[文献] 帮忙下一篇百度文库的资料 [推广有奖]

11楼

feitianyu12 发表于 2011-12-10 00:50:01

For women, this proposal is essentially the strategy known as “sequencing”. The main difficulty with it, as sociologist Phyllis Moen has noted,” is that child-nurturing years are also the career-nurturing years. What is lost in either case cannot be ‘made up’ at a later time.” Yet I would argue that it is possible to “make up” for career loss, but impossible to make up for child-nurturing loss. To make it economically more possible for a family with young children to live on a single income, we should institute (in addition to the “family fund”) what virtually every other industrialized society already has in place—parental leave and child allowance programs. And, to help compensate women for any job or career setbacks due to their time out of the labor force, we should consider the development of “veterans benefits” type programs that provide mothers with financial subsidies and job priorities when they return to the paid work force. In general, women must be made to feel that caring for young children is important work., respected by the working community. 对女性来说，这个提议实质上就是被称为“人生排”的策略。正如社会学家菲利斯. 莫恩提到的，他的主要困难”在于照料孩子的时光也正是建立事业的年纪。两者损失都无法再以后弥补。然而我想说在事业上的损失都能够弥补的。而养孩子的损失却是无法弥补的。为了使有幼孩子的家庭能够只靠一份收入生活，我们应该设立—几乎所有工业化国家早就已经有的---育儿假以及儿童补贴项目。另外，为了帮助补偿女性由于一段时间不在职场而遇到的工作或者事业挫折，我们应该考虑类似“退伍军人补贴金的方法” ，使他们重新就业时给予母亲以经济补贴和工作优先权。总之，必须让女性感到照料小孩是一项重要的工作，是受到就业群体尊重的。 (6)According to this proposal, the mother and not the father ordinarily would be the primary caretaker of infants. This is because of fundamental biological differences between the sexes that assume great importance in childrearing, as discussed above. The father should be an active supporter of the mother-child bond during this period, however, as well as auxiliary homemaker and care provider. Fathers should expect to spend far more time in domestic pursuits than their own fathers did. Their work should include not only the male’s traditional care of the house as a physical structure and of the yard and car, but in many cases cooking, cleaning, and child care, the exact distribution of such activities depending on the individual skills and talents of the partners. And, as noted above, after children reach age eighteen months it may be desirable for the father and not the mother to become the primary caretaker. This means that places of employment must make allowances for substantial flex-time and part-time job absence for fathers as well as for mothers. 根据这个提议，母亲而不是父亲成为婴儿的主要照看人。是因为，如前所述，男女性别之间的基本生理差异对育儿有重大影响。不过，父亲在这个阶段应该成为母亲关系的积极支持者，同时海燕帮助照料家务和照看孩子。父亲应该要比他们自己的父辈在家承担的事务上要花更多的时间。他们的职责范围应该不近包括传统上就一直有男性承担打理房屋，庭院和汽车，在很多情况下还包括做饭，打扫卫生和照顾小孩。这些事物的具体分工还取决于配偶双方的个人技巧和才能。而且，如前面提到的，在婴儿涨到 18 个月以后可以有父亲而不是母亲充当主要照看人。这就意味着用工单位必须不近体谅母亲而且还要体谅父亲在弹性工作时间和非全日制时的经常缺勤。 (7)It should be noted that there is some balancing out of domestic and paid-work roles between men and women over the course of life. Under current socioeconomic conditions, husbands, being older, retire sooner than their wives. Also, in later life some role switching occurs, presumably caused in part by hormonal changes, in which women become more work-oriented and men become more domestic. Given current male-female differences in longevity, of course, the average woman can expect to expect to spend an estimated seven years of her later life as a widow. 应该注意的是，在一生中男性和女性所承担的家务和带薪工作是基本相当的。在当前的经济状况下，丈夫由于年龄大，比妻子退休的早。而且，在后半生会发生一定的角色转换，部分想必是有荷尔蒙变化引起的。在这个转换过程中，女性更加倾向外出工作，而男性则变得更加乐于操持家务。当然鉴于现在的男女寿命差异，一般女性在后半生估计要寡居 7 年左右。 Male breadwinning and female childrearing have been the pattern of social life throughout history, albeit not always in quite so extreme a form as found in modern societies over the past century and a half. Except perhaps for adult pair-bonds in which no young children are involved, where much social experimentation is possible, it is foolhardy to think that the nuclear family can or should be entirely scrapped. When children become a part of equation, fundamental biological and social constraints come into play—such as the importance of mothers to young children—and central elements of the nuclear family are dismissed at society’s peril. Rather than strive for androgyny and be continuously frustrated and unsettled by our lack of achievement of it, we would do much better to more readily acknowledge, accommodate, and appreciate the very different needs, sexual interests, values, and goals of each sex. And rather than the unisex pursuit of “freedom with a male bias,” we should be doing more to foster a culture in which the traditional female values of relationship and caring are given a higher priority and respect. 男人挣钱养家、女人生儿育女是有史以来天经地义的社会生活模式，虽然这种模式并不总如过去一个半世纪现代社会中表现得那样极端。也许除了在没有年幼儿童的成人伴侣中可以进行很多社会实验，认为核心家庭可以或者应该被完全抛弃是极其鲁莽的。当孩子成为综合考虑因素的一部分时，基本的生理和社会限制就开始发挥作用——比如母亲对幼小儿童的重要性——如果抛弃核心家庭的中心元素，社会将会承担极大的风险。与其努力同时承担男性挣钱养家和女性生儿育女的双重责任，并为自己不能达到目的而不断地感到失望和不安，不如我们更坦然地承认、考虑、并欣赏不同性别的截然不同的需求、性兴趣、价值观和目标，这样我们会做得更好。与其不分男女都追求“具有男性偏向的自由” ，我们应该做更多的工作来促进一种社会文化：给予注重家庭亲情关系和养育子女的传统女性价值观更多的重视和尊重。 In a much modified form, then, traditional marital gender roles are necessary if the good of society---and of individuals --- are to be advanced. 因此，如果要推进社会及个人的利益吗，经过改良的传统婚姻性别角色是必要的。。 1、America is a nation of ambitious people, and yet ambition is a quality that is hard to praise 、 and easy to deplore. It’s a great engine of American creativity, but it also can be an unrelenting oppressor, which robs us of time and peace of mind. Especially in highly prosperous periods — periods like the present — it becomes fashionable to question whether ambition has gotten out of hand and is driving us to excesses of striving and craving that are self-destructive. 美利坚是一个雄心勃勃的民族，然而雄心这种品质却很少受到赞赏，更多受到的是谴责。它是激发美国人创造力的巨大动力，但是也会是一个残酷的压迫者，剥夺我们的 1992 时间和平和的心态，特别是在高度繁荣的时期——就像现在人们普遍质疑雄心是不是已经失去了控制，并正在驱使着我们走向导致自我毁灭的过度奋斗和过度渴望。

12楼

feitianyu12 发表于 2011-12-10 00:50:27

2、 Ambition is not, of course, only a quest for riches. The impulse pervades every walk of life. 、 Here is Al Gore straining to be president — campaigning earnestly without any apparent joy — to fulfill an ambition that must date back to his diaper days. And does anyone really believe that the fierce rivalry among America’s immensely rich computer moguls is about money? What it concerns is the larger ambition to control the nation’s cyberagenda. 雄心当然不只是对财富的追求。这种推动力遍布社会各个行业，各个阶层。阿尔，戈尔正在竭尽全力力争当选总统——尽心竭力地参加竞选活动，毫无乐趣可言——为了实现一个准是在孩提时代就已萌发的雄心壮志。难道会有人真的相信美国及其富有的电脑巨头之间的激烈竞争只是为了金钱？这场竞争的目的是实现更大的野心——控制美国的网络世界。 3、One-upmanship is a national mania. You see it every time a wide receiver prances into the 、 end zone and raises his index finger in triumph. More common is the search for status symbols — a bigger house, a more exotic vacation, a niftier bike, a faster computer — that separate us from the crowd. Money may not be the only way to satisfy this urge, but it’s the most common because it can so easily translate itself into some other badge of identity and standing. 对胜人一筹的狂热充斥着整个民族。每当橄榄球边接应队员大步冲入球门区，并怀着胜利的喜悦竖起象征第一名的食指时，你都会看到这种狂热。更为普遍的则是对地位象征的追求——更大的房子，更有异国情调的假期，更灵便的自行车，速度更快的电脑——这些使我们有别于一般大众。金钱不一定是满足这种渴求的唯一途径，但它却是最常见的途径，因为它可以很容易地转化为其他某种身份和地位的象征。 4、For many people, the contest seems futile. The New York Times recently ran a long story 、 on four families with roughly $50,000 of income who “wonder why they have to struggle so hard just to pay the bills.” The answer isn’t that their incomes are stagnating. Between 1992 and 1997, the median income of married couples rose from $48,008 to $51,681 in inflation-adjusted dollars,reports the Census Bureau. They are surely higher now. All the families profiled by the Times owned homes as well as things like big-screen TVs and elaborate outdoor grills. 对于许多人来说，这种竞争毫无意义。<纽约时报>最近刊登了一个长篇报道介绍 4 个收入约为 5 万美元的家庭。他们都“奇怪为什么自己必须如此努力地工作，却仅仅能够缴清账单。 ”问题的答案并不是他们的收入停滞不前。根据美国人口普查局地报告，1992 到 1997 年间，去除通货膨胀的因素，已婚夫妇收入的中位数从 48088 美元上升到了 51681 美元。现在的收入水平肯定比以前高。《纽约时报》所描述的家庭都拥有住宅以及大屏幕电视和制作精良的户外烤架等高档消费品。 5、The problem isn’t that they’re running in place but that they’re running in the pack with 、 everyone else. Consumer products morph from luxury to convenience to necessity. Cars, TVs and microwaves all followed the cycle; now it describes Internet connections and cell phones. If you don’t buy by the final stage, you’re considered a crank or a pauper. There’s nothing new here. In The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), Thorstein Veblen argued that, once an item becomes widely owned, possessing it becomes a requisite for “self-respect.” People try to consume “just beyond their reach” so they “can outdo” those with whom they compare themselves. 问题不在于他们正跑在跑道上，而在于他们正和所有其他人一起以同样的速度跑在比赛领先者地后面。消费品总是从奢侈品变为给人们带来便利的物品，在变为生活奢侈品。汽车、电视和微波炉都经历了这样一个过程；现在网络和手机也是一样。如果你没有购买最先进的产品，你就会被看成是怪物或者贫民。这并不是什么新鲜的现象。在 1899 年的著作《有闲阶级论》里，索尔斯坦。维布伦就论述到，一旦一件商品被大多数人拥有，那么拥有它就成为维持“自尊”的必要条件。人们想要购买“超过自己消费能力”的商品。这样他们就“可以胜过”那些他们用来与自己进行比较的人。 6、Frustration is preordained. Despite the booming economy, a Newsweek Poll in June 、 reported that 29 percent of adults found it “more difficult” to “live the kind of life” they want, while only 23 percent found it less difficult. (For 47 percent, there was no change.) The stress can lead to tragedy. Perhaps this is the story of Mark Barton, the day trader who murdered 12 people. People routinely try to beat the system through get-rich-quick schemes. This partly explains the explosion in legalized gambling. In 1998, Americans lost about $50 billion gambling. 人们注定会感到失望。尽管经济繁荣，《新闻周刊》6 月份的一份民意调查却显示百分之 29 的成年人认为要过上自己想过的生活更困难了，只有百分之 23 的人觉得更容易（百分之 47 的人觉得没有变化。，这种压力可能会导致悲剧。这也许就是马克。巴顿，那个谋杀）了 12 个人的当天买卖股票投机者的情况。人们习以为常地试图用各种暴发致富的方法钻制度的空子。这部分解释了合法化赌局急剧增加的原因。在 1998 年，美国人在赌博中输掉了约 500 亿美元。 7、、 We’re constantly advised to subdue ambition. Search for deeper meaning in family, friends and faith, we’re told. Money cannot buy happiness. This seems sensible — up to a point. The General Social Survey at the University of Chicago asks people to rate their happiness. The 1998 survey shows a somewhat stronger relation between money and happiness than earlier polls. About 34 percent of those with incomes between $30,000 and $50,000 were “very happy” and 58 percent were “pretty happy.” Above $110,000, the ratings were 51 percent “very happy” and 45 percent “pretty happy.” (Marriage has a bigger impact than income; the “very happy” rate of couples is about double that of singles.) 我们不断地收到应该克制野心的忠告。人们奉劝我们应该从家庭、朋友和信仰中寻找人生更深刻的意义。金钱买不到幸福。这似乎有一定道理。芝加哥大学展开的综合社会调查要求人们评判自己的幸福等级。1998 年的调查显示出的金钱和幸福之间的相关性略高于往年的调查。在收入为 3 万到 5 万美元之间的受访者中，大约 34%感到“很幸福” ，58%感到“相当幸福” ，在收入为百万美元以上的受访者中，结果是 51%的人感到“很幸福” ，45%的人感到“相当幸福”（婚姻比收入的影响更大；感到“很幸福”的夫妇所占比例是单身的两倍），。 8、 a recent book (Luxury Fever), Cornell University economist Robert Frank urges that we 、 In penalize overambition with a progressive consumption tax. The more people spend, the higher their tax rate. Spend $5,000 on a watch instead of $50, and your taxes go up; buy a car for $60,000 instead of $20,000, and pay more taxes. People wouldn’t be worse off, Frank argues, because they’d be shielded from the “arms race” pattern of competitive consumption. Indeed, they’d have more free time, because it wouldn’t pay to work so hard. 在最近的《奢侈品热》一书中，康奈尔大学的经济学家罗伯特·弗兰克敦促我们采用累进消费税来惩罚过度雄心勃勃的行为。人们消费得越多，他们的税率就越高。花 5000 美元而不是 50 美元买一块手表，你交的税就会增加；花 6 万美元而不是 2 万美元买一辆汽车，你就要交更多的税。弗兰克认为，人们不会因此而变得更穷，因为他们将会得以避免“军备竞赛” 式的竞争性消费。实际上，他们会有更多的空余时间，因此如此努力地工作并不划算。 9、Hmm. Let’s rethink. Though unlovable, ambition is socially useful. It sustains economic 、 vitality. It prods people to take risks and exert themselves. The Internet is the offspring of workaholics spending eight-day weeks to invent a new world and make a fortune. When the process works well, gains overwhelm losses — and not just in economic output. Today’s hyper-prosperity has improved the social climate. Almost all indicators of confidence have increased. 嗯，让我们重新考虑一下。虽然不太可爱，雄心却对社会有益。它使经济保持活力。它促使人们去冒险，去努力。因特网就是工作狂为为了创造一个新世界并借此发一笔大财而每周工作 64 小时的产物。当他们的工作进展顺利时，所得远远大于所失—--而且这并不仅仅在经济产出方面。今天因特网的超级繁荣也改善了社会心态。几乎所有的信心指数都有所增加。 10、What people disdain as ambition they also venerate as opportunity. As Tocqueville long 、 ago noted, America was built on the notion that — unlike in Europe, with its hereditary aristocracy — people could write their own life stories. The ideal endures. A 1996 survey asked whether anyone starting poor could become rich; 78 percent of Americans thought so. And social standing is fluid everywhere. Ambition and its creative powers permeate the arts, the professions, academia, science. Because everyone can be someone, the competition to excel is unrelenting and often ruthless. 人们鄙视野心，然而同时他们又崇拜它，视其为机遇。正如托克维尔很久之前特别提到的，美国是建立在----不像在具有世袭贵族的欧洲----相信人们可以书写自己的人生故事的观念基础之上的。这个理想持久存在。1996 年的一项调查询问是不是所有开始时贫穷的人都可以变得富有； 78%的美国人认为可以。而且在任何领域，人们的社会地位都是可以改变的。雄心和它的创造力弥漫在艺术界、职业界、学术界和科学界。因为每个人都可以成名，为脱颖而出的竞争是持久的，甚至常常是残酷的。

13楼

feitianyu12 发表于 2011-12-10 00:51:19

11、 Few of us escape ambition’s wounds. There are damaged dreams, abandoned projects and 、 missed promotions. Most of us face the pressures of balancing competing demands between our inner selves and outer lives. A society that peddles so many extravagant promises sows much disappointment. Ambition is bitter as often as sweet; but without it, we’d be sunk. 很少有人能逃脱雄心的伤害。有破灭的梦想，放弃的计划和失去的升迁机会。我们大多数人都要面对平衡内心思想、情感和现实生活之间矛盾的压力。一个宣扬这么多不切实际的承诺的谁会导致了很多的失望。雄心往往是苦涩的，正如它往往是甜蜜的一样。但是，没有了它，我们会彻底毁灭。 7 网络空间：如果你不喜欢它，就离开它 Something in the American psyche loves new frontiers. we hanker after wide-open spaces; we like to explore; we like to make rules but refuse to follow them. But in this age it’s hard to find a place where you can go and be yourself without worrying about the neighbors. 在灵魂深处，美国人喜欢新的疆界。我们渴望广阔的空间；我们喜欢探索；我们新欢制定规则。然而在现在这个时代，政治正确（言行避免有歧视之嫌）和其他束缚正在侵犯我们国民所崇尚的独立精神，你很难可以找到一个可以去放松自己而不担心邻居打扰的地方。 1.There is such a place: cyberspace.lost in the furor over porn on the net is the exhilarating sense of freedom that this new frontier once promised-and still does in some quarters. Formerly a playground for computer nerds and techies, cyberspace now embraces every conceivable constituency: schoolchildren, flirtatious singles, Hungarian-Americans, accountants. Can they all get along? Or will our fear of kids surfing for dirty pictures behind their bedroom doors provoke a crackdown? 网络空间就是这样一个地方。被淹没在公众对网络****的激愤之中的事这个新疆界曾经能并且在一些群体中依然能带给人们的一种激动人心的自由感觉。从前，网络空间是计算机爱好者和精通者的天地，而如今各种各样你可以想象的到得人都加入到进来，比如在校学生、打情骂俏的单身汉、匈牙利以美国人、会计师、还有****爱好者。他们能和睦相处吗？或者说，我们对于孩子们躲在自己卧室里浏览****网页的担忧会不会引发ZF严厉打击网络 ****？ 2.The first order of business is to grasp what cyberspace is. It might help to leave behind metaphors of highways and frontiers and to think instead of real estate. Real estate, remember, is an intellectual, legal, artificial environment constructed on top of land. Real estate recognizes the difference between parkland and shopping mall, between red-light zone and school district, between church , state and drugstore. 首先的任务是要弄明白什么是网络空间。或者，抛开高速公路和疆界这样的比喻，而把它看作是房屋土地财产会对我们理解网络空间有所帮助。记住，房屋土地财产是构建在陆地上的、理性的、合法的、人造的环境。房屋土地财产承认公园用地与购物商场的区别，承认红灯区与学校区的区别，承认教堂、ZF、与药店的区别。 3.In the same way, you could think of cyberspace as a giant and unbounded world of virtual real estate. Some property is privately owned and rented out; other property is common land; some places are suitable for children, and others are best avoided by all citizens. Unfortunately, it’s those places that are now capturing the popular imagination, places that offer bomb-making instructions, pornography, advice on how to steal credit cards. They make cyberspace sound like a nasty place. Good citizens jump to a conclusion: better regulate it. 同样，你可以把网络空间想象成一个由虚拟房屋土地财产构成的巨大无限的世界。一些财产为个人所有，并对外出租；一些财产属于公共用地；一些场所适合于儿童；而剩下的除了最怪癖的市民，大家最好都远远的避开的地方。不幸的是，当前正是这些地方正在激发人们的想象，比如提供炸弹制造的地方、提供****内容的地方以及提供被盗信用卡方法的地方。它们让网络空间听起来像一个污秽的场所。善良的公民于是得出这样的结论：最好管理一下网络空间。 6.Aside from being unconstitutional, using censorship to counter indecency and other troubling” speech” fundamentally misinterprets the nature of cyberspace. Cyberspace isn’t a frontier where wicked people can grab unsuspecting children, nor is it a giant television system that can beam offensive messages at unwilling viewers. In the kind of real estate, users have to choose where they visit, what they see, what they do. It’s optional.and it’s much easier to bypass a place on the net than it is to avoid walking past an unsavory block of stores on the way to your local 7-11. 无论颁布多少法令，进行多少诉讼，法规管理都不会奏效。通过审查制度来抵制网络上的下流内容和其他制造麻烦的言论，不仅违反宪法，而且从根本上曲解了网络空间的本质网络空间不是坏人可以抓走毫无戒备的儿童的疆界地带，也不是可以将冒犯性信息强加给不乐意接受的观众的庞大电视体系。在这类房屋土地财产中，用户必须选择它们要访问哪里，他们要看什么，和他们要做什么。用户可以选择避开网上的某个地方，而且与去附近便利店的路上避开一个有许多讨厌商店的街区相比，这要容易的多。 7.Put plainly, cyberspace is a voluntary destination -----in reality, many destinations. You don’t just get “onto the net ”; you have to go someplace in particular. That means that people can choose where to go and what to see. Yes, community standards should be enforced, but those standards should be set by cyberspace communities themselves, not by the courts or by politicians in Washington.what we need isn’t government control over all these electronic communities:we need self-rule. 简单地说，网络空间是一个可供自由选择的目的地——实际上，是可供自由选择的很多目的地。你并不仅仅是“上网” ，而且你必须要到某个地方去。也就是说人可以选择要去哪里，看什么。是的，社区行为规范必须执行，但是这些行为规范应该由网络社区自己制定，而不是由法院或者华盛顿的政客们来制定。我们需要的不是ZF对网络社区的管理，我们需要的是自制。

14楼

feitianyu12 发表于 2011-12-10 00:51:42

10.Second, there are information and entertainment services, where people can download anything from legal texts and lists of “great new restaurants” to game software or dirty pictures. These places are like bookstores, malls and movie houses-----places where you go to buy something. The customer needs to request an item or sign up for a subscription; stuff(especially pornography) is not sent out to people who don’t ask for it. Some of these services are free or included as part of a broader service like compuserve or America online; others charge and may bill their customers directly. 第二，网络空间提供信息和娱乐服务，人们可以下载从法律文书、声誉良好的新饭店名单到游戏软件、淫秽图片的任何东西.这些场所类似于你可以去买东西的地方，比如书店、购物中心和电影院。客户需要提出购买某个商品，或者签约订阅某种刊物。否则，任何物品（尤其是色情信息）是不会被发送给他们的，这些服务有些是免费的，或是包含在像美联网和美国在线所提供的广泛服务之中，有些是收费的，可以直接开列账单要求顾客付账。 11.Third, there are “real ” communities-----groups of people who communicate among themselves. In real-estate terms, they’re like bars or restaurants or bathhouses. Each active participant contributes to a general conversation, generally through posted messages. Other participants may simply listen or watch.. some services are supervised by a moderator; others are more like bulletin boards------anyone is free to post anything. Many of these services started out unmoderated but are now imposing rules to keep out unwanted advertising, extraneous discussions or increasingly rude participants.without a moderator, the decibel level often gets too high. 第三，网络空间上有“真正的”社区——内部相互交流的群体。参照房屋土地财产的比喻来说，它们类似与酒吧·饭馆和公共浴室。每个积极的参与者一般通过张贴信息来参与某一个讨论。其他参与者可以只是旁听或者是观望。部分社区由一个版主进行监管，其他的社区则更像电子公告牌——任何人都可以自由的张贴任何东西。许多服务开始时并不设版主，但是现在也实行强制规定以防止出现无用的广告·无用的讨论或日益粗鲁的参与者。没有版主，社区讨论往往会分贝太高，显得过于吵杂。 14.What’s unique about cyberspace is that it allows communities of any size and kind to flourish; in cyberspace, communities are chosen by the users, not forced on them by accidents of geography. This freedom gives the rules that preside in cyberspace a moral authority that rules in terrestrial environments don’t have. Most people are stuck in the country of their birth, but if you don’t like the rules of a cyberspace community, you can just sign off. Love it or leave it. Likewise, if parents don’t like the rules of a given cyberspace community, they can restrict their children’s access to it. 网络空间的特别之处在于。它把我们从必须遵循大多数人制定的规则而生活的政府专制中解放出来。在民主国家中，少数派和少数人的偏好往往会遭到排挤，无论他们是少数民族和文化还是少数人拥有的个人爱好。但是在网络空间，任何大小和类别的社区都能繁荣昌盛；在网络空间，用户自由选择自己的社区，而不是依据地域的偶然因素将社区强加给用户。这种选择的自由赋予主持网络空间的规章制度以一种道德权威，而这种权威是陆地环境中的规章制度所不具备的。大多数人被困于自己出生的国家无法脱身。然而如果你不喜欢某个网络社区的规章，你可以退出，要么喜欢它，要么离开它。同样的，如果父母们不喜欢某个网络社区的规章，他们可以限制自己孩子与它接触。 What’s likely to happen in cyberspace is the formation of new communities, free of the constraints that cause conflict on earth. Instead of a global village, which is a nice dream but impossible to manage, we’ll have invented another world of self-contained communities that cater to their own members’ inclinations without interfering with anyone else’s. the possibility of a real market-style evolution of governance is at hand. In cyberspace, we’ll be able to test and evolve rules governing what needs to be governed------intellectual property, content and access control, rules about privacy and free speech. Some communities will allow anyone in; others will restrict access to members who qualify on one basis or another. Those communities that prove self-sustaining will prosper (and perhaps grow and split into subsets with ever-more-particular interests and identities). Those that can’t survive----either because people lose interest or get scared off-----will simply wither away. 可以预料在网络空间将会形成不受那些在地球上导致冲突的种种约束的新社区。我们不会建立一个地球村，那只是一个美好却难以实现的梦想。我们将创造另一个由许多能满足其成员的意愿同时不妨碍他人意愿的独立自主的社区组成的世界。社区管理方式的真正市场化演变即将成为可能。在网络空间，我们将能够通过试验和改进规章制度来管理那些需要管理的——知识财产·内容和限制·关于隐私和言论自由的规则。有些社区将允许任何人加入，有些将只允许符合这种或那种条件的成员加入。那些能够自我维持· 自我完善的社区将会昌盛起来（而且也许会壮大分裂为一个个依据更加具体的兴趣和身份而建立的分社区）。而那些不能生存的社区——或是因为人们对它们失去了兴趣或是因为人们被吓跑了——则将渐渐萎缩并消失。 15.In the near future, explorers in the cyberspace will need to get better at defining and identifying their communities. They will need to put in place-----and accept-----their own local governments,just as the owners of expensive real estate often prefer to have their own security guards rather than call in the police.but they will rarely need help from any terrestrial government. 在不远的将来，网络空间的探索者将需要更好的明确和识别他们的网络社区。他们将需要建立并接受他们自己的社区政府，就像高档房产的主人常常宁愿要自己的保安人员而不愿叫警察一样。不过他们将不太会需要来自陆地政府的帮助。 16.In the end, our society needs to grow up. Growing up means understanding that there are no perfect answers, no all-purpose solutions, no government-sanctioned safe havens. We haven’t created a perfect society on earth, and we won’t have one in cyberspace either. But at least we can have individual choice-----and individual responsibility. 最后，我们的社会需要成熟起来。成熟意味着认识到不存在完美的答案，不存在能够满足各类人群需要的解决方法，不存在政府批准的安全避风港。我们还没有在地球上建立一个完美的社会，我们同样也无法在网络空间建立一个完美的社会。但是至少我们可以拥有个人的选择和个人的责任。最终还是那些规章制度决定这些社区成功那个与否。有些规则是由内容提供者制定的；有些规则涉及到价格与会员费。这些规章可以非常简单，如： “只接受石油行业法律责任与环境污染法规的高质量内容：每小时 120 美元” 。或是： “本论坛不社版主，仅限于有关版权问题的信息。那些坚持发布广告和不相干内容的人将被要求停止其行为（并可能最终被禁止参与）。再比如： “只接受 8 至 12 岁的儿童，讨论和学校相关的话题，必须使用文明语言。版主将决定什么内容是容许发布的。 ”