2013年12月24日

向小田:关于钱荒最靠谱的解读

人民币印了这么多,为什么银行还会发生"钱荒"?
  一、为叙述需要,先明确几个概念
  1、关于央行。人民银行被称为银行的银行,对其他银行具有监管职能。按人民银行法规定,其主要职责是:中国人民银行在国务院领导下,制定和执行货币政策,防范和化解金融风险,维护金融稳定,保证币值稳定,发行人民币,管理人民币流通的。同时也可以运用金融工具,从事金融业务,但这一业务是以维护金融稳定为目的,而非自身盈利。
  2、关于货币。从流通的角度说,货币是一种以信用为支撑的可以广泛使用的交换媒介。他的形式,可以是纸币、金属币、账务符号、以及支票、各种电子卡上的货币表达和数量等。对于拥有者来说,是一种金融索取权,即拥有者可以用其换回自己需要的东西。
  3、关于发行。按人民银行法的准确定义,新版人民币称为发行。这个发行,指的是纸币和金属币。当社会上流通的人民币不够使用时,可以说增加发行量,但更准确的说法是增加印刷量。污损的人民币,叫收回销毁并予补充,这种情况,不体现为流通量的增加。
  4、关于货币增加。货币增加,主要不是指纸币和金属币,而是多种货币方式计算的总量增加。2012年年末,按央行网站的数据,我国流通中的现金,即纸币和金属币的总量仅5.46万亿,而同期我国人民币存贷款余额分别为91.7万亿元和63万亿元。同期广义货币供应量为97.41万亿,流通中的现金只占5.6%。货币供应量同比增幅为14.33%。而现金流通量与上年同期的5.07万亿相比,仅增加3900亿元,增幅为7.8%。这是因为,货币更多地以各种现代支付手段和结算办法在运转了。
  二、货币是怎么增加的?
  货币的增加,主要是由货币创造货币产生的倍增结果。在学者的文章或新闻报道中,常将货币的创造称为发行,一采取增强流动性的措施,如增加投资、贷款或国外实行的量化宽松政策,就说开动印钞机了,大发钞票了,可能是用"发"的说法,比较简便的缘固。
  1、这一增加,是由贷存贷存中派生的乘法效应带来的。目前,我国的基础货币(存款准备金加流通现金之和),按央行公布数,2012年末,基础货币是25.2万亿,其中存款准备金接近20万亿,流通现金5万多亿。乘法效应是3.86倍。基础货币的3.86倍,就是广义货币供应量。
  乘法效应的形成。比如,银行贷给甲企业一年期贷款1200万元,而甲企业暂时只使用100万元,其他钱照样存银行,银行就可以将剩下的钱,再贷给其他企业,其他企业又只用100万元,其他钱再存银行,如此贷存贷存循环下去,就会产生神奇的货币乘法效应。如果乘法效应是3.86倍,这个货币量就放大为4632万元了。这个乘法效应,就是货币创造。
  2、这一增加,是由外汇储备形成的外汇占款形成的。2012年,我国外储是3.31万亿美元,按汇率折算,接近26万亿人民币。2000年,我国外储是1655.74万元,外汇占款是1.36万亿元。分别增加了19倍和18倍。所谓外汇占款,是指用于收购外汇的人民币金额。但是央行本来没有这个钱,用于收购外汇的钱,体现为央行的负债。由于数量太大,被称为货币超发。
  巨额的国际收支顺差尤其是其中的贸易顺差,造就了我国高居世界首位的外储。大批出口企业的产品如果不是出口,在国内销售,收取人民币,再用人民币在国内购置原材料,资金就会通过人们的购买行为和通过银行,在国内循环使用或者创造货币来满足需求,不会导致货币超发。或者虽然出口,但同时又有大致相当的进口对冲,人民币与外币就会处于不断地交换使用之中,也能自求平衡。由于存在巨额顺差,每进一美元,央行就收走一美元,按汇率发人民币,从前是8元多,现在是6元多。顺差越大,央行收得越多,人民币发得越多。一方面外储高居不下,一方面人民币超发。
  基础货币又称为初始货币、高能货币。如果确定一定的基础货币量,这个货币放出来的量越大,产生的乘法效应越大。而外汇占款也都是初始货币,一经放出,就会产生倍增效应。由于我国的外汇占款额已高达近26万亿,比目前2012年央行公布的基础货币还多一点,便会形成强大的通胀压力。
  央行行长周小川说,要用资金池来装。这个所谓的资金池,就是指用提高存款准备金率的办法来对冲。2000年时,我国的存款准备金率是8%,现在存款准备金率大型金融机构是20%,中小金融机构是16.5%。所谓准备金率,就是将所有金融机构的存款总量,按一定比率冻结,上收为央行的存款。
  如果不提高存款准备金率,还按8%执行,意味着有10多万亿高能货币被释放出来,现在中国的货币可供应量,就远远不止这个数了。
  3、这个增加是由国债地方债以及奉行投资拉动等策略发生的贷款形成的。2011年,我国的国家债务和地方债务大体是20万亿。如果发行的是国债和地方债,就是用公众的现金,以及公众及企业机构的存款转移出来,用于购买高于银行利率的债券。债务的形成,主要是用于基础设施建设,同时制造需求,还会配套产生贷款,拉动相当一部分相关产业的发展。这些资金会进入各个领域,通过银行存贷循环,产生货币的倍增效应。
  投资拉动,是我国拉动经济增长的三套马车之一。由于这个拉动主要是政府行为,又成了我国GDP增长保8,实际经常处于10左右的一项常用手段。在内需增长困难的情况下,每当出口增长受限,就会强化投资拉动。2008年受金融危机影响,出台了4万亿投资措施,2012年下半年,眼见得经济下滑了,于是各种投资拉动措施又出台了,于是货币量就大幅增加了。而后就是媒体报道,什么经济企稳回升了。
  此外,信托产品、理财产品之类,以高于银行存款的收益吸收资金,相当一部分又会进入银行流转,起着提高货币的流动性增加货币的作用。
  三、货币增加的利与弊
  社会上流通中的现金,日日都有正常波动。由于电子卡等各种货币支付形式的增加,现金即纸币、金属币,与商品流通量相比,处于相对减少的状态。由于经济生活发展的需要,以及存贷存中的货币倍增效应,货币总量始终在增加,在实行金本位制时,受黄金储备的制约。在不再实行金本位制后,靠国家信用制约,由于国家常运用金融手段来拉动经济,就会显著增加货币总量。
  如果单指现金,大体流程是这样的。货币的发行权属央行。央行印制的钞票,进入发行库(发行库又称金库)储备,再按其他各银行的需要量,调拨入这些行的业务库(也称金库),由这些行各营业点按业务量取出面市,这叫"现金投放"。
  各银行营业点现金收付日日都在进行。现金使用有个常量,超过部分,要交回所属行的业务库。而这个业务库的现金储量,是有限额的。当超过这一限额时,就要上解发行库保管,这叫"现金回笼"。
  由央行发行库进入各银行业务库的人民币,未离库进入社会流通,不计算为流通量。由于发行的数量和回笼的数量是不一致的,会形成轧差。当大于回笼的数量时,以年为计,称为当年增加了多少投放量,当小于回笼量时,称为当年减少了多少投放量。
  在社会上某些必需商品紧俏需要囤积时,在遭遇天灾人祸时,在对物价上涨产生心理预期时,如果使用钞票更为方便,人们可能大量从银行提现,增加了钞票流通量。但这种情况往往具有临时性,一恢复平静,现金又重新回归银行。
  在我国银行,最重要最可靠的货币资金,其实是老百姓的存款。2011年,我国城乡居民储蓄存款余额为35.2万亿,消费者贷款(包括住房)为8.8万亿。沉淀在银行的资金,达26.4万亿。这个存款余额,年年都在增长,以2006年以来计,多数年份的增长率,都在15%以上,2012年,又增长了16.7%,达到40.6万亿。所以有的人说,银行的钱,其实就是老百姓的钱,是有道理的。既然你存起来不用,银行就可以用来发放贷款。
  央行以降升准备金率,控制货币总量。在市场经济条件下,加上体制上的若干原因,每一次降升,都会对经济产生影响。总量过大时,就会形成通货膨胀。不知不觉间,老百姓发现,存款是多了,当年的收入也增加了,可是钱却越来越不顶用了。尤其是房地产价格高企,比如10年前一套房100万,现在变成300万了,就会让欲购房者后悔不迭。前面我们说到,货币对于拥有者来说,是一种索取权,这个权利被稀释了,代表的财富减少了,拿同样的钱,甚至再增加一倍,也换不回原来的东西了。
  钱放出去了,确实办了许多事。比如,公允的说,全国所有的地方,基础设施条件都有了极大改善,这是成就。但是货币乘法效应产生的货币总量,有极大的虚拟性和脆弱性。比如,我们现在常说资金链断裂,如果某一环节资金出现重大损失,受影响的往往就是一片企业。如果是银行出问题,相关的企业,就会普遍遭殃。
  投资拉动下基础设施建设中兴起的许多相关产业,如钢铁、水泥、电解铝、平板玻璃、建筑设备等都严重过剩,产能利用率很低。短期内的强力投资拉动形成的这些产业,随着基础建设的逐步完成,将因能力放空而使过剩情况进一步加剧,形成的庞大资产将急剧贬值。另外,全球主要国家都在实行货币宽松政策,货币进一步贬值在所难免,这又会给出口形势渐渐严峻的中国大批出口企业增加新的难题,如果出口大面积受阻,也会遭遇产能大量过剩而使庞大资产贬值。而资产贬值就会形成巨量的难偿债务。
  由于需求受限,预期不好,我国去年就出现了企业贷款需求显著下降,贷款下降的情况。
  正在看日本著名经济学家辜朝明的《大衰退》一书。日本在上世纪80年代后期,资金总量大幅增加,形成投资狂潮,土地价格猛增,国际收支顺差大,外储高居全球首位,最终却难以为继。此书讲述了日本自上世纪90年代初经济泡沫破灭后,内需不足,资产价格暴跌,本来处于盈余状态的资产,一下子处于负值,严重的甚至只相当于从前的10%,从而破坏了数以百万计的企业资产负债表。
  企业在利率接近于零的状况下,也不敢贷款扩大生产,有点钱就加速还债,2002年和2003年,偿债额已经上升到年30万亿日元的空前规模。由此使经济丧失需求,进入了全面大衰退。
  虽然情况未必都相似,但前车有鉴,总有些经验教训,是值得后来者记取的。
  一、这个钱紧,不是调控上没有钱,而是控制下发生的钱紧现象。我国现在银行存款余额上百万亿,按现有存款准备金率,被央行冻结的资金接近20万亿,随便拿点出来,就化解了。现在有些专家呼吁,央行应降存款准备金率,而各地和各商行,也预期央行会放松,结果央行纹丝不动。19日国务院开会,在调控上没松口,过惯了宽松日子的各方,这一下就慌了,于是次日,即在20日这一天,本来就在上涨的利率更是暴涨。
  二、也不是没有放松过,但效果不佳。今年一季度,由于货款增量大等原因,我国货币供应量突破百万亿,达到103万亿。今年国家预期货币供应量增长13%,上了政府工作报告,我算了一下,全年需要增加12.66万亿,结果一季度绝对值就增长了6.21万亿,一个季度的增量,就达到了全年预期的一半,而一季度的社会融资规模同比也增 了2.27万亿,总量已占到去年全年的42%。结果是GDP增幅下降,财政收入增幅大降,工业产品出厂价格(PPI)继续十年来罕见的低迷现象。资金使用效益很差,增加资金投放,非但解决不了问题,还会惹出更多的麻烦。这些意思,我在之前有关的答题中均说过。
  三、历史经验证明,多年形成的问题,往往要在新一届决策者产生后,才能痛下决心解决。记得早在2005年,就提出了流动性过剩的问题要控制,结果是控而不制。各地依然比拚着大上项目,再加上后来应对金融危机的举措,说要调控,实际上往往虚晃一枪就算了,从来没有真正调控过,导致了多方面的产能过剩和结构的不合理。在我的印象中,真正的调控有过,那还是在朱老总时期,那个时候,物价飞涨,最高一年,已经高达24%以上了。于是紧缩,下来了。那个时候留下的烂尾楼,我去年到海南时,还能见到。流动性过剩的日子,舒舒服服过了这么多年,该收手了。
  这些年来,投放了大量资金,包括外资进入,出口退税下的外需旺盛,固然让经济突飞猛进,形成了一个庞大的经济存量,既有好的一面,又有虚胖子的一面。这个庞大的存量,需要巨额的资金去维持。而虚的一面,却会成为吞噬资金的黑洞,还有大量的资金还会拐弯去了房地产。于是过剩的产能加剧过剩,房地产不差钱,再怎么调,也是越调价越高。此外,在流动性宽裕的情况下,金融系统和市场上各种资金空转套利盛行,只顾自己挣钱,不顾资金杠杆率越来越高,加大了风险等等。
  所以,现在国家钱是有,而这次所谓的钱紧,事实上是一个强烈信号,就是要真的控制一下了,并不是没有钱的表现。如果不控制,不纠偏,今后的问题会更大。只是这样一来,经济中潜藏的那些问题,就要突显出来 了,有这些问题的方面,日子会很难过。那些把资金拐了弯去了房地产的,恐怕自己也得清理一下了。这叫刮骨疗伤。只是看能不能坚持了。决策者说了,要"激活货币信贷存量支持实体经济发展",还得看究竟怎么把资金用好,用到最该用的地方。故事才刚刚开头,是不是个好故事,就看怎么展开了。
  如果「钱荒」是真的,个人应如何应对以便降低风险?
  需要说明的是,这次的流动性紧张是「钱慌」不是「钱荒」。目前的广义货币(M2)的供应量应该是非常充裕的,只是部分机构的头寸掉不开。因为面临月末、季末的考核,以及新一轮准备金和所得税的上缴,6 月中下旬到 7 月上旬的流动性往往都很紧张。加之之前对银行间债券市场的整顿已经央行较为严格的流动性管理,才使得这一次的「钱慌」现象尤为明显。而且央行手里握着各种调控流动性的工具,稍微放点水这事情就会过去,只是央行不太愿意放水。
  总而言之,央行好不容易下定决心在收拾那些熊孩子呢,我们就不要为央行瞎操心了,马照跑、舞照跳、股……要少炒。
  现在来回答题主的问题:
  对于银行存款,最大的风险还是机会成本。在流动性紧张的环境下,主要投资于货币市场的货币市场基金和短期理财产品的年化收益往往都会飙升,能够取得成倍于银行存款的利息收益。所以适当的购买一些这类的现金管理产品或者参与一下逆回购都是很明智的选择。当然也不能排除一些本身基本面不好的中小型银行在这次的压力测试中倒下的可能,但即使这种情况真会发生,管理层也不会坐视不管的。如果非常担心银行破产、倒闭的风险,那么就把钱都存去宇宙行(工行)吧。
  关于贷款,如果手里有贷款,没什么特别好说的,该干嘛还干嘛,只要别急着提前还贷就行(当然,如果提前还贷是为了换房或者转公积金贷款,那另当别论)。如果近期有融资需求,那就比较悲催了,不过只要等到 7 月下旬流动性不那么紧张之后再交贷款申请就可以了。
  关于股票,这个……是吧 =。= 国内的流动性紧张肯定是不利于 A 股市场的,加之 IPO 重启的达摩克斯之剑一直悬在头顶,所以短期不会有什么阶段性行情,顶多会有些技术性反弹。而且在基本面没有走好的前提下,即使有一波流动性推升的上涨行情也会悲剧的――想想五月份。市场就这个样子,具体是机遇还是杯具就见仁见智了,具体怎么操作也因人而异。
  另外,没事别乱买黄金――至少在你能搞清楚美元走势和金价的关系之前。

2013年8月1日

Narrative Risk

Narrative Risk

by Capital Spectator

The Economist tells us that "the emerging market slowdown is not the beginning of a bust. But it is a tuning point for the world economy." Growth, to cut to the chase, will be lower in China and across the emerging market realm. Some pundits look at this reasonable assumption and warn that it's the beginning of the end; we've crossed the Rubicon as it relates to the global economy and international investing. Actually, there's far less drama to this story. Narrative risk, as Barry Ritholtz explains, may be lurking. Indeed, if you're looking at the evolution of emerging markets through the prism of certain media headlines of late, the end appears to be nigh, at least for this week.

Perhaps the bigger issue is one of managing expectations. Emerging markets have had a good run, an extraordinary run, in fact, if you choose your look-back period carefully. But let's think about this from a different perspective. Consider rolling three-year annualized returns for these countries in comparison with the US stock market (S&P 500) and foreign equities in developed markets (MSCI EAFE). By this standard, the track record for emerging markets looks a bit more complicated from an investment angle. Indeed, there are periods of above- and below-average performance. Shocking, isn't it?

In the late-1990s, I recall talking to numerous financial advisors who complained that they had been sold a false bill of goods. Emerging market equity funds at the time were an innovative concept, and one that relatively few investors had embraced. A few early adopters jumped on the bandwagon, largely because of several influential research studies that highlighted the impressive track record in these stocks. As an added bonus, the diversification benefits were potent, i.e., return correlations were quite low vs. US and foreign-developed-market stocks.

But the cult of equities in, say, 1999 was dominated by US stocks. It was hard not to notice, with the S&P 500 routinely delivering 20%-to-30% annual returns. Owning emerging market stocks, by contrast, looked like a wet dish rag as the new millennium approached.

Since then, emerging market stocks have rallied, crashed, and rallied again. Something similar can also be said about US and foreign developed-market stocks, albeit in varying degrees. But now we're told by some that the party's over for emerging market stocks, or at least that the celebrations from here on out will be toned down by more than trivial amounts.

The truth is that we didn't wake up today and find that what had been an extraordinary investment opportunity last night had suddenly become dirt. The real story is that as the world has become increasingly globalized, and markets have become ever more securitized, expected return for the long run generally has inched down. This is almost certainly true for emerging market stocks, but it's no less relevant for the rest of the planet's equities (and bonds, real estate and commodities). For the same reason that you should expect that Apple's growth rate will slow in the years ahead relative to history, the same applies to emerging markets. The low hanging fruit of return has been picked. We've been here before, with countries, with asset classes, and individual companies. Trees don't grow to the sky.

But there's more to this story. From an asset allocation perspective, it's prudent to assume thatexpected return is in constant flux in shorter periods. Yes, as I discussed last week, it's reasonable to assume that diversification benefits will fade through time. Earning a risk premium is going to get tougher, all else equal. Gravity prevails eventually.

This isn't news, even if it's tempting to treat it as such. If you think you've heard this somewhere before, you're right. The ancient writings a la the efficient markets hypothesis and the capital asset pricing model imply that the "market" portfolio's return is likely to trend lower rather than higher over time. The rate of decline is unknown, but it's tempting fate to assume that the performance of beta in the coming decades is going to rise.

This isn't a new development; it's been with us all along. It's hardly a smooth process where, say, expected return drops by five basis points every year like clockwork. And just to keep things interesting, the process reverses itself at times and ex ante performance goes up. Over longer stretches, however, it's going to be tough to escape the terminal slide. In a world crawling with institutions armed to the teeth with computer-based quantitative strategies, searching through every nook and crevice of markets, the long, slow descent of risk premia will yield to financial gravity.

That said, it's a mistake to focus on one piece of the major asset classes and single it out for abuse.

What hasn't changed is that over shorter periods there will be quite a lot of volatility in expected return, for all the asset classes. What should we do? More of the same. Diversify broadly (which is about as hard as falling asleep) and spend most of your time on designing and managing a rebalancing strategy.

Oh, yes, one more thing: Don't get tangled up in narrative risk. Why? Because turning points, in both major and minor forms, are a dime a dozen―there's always another one coming.

 

2013年7月18日

The epigenetics of fat

The epigenetics of fat
脂肪表观遗传学

Altered states
改变了的状态


Limbering up does not just help shed fat. It also changes how fatty tissue works
伸展运动不仅有助于减肥,也改变脂肪组织的工作方式


Jul 13th 2013 |From The Economist print edition: Science and technology


Don't worry. My epigenetic markers will take care of it
别担心。我的表观遗传学标志物会处理的


EXERCISE is the closest thing medicine has to a panacea. Though hitting the treadmill is more effort than swallowing a pill, the benefits are worth it. Even modest amounts of exercise protect against diseases ranging from diabetes and osteoporosis to heart attacks and senility.
运动是医学上最接近于万能药的一种东西。虽然在跑步机上运动要比吞下一枚药片费力许多,但是值得的。甚至是少量的运动也能抵御各种疾病,从糖尿病和骨质疏松症到心脏病和衰老。

Exercise works its magic in many ways. It improves the power and efficiency of the heart; it boosts the release of certain neurotransmitters (the chemicals nerve cells use to talk to each other); and it stimulates cells' garbage-disposal machinery. Now a group of researchers led by Charlotte Ling of Lund University, in Sweden, has discovered another effect of exercise. It alters the way genes work in the tissue that stores fat.
运动在多个方面发挥着它的神奇功效。它提升了心脏的能力和效率;促进某些神经传递素(神经细胞用来彼此交流的化学物质)的释放;和刺激细胞的垃圾处理机制。日前瑞典隆德(兰德)大学Charlotte Ling领导的一个研究小组已经发现了运动的另外一个效果。它改变了基因在存储脂肪的组织中的工作方式。

In a paper published in the Public Library of Science, Dr Ling and her colleagues report the effects of six months of moderate exercise on 23 male couch-potatoes who were in their 30s and 40s. The men were supposed to attend three workouts a week. In the event, they managed an average of 1.8. Nevertheless, besides finding the usual effects―reduced heart rate, lowered blood pressure and a drop in cholesterol levels―the researchers also observed changes in the men's adipose tissue, the place where fat is stored. Specifically, the way fat cells in this tissue expressed their genes had altered.
在一篇发表于《科学公共图书馆》的论文中,Ling博士和他的同僚们报告了6个月的少量运动在23名整天坐在沙发看电视的三四十岁男性身上产生的效果。这些男人们本来应该每周参加3次锻炼。最终,他们做到了平均每周1.8次。然而,除了发现通常的效果外―心率减慢、血压降低和胆固醇水平下降―研究人员还观察到了他们的脂肪组织中的变化,脂肪组织即是脂肪被储存的地方。特别的是,脂肪组织细胞中基因的表达方式已经发生了改变。

This is epigenetics, a rapidly developing branch of biology that focuses not on the genes themselves but rather on how particular genes behave in specific cells. Which genes are active in a cell can be changed by making chemical alterations (known as epigenetic markers) to their DNA. Such alterations let the body fine-tune its response to the environment, and modern gene-sequencing techniques can detect them without too much difficulty.
这就是表观遗传学,生物学中快速发展的一个分支,它并不关注基因本身,而是将焦点放于特定细胞中特定基因是如何表现的。细胞中哪些基因是活跃的,这是能够通过修改DNA的化学成分(表观遗传学标志物)而改变的。这些修改使得身体微调其对环境的反应,而现代的基因测序技术能够比较轻松地检测到。

Dr Ling, who is interested in adult-onset diabetes (often associated with too much body fat), knew that exercise stimulates epigenetic changes in muscle cells. These alter how muscle processes sugar. When she and her colleagues looked for similar alterations in their charges' adipose tissue, they found lots―18,000 markers distributed across 7,663 genes. This matters, because adipose tissue is not just a passive store of energy, it is also an organ in its own right, producing a range of biologically active chemicals that have all manner of effects on the rest of the body.
致力于研究成人发病型糖尿病(通常与过多的身体脂肪有关)的Ling博士已经知道,运动刺激了肌肉细胞的后天改变。这些改变着肌肉如何处理糖分。当她和她的同僚们在脂肪组织中寻找相似变化时,他们发现了很多―18000个标记物分布于7663个基因中。这个关系重大,因为脂肪组织并不只是被动地储存能量,它也是一个能自行产生一系列具有生物活性的化学物质的器官,这些化学物质对身体的其它部位有着各个方面的影响。

Genetic epicenter
基因之源


What all these epigenetic markers are doing remains obscure. But among the altered genes were 18 known to be associated with obesity and another 21 linked with adult-onset diabetes. When Dr Ling's colleagues picked two such altered genes and silenced them completely in laboratory-grown fat cells, the cells changed, becoming more efficient at processing and depositing fat. That leads, Dr Ling notes, to the hypothesis that one reason exercise is good for you is because it improves the ability of fatty tissue to do its job. Lipids thus get stored in the right place instead of settling elsewhere in the body, where they do harm. As she observes, if you do have surplus fat it is better to have it stored in fatty tissue than in the liver or the pancreas.
这些表观遗传学标志物到底都做了什么目前仍然不清楚。但是在这些被修改了的基因当中,18种已知与肥胖有关,而另外12种与成人发病型糖尿病有关。当Ling博士的团队从实验室生长的脂肪细胞中挑选了两个这种改变后的基因并将其完全关闭后,这些细胞反生了变化,它们在处理和储存脂肪上变得更加高效了。Ling博士写道,这引出了一种假设,运动对人有好处的一个原因在于它提升了脂肪组织的工作能力。因此,油脂就被储存在了正确的地方而不是驻留在身体的其它位置而产生危害。正如她所观察到的,如果你有多余的脂肪,那最好将其储存在脂肪组织中,而不要位于肝脏或胰腺。

This study is only a beginning. Working out which epigenetic changes wrought by exercise are important, and which incidental, will take time. But, given worries about how overweight people are becoming, and the incessant message from many governments that their citizens should take more exercise, studies like Dr Ling's should help by shining light on the way exercise actually works its magic.
此类研究仅仅是一个开端。找出哪些基因的后天改变是由运动造成的是至关重要的,以及哪些是偶发的,这些都需要时间。但是,鉴于人们对于是如何变得过重的忧虑,以及许多政府不断的要求其国民要多运动的信息,像Ling博士这样的研究应该有助于人们弄明白运动到底是如何起作用的

2013年5月28日

The age of smart machines

Schumpeter

The age of smart machines 

智器时代

Brain work may be going the way of manual work 
手动代替脑转

May 25th 2013 |From the print edition

IN HIS first novel, "Player Piano" (1952), Kurt Vonnegut foresaw that industry might one day resemble a "stupendous Rube Goldberg machine" (or as Brits would say, a Heath Robinson contraption). His story describes a dystopia in which machines have taken over brain work as well as manual work, and a giant computer, EPICAC XIV, makes all the decisions. A few managers and engineers are still employed to tend their new masters. But most people live in homesteads where they spend their time doing make-work jobs, watching television and "breeding like rabbits".
  在Kurt Vonnegut(库尔特•冯内古特)的第一部小说《player piano(自动钢琴)》(1952)中,他预言了在未来某天,工业会"以化简为繁的方式制造取之不尽的饭碗(惊人的鲁比戈德堡机)color]"(或者用Brits的话说,一个健全的鲁滨逊机制)。书里描述了一个糟糕的社会,那里机器可以取代脑力工作,也可以完成体力工作,另外还有一台巨型计算机EPICCAC XIV负责做出所有决策。几个经理人和工程师仍受雇于他们的新主人,维护照顾这个机器。但大多数人都窝在家里做一些没事找事的事情,看看电视,还有"像兔子一样繁衍"。

It is impossible to read "Player Piano" today without wondering whether Vonnegut's stupendous machine is being assembled before our eyes. Google has designed self-driving cars. America's military-security complex has pioneered self-flying killing machines. Educational entrepreneurs are putting enlightenment online. Are we increasingly living in Vonnegut's dystopia? Or are the techno-enthusiasts right to argue that life is about to get a lot better?
现在再读《Player Piano》时,不可能还怀疑Vonnegut的巨大机器不会出现在现实之中了。谷歌已经设计了自动智能车。美国国防集团在智能歼灭飞行器上的发展也令人望尘莫及。教育届的企业家也在正在将启迪教育连到互联网里。难道我们正渐渐地与Vonnegut的糟糕的世界趋同了吗?亦或是技术狂热派仍一成不变的认为生活即将变得更好吗?

Two things are clear. The first is that smart machines are evolving at breakneck speed. Moore's law―that the computing power available for a given price doubles about every 18 months―continues to apply. This power is leaping from desktops into people's pockets. More than 1.1 billion people own smartphones and tablets. Manufacturers are putting smart sensors into all sorts of products. The second is that intelligent machines have reached a new social frontier: knowledge workers are now in the eye of the storm, much as stocking-weavers were in the days of Ned Ludd, the original Luddite. Bank clerks and travel agents have already been consigned to the dustbin by the thousand; teachers, researchers and writers are next. The question is whether the creation will be worth the destruction.
  有两件事清楚明了。一,智能机器正在耸人的高速发展。约每18个月计算机运算能力就翻一番的摩尔定律仍旧普适。而这种运算能力正从笔记本电脑向着人们的口袋移动。超过110万人拥有智能手机和平板电脑。制造业厂商紧跟着把传感器安装在所有产品里。二,只能机器已经达到了前所未有的社会极限:脑力劳动者现在处于台风眼中,类似于织袜工人原来曾是Luddite[勒德分子(1811-1816年英国捣毁纺织机械抗议资本家的团体成员)] ,现在称Ned Ludd。成千上万的银行职员和旅行经理人都丢了饭碗;老师、调查员以及作家也即将中弹。而问题是,创造的价值是否等于被毁灭的价值?

Two academics at MIT's Sloan Business School, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, have taken a surprisingly Vonnegutish view on this: surprising because management theorists like to be on the side of the winners and because MIT is one of the great strongholds of techno-Utopianism. In "Race Against the Machine", their 2011 book, they predict that many knowledge workers are in for a hard time. There is a good chance that technology may destroy more jobs than it creates. There is an even greater chance that it will continue to widen inequalities. Technology is creating ever more markets in which innovators, investors and consumers―not workers―get the lion's share of the gains. The Brynjolfsson-McAfee thesis explains one of the most puzzling aspects of the modern economy: why so much technological creativity can co-exist with stagnating wages and mass unemployment.
  两位麻省理工大学斯隆商学院的学者,Erik Brynjolfsson和Andrew McAfee在这方面出奇地采取了Vonnegut式的观点:令人吃惊的原因有二,一是因为理论家总喜欢与赢家为营,还有,麻省理工是技术乌托邦主义最强大的靠背之一。2011年他们合著的书《Race Against the Machine(与机器之战)》中有预言许多脑力工作者将会很难熬。在很大程度上科技将摧毁的岗位比它创造的多。更大程度上科技还会继续加剧社会差距。科技为革新派、投资人、消费者们,而不是工人们,创造着多了又多的市场,好让利益获得方独占鳌头。Brynjolfsson-McAfee理论解释了当下经济体系里最复杂方方面面之一:为什么科技创新能和薪资拖滞还有大规模失业并存于世。

A new study by the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI), "Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life, business and the global economy", shines a light on this problem and produces lots of examples of the way the internet is revolutionising knowledge work. Law firms are using computers to search through masses of legal briefs and precedents. Financial companies are using computers to monitor news feeds and make financial bets on the basis of the information they uncover. Hospitals are using robots to perform keyhole surgery.
  麦肯锡全球研究所(MGI)一项新的研究是,"分裂的科技:进步会改变生活、商业和全球经济",在此议题上提出了新的观点,并在  因特网是智力革命的产物方面  做了许多例证。律师事务所用电脑在巨量的条款简章和以前的案例中翻寻。财务公司用电脑监测新闻的反馈,在他们获取的信息基础上做出财务决策。医院则用机器人锁眼切口手术。

The rate of progress, says MGI, is set to increase dramatically thanks to a combination of Moore's law and the melding of three technologies: machine learning, voice recognition and nanotechnology. Tiny computers will be able to perform jobs once regarded as the peculiar preserve of humans: most middle-class people will soon have access to electronic personal assistants (to book flights or co-ordinate diaries) and wearable physicians (to keep a permanent watch on their vital organs).
  MGI称,不断加速的进步应归功于摩尔定律和3种科技的混合:机器学习,语音识别以及纳米技术。智器被视作奇异而完整的人,微型计算机将完成各种各样的工作:大多数中产阶级很快将拥有电子个人助理(比如预定机票和日程安排)以及便携式医生(永久监测重要器官的健康)。

MGI puts a typically positive spin on all this. It argues that being spared relatively undemanding tasks will free knowledge workers to deal with more complex ones, making them more productive. It argues that the latest wave of innovation will be good for both entrepreneurs and consumers. Small businesses will be able to act like giant ones, because cloud computing will give them access to huge processing power and storage, and because the internet destroys distance. Innovators will be able to test their new ideas with prototypes, then produce them for niche markets. Consumers captured much of the economic gains created by "general-purpose technologies" like steam and electric power, because they stimulated competition as well as increasing efficiency. MGI reckons that so far they have captured two-thirds of the gains from the internet.
  MGI对以上种种做了一贯的正面评价。称被空闲的脑力工作者从相对低级的工作解脱就能够去处理更复杂的工作,提高效率。还说最新的创新成果对企业家和消费者都于其有利可图。因云计算的流行,巨大的处理能力和存储空间唾手可得,以及互联网消灭了距离,小型公司能够像大规模公司一般运作。开发者能用新点子原型进行测试,然后投放在适当的市场。消费者则在"通用科技"中获得很多便捷,比如蒸汽和电力 ,因为激发竞争力就是提高效率。MGI估计,截至目前,他们已经从互联网中赚取了三分之二的涨幅。

Techno-backlash 
科技反动


Nevertheless, MGI's study has some sympathy with Messrs Brynjolfsson and McAfee. It worries that modern technologies will widen inequality, increase social exclusion and provoke a backlash. It also speculates that public-sector institutions will be too clumsy to prepare people for this brave new world. Policymakers need to think as hard about managing the current wave of disruptive innovation as technologists are thinking about turbocharging it. For one thing, the purpose of education systems, and the skills and knowledge that they impart, will need to be rethought: "chalk and talk" instruction will be done best by machines, freeing teachers to become more like individual coaches to their pupils.
  然而,MGI的研究还是有某些对Messrs Brynjolfsson和McAfee的认同的。他们担心因科技发展而造成的社会不平等扩张,加剧社会排外情节,激起反动。它也怀疑公共事业部门会能力不足不能引领人们勇敢面对全新时代。政策制定者需像科学家思考涡轮增压机那样好好思考在分裂的创造中经营智能化大潮。首当其冲地,教育体系的目的和学生被传授的技能亟待重定位:机器得最好的完成"注入式教学"的工作,让老师在师生关系中更能扮演学生个人导师一角。

Knowledge-intensive industries will also have to rethink cherished practices. For a start, in an age in which information and processing power are ubiquitous, they will have to become less like guilds, whose reflexes are to regulate supply and restrict competition, and more like mass-market businesses, whose instinct is to maximise the customer base. Innovation will disrupt many areas of skilled work that have so far had it easy. But if we manage them well, smart machines will free us, not enslave us.
  智力驱动的行业也得重新想想持续发展的问题了。首先,在信息和进程无孔不入的时代,他们应少一些协会制,协会内只会规定供给和限制竞争,多一些大型企业式的制度,最大化消费者规模才是大企业的本能。创造会轻而易举的打断很多领域内的技师工作。但要是我们应用有方,智能机器只会解放人类,而非奴役人类。