廣泛的負面反應，表達了對大型科技巨頭公司的批評與抵制。
In 2018 a new word entered Silicon Valley's lexicon: the "tech- lash", or the risk of a consumer and regulatory revolt against big tech. Today that threat seems empty. Even as regulators discuss new rules and activists fret about the right to privacy, the shares of the five biggest American tech firms have been on a jaw-dropping bull run over the past 12 months, rising by 52%. The increase in the firms' combined value, of almost $2trn, is hard to get your head round: it is roughly equivalent to Germany's entire stockmarket. Four of the five—Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft—are each now worth over $1trn. (Facebook is worth a mere $620bn.) For all the talk of a techlash, fund managers in Boston, London and Singapore have shrugged and moved on. Their calculus is that nothing can stop these firms, which are destined to earn untold riches.
2018年，硅谷的詞典中出現了一個新詞："技術後沖"，即消費者和監管機構對科技巨頭公司的抵制所帶來的風險。如今，這種威脅似乎沒有意義。盡管監管機構研討了新規則，激進主義者亦表達了對隱私的擔憂，但科技五巨頭的股價仍然在過去的12個月中上漲了52％，令人瞠目結舌。這幾家公司的總市值增長了將近2萬億美金。2萬億美金是什麽概念呢？大致相當于德國整個股市的市值。五家公司中的四家，也就是谷歌（母公司）、亞馬遜、蘋果和微軟，每一家市值都超過1萬億美金（FB臉書的市值只到6200億美金）。盡管一直在談論techlash，但波士頓、倫敦和新加坡的基金管理人卻對此不屑一顧，繼續勇往直前。他們認爲，沒有什麽能夠阻擋這些注定要賺取不菲財富的公司。
This surge in tech giants' share prices raises two worries. One is whether investors have stoked a speculative bubble. The five firms, worth $5.6trn, make up almost a fifth of the value of the s&p 500 index of American shares. The last time the market was so concentrated was 20 years ago, before a crash that triggered a widespread downturn. The other, opposite concern is that investors may be right. The big tech firms' supersized valuations suggest their profits will double or so in the next decade, causing far greater economic tremors in rich countries and an alarming concentration of economic and political power.
科技巨頭股價的飙升引發了兩個擔憂。一是，科技股投資者是否引發了投機泡沫。這五家公司的市值達到5.6萬億美金，幾乎占了標准普爾500指數美國股票價值的五分之一。市場上一次（市值）如此集中是出現在20年前，那一次隨後便引發了股市的崩盤（說的是2000年的互聯網泡沫）。另一個擔憂則相反，即擔憂這些投資者可能是正確的。大型高科技公司過高的估值，恰恰表明了他們的利潤將在未來十年內翻番，從而在富裕國家引起更大的經濟震蕩，並造成經濟和政治影響力驚人的集中。
The question of a bubble is a reasonable one. Tech cycles are an integral part of the modern economy. The 1980s saw a semiconductor boom. Then, in the 1990s, came pcs and the internet. Each cycle fades or ends in a bust.
關于泡沫的質疑是合理的。科技周期本就是現代經濟不可或缺的一部分。例如1980年代就出現了半導體熱潮，隨後是1990年代的計算機和互聯網。每個周期都以泡沫破裂告終。
Today's upswing got going in 2007 with the launch of the iPhone. By 2018 it, too, seemed to be showing its age. Sales of smartphones were stagnating. Data scandals at Facebook crystallised anger about the tech giants' flippant approach to privacy. Global antitrust regulators were on the alert. And the loss-making antics of flaky tech "unicorns", such as Uber and WeWork, evoked the kind of speculative froth often seen at the tail end of a long boom.
今天的上漲可以回溯到2007年，也就是iPhone發布的年代。到了2018年，智能手機的銷售停滯不前，顯現疲態。FB臉書的數據醜聞，引發了人們對科技巨頭在處理隱私問題時的輕率所感到的憤怒。全球的反壟斷監管機構緊盯其後。同時，像Uber和WeWork這類所謂的高科技"獨角獸"的虧損，都讓人不禁聯想起長繁榮周期末端時常出現的投機泡沫。
In fact, at least for the biggest tech giants, today's valuations are built on more solid foundations. Together, the five biggest firms have cranked out $178bn of cashflow after investment in the past 12 months (see Buttonwood). Their size has yet to slow their expansion: their median sales growth, of 17% in the latest quarter, is still as impressive as it was five years ago.
實際上，至少就這幾家科技巨頭而言，當今的估值的確是建立在更堅實的基礎上的。在過去的12個月裏，五家科技巨頭合計扣除投資後的現金流量達到了1,780億美元（參見Buttonwood）。 在這樣的體量下，其擴張速度並沒有減緩：五家最近一個季度的銷售數據，中位數增長達17％，仍然如五年前般驚人。
Consumers say they care about privacy but act as if they care much more about getting stuff, and preferably without having to pay for it in cash. Since the end of 2018 the number of people us- ing Facebook's services (including Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp) has risen by 11%, to 2.3bn. Regulators have punished tech firms for tax, privacy and competition misconduct, but so far their efforts have been like bringing a pea-shooter to a gun fight: the fines and penalties they have imposed amount to less than 1% of the big five's market value, a tolerable cost of doing business. And the agonies of some of the unicorns, and their big- gest backer, SoftBank, have only demonstrated how hard it is to replicate the scale and network effects of the big five.
雖然消費者表示他們很關心隱私，但其實他們更在意的是能否用電子支付買到心儀的産品。自2018年底以來，使用FB服務（包括Instagram，Messenger和WhatsApp）的人數增加了11％，達到23億美金。盡管監管機構已對科技公司在稅收、隱私和競爭等方面的不當行爲進行了懲罰，但到目前爲止，他們的做法只是隔靴搔癢（原文-帶著豌豆射手進行槍戰）：監管所施加的懲罰和罰款總計不到五巨頭市值的1％，這成本太可以接受了。而一些所謂獨角獸公司及其最大的支持者軟銀的痛苦，又表明了想複制五巨頭的規模和網絡效應是有多難。
Meanwhile, the size of the opportunity is vast. As our special report in this issue explains, many parts of the economy have yet to digitise. In the West only a tenth of retail sales are online, and perhaps a fifth of computing workloads sit in the cloud with the likes of Amazon and Microsoft. Big tech operates globally, giving it more space to expand, especially in emerging economies where spending on digital technology is still relatively low.
與此同時，機會還是巨大的。正如我們在本期雜志特別報告中所解釋的那樣，許多經濟領域尚未實現數字化。在西方世界，只有十分之一的零售業實現了在線銷售，大概只有五分之一的計算工作交給了亞馬遜和微軟等公司的雲服務。放眼全球，科技巨頭還有更大的擴張空間，尤其是在新興經濟體中，這些國家在數字技術方面的支出仍然相對較低。
The trouble is that if you think that tech firms will get much bigger and diversify into more industries, from health care to agriculture, it is logical to assume that the backlash against them will not fade away but, eventually, get bigger.
問題在于，如果您認爲科技公司將會越來越大，並向更多行業（從醫療保健到農業）多元化發展，那麽可以合理推測得出，對它們的抵制不會消失，而是會更大。
As big tech's scope expands, more non-tech firms will find their profits dented and more workers will see their livelihoods disrupted, creating angry constituencies. One crude measure of scale is to look at global profits relative to American gdp. By this yardstick, Apple, which is expanding into services, is already roughly as big as Standard Oil and us Steel were in 1910, at the height of their powers. Alphabet, Amazon and Microsoft are set to reach the threshold within the next ten years.
隨著科技巨頭涉獵範圍的擴大，越來越多傳統企業的利潤會減少，更多普通工人的生計將受到影響，從而成爲憤怒的反抗者。一種粗略的規模衡量標准是用全球利潤與燈塔國的GDP來比較。以此爲基准，正在向服務業擴張的蘋果已經達到了標准石油和美國鋼鐵1910年鼎盛時期的規模。而谷歌（母公司）、亞馬遜和微軟將在未來十年內達到臨界值。
When recession strikes it will fuel new resentments. Big tech could face a storm that few have yet paid much attention to (see Business section). The big five firms employ 1.2m people and are now by far the biggest investors in corporate America, spending almost $200bn a year. Their decisions about whether to squeeze suppliers, slash investment or attack weaker rivals will prove as controversial as those of carmakers when Detroit still ruled in the 1970s, or even of Wall Street in 2007-08. Big tech's role in politics is already toxic; social media and videos influence elections from Minnesota to Myanmar.
經濟衰退來臨時，將會激起新的怨憤。科技巨頭可能會面臨當下極少關注的風暴（另一個板塊大意是說，年輕的科技巨頭管理者沒有作爲領導者真正經曆過經濟大衰退以及收縮成本、裁員帶來的失業潮等社會動蕩）。這五家科技巨頭總計雇用了120萬名員工，每年花費近2000億美金，是目前美國企業界最大的投資者。有朝一日，當科技巨頭做出壓縮供應商，消減投資亦或打擊勢弱的競爭對手的決策時，將會造成極大爭議，一如1970年代的統治者——底特律的汽車制造商，甚至是2007-2008年的華爾街所面臨的情形。科技巨頭的角色也已經在政治方面産生不良影響，社交媒體和視頻節目正影響著近至明尼蘇達遠至緬甸的選舉。
All this means that, far from having peaked, anger may be in the foothills. Executives hope that slick lobbying will protect them. But even today, the picture outside America is not of inaction but a tumult of regulatory experiments. China keeps its internet giants under tacit state control and wants to rely less on Silicon Valley, including Apple, which is already dealing with the covid-19 virus and other headwinds there. At least 27 countries have or are considering digital taxes. India has cracked down on e-commerce and online speech. The European Union (eu) wants individuals to own and control their own data, an approach this newspaper favours, although it may take years of innovation to create a system that is easy for consumers to use and profit from. This week the eu proposed curbs on artificial intelligence. Even in America, trustbusters may limit big tech's ability to gobble up startups, a strategy which has been instrumental to the success of Alphabet and Facebook in particular.
這一切意味著，怨憤可能遠未達到峰值。高管層仍然寄望于通過圓滑的遊說來保護自己。但即使到了今天，美國以外的地區雖不是毫無作爲，卻也是在監管實驗下各顯混亂。中國將互聯網巨頭置于國家的隱性管控之下，並希望減少其對硅谷、包括對蘋果的依賴，而蘋果已經在著手處理由于中國新冠病毒等因素帶來的不利影響。至少有27個國家已經或正在考慮征收數字稅。印度已在壓制電子商務和在線演講。歐盟則希望個體擁有對自己數據的所有權和控制權，這也是本報所偏愛的一種方式，盡管創建一個易于用戶使用並有商業價值的系統可能需要花費數年時間進行研發。歐盟本周已經提議遏制人工智能。即使是美國，反壟斷團體也可能對科技巨頭吞並初創企業進行限制，而這恰恰是谷歌和FB臉書能夠成功所采用的重要策略。
Just when you thought platforms were back in fashion
The $5.6trn market value of tech's formidable five is a testament to some of the most commercially successful companies ever created. But it also assumes that they will get a lot bigger even as the world stands by and watches placidly. Until today, big tech has been largely unscathed. The bigger it becomes, the more reason there is to doubt this can continue.
就在你認爲平台模式重新開始流行時
令人敬畏的科技五巨頭那高達5.6萬億美金的市值，正是這些公司作爲商業領域有史以來最成功的企業的證據。但這也表明，即使整個世界停滯不前，這些科技巨頭依然會變得更加強大。時至今日，科技巨頭們仍毫發未損。而他們變得越大，我們就越有理由懷疑，這種情況是否還能夠持續下去。
以上。