centos7遏制白名单
重点 (Top highlight)
The Beat writer William Burroughs once said that language is a virus from outer space, and he didn’t mean it allegorically.
吨他击败作家威廉·巴勒斯曾经说过，语言是来自外太空的病毒，而他并没有寓言的意思。
Fake news, long before the phrase entered the national lexicon, was part of his evidence: Pieces of misinformation spreading quickly from person to person behave just like “viral mechanisms,” Burroughs said — aliens invading unwary hosts, feeding and growing stronger as they spread.
假新闻早在该短语进入国家词典之前就已成为他的证据之一 ：Burroughs说，错误信息在人与人之间Swift传播的行为就像“病毒机制”一样，外星人入侵粗心的宿主，随着它们的传播而不断进食并变得越来越强。
With the unprecedented communication power of the internet and social media, linguistic virality has reached epic proportions. The writer and futurist Richard Watson has gone so far as to say that we are living in an information pandemic, overwhelmed with hastily compiled, badly sourced, and unverified data. “There is now too much information and opinion circulating too fast,” he told me. The result is a nonstop assault of the “nasty, negative or poorly informed.”
随着互联网和社交媒体空前的交流力量，语言病毒学已达到史诗般的程度。 作家和未来主义者理查德·沃森(Richard Watson)甚至说我们生活在一个信息大流行中，被匆忙编译，来源不正确和未经验证的数据所淹没。 他告诉我：“现在有太多的信息和意见流传得太快了。” 结果是不停地袭击“讨厌，消极或知情的人”。
That said, we’ve never been better equipped to understand the dangers of unchecked language virality — or to flatten the curve. We know that words, weaponized as fake news on social media, can be used to manipulate and undermine democracies, as they did with Brexit and the 2016 U.S. presidential election. And because of the coronavirus’s spread, we are beginning to better understand the myriad ways that we’re intricately connected, and the responsibilities we bear for our fellow humans.
就是说，我们从来没有更好的能力来理解未经检查的语言病毒式传播的危险-或弄平曲线。 我们知道，在社交媒体上被当作假新闻武器化的言论可以被用来操纵和破坏民主政体，就像英国脱欧和2016年美国总统大选一样。 而且由于冠状病毒的传播，我们开始更好地了解我们错综复杂的联系方式以及我们对人类的责任。
So, for the greater good, consider social media distancing. With collective action, we can quell the first postmodern pandemic.
因此，为了更大的利益，请考虑与社交媒体保持距离。 通过集体行动，我们可以平息第一个后现代大流行病。
个人变革与结构变革 (Individual vs. structural change)
In a recent opinion piece in The Guardian, the tech journalist Leo Mirani suggested that social-media platforms such as Facebook should build social distancing into their interfaces. They could implement anti-viral design, Mirani argues, by deliberately creating “friction” for the user that makes it harder to share information.
在《卫报》最近的一篇评论文章中，科技记者莱奥·米拉尼(Leo Mirani)建议，诸如Facebook之类的社交媒体平台应将社交距离融入其界面中。 Mirani认为，他们可以通过故意为用户创建“摩擦”来实施抗病毒设计，从而使信息共享变得更加困难。
What he’s advocating is structural, systemic change, not individual action: Mirani argues that personal efforts to quell the info tsunami are futile, empty gestures in the grand scheme of things, like eschewing flying or plastic straws. Reducing your personal doomscrolling or enforcing social media-free evenings might be good for your own mental health, but they don’t solve the bigger problem. “My belief is strongly that individual action is not the answer,” he told me. “These things are structural.”
他提倡的是结构性，系统性的变化，而不是个人行动：Mirani认为，平息信息海啸的个人努力是徒劳的，空洞的手势，例如避免飞行或塑料吸管。 减少个人的失败决定或实施无社交媒体的夜晚可能对您自己的心理健康有好处，但它们并不能解决更大的问题。 他对我说：“我坚信个人的行动不是答案。” “这些都是结构性的。”
But just as the U.S. government has failed to implement the measures necessary to flatten the pandemic’s curve, tech companies are unlikely, for now, to disinfect their systems as Mirani suggests.
但是，正如美国政府未能采取必要措施来平息大流行曲线一样，科技公司目前不太可能像Mirani所说的那样对其系统进行消毒。
Given that reality, the best hope is collective action. Companies, governments, and societies are made up of individuals. And as the more successful communal responses to the current pandemic have shown, the small steps we take as individuals can collectively have a massive impact.
鉴于这一现实，最大的希望就是集体行动。 公司，政府和社会由个人组成。 而且，正如对当前大流行病更成功的社区React所表明的那样，我们作为个人可以采取的小步骤可以集体产生巨大影响。
I know, for example, that one person picking up bags and bottles won’t save the seas awash in plastics. But when I lived in Florida — where dead dolphins who swallowed plastics regularly drift ashore — I collected litter along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico anyway, one of many people hoping to minimize the harm our species was doing to others.
例如，我知道，一个人拿起袋子和瓶子不会用塑料来挽救大海 。 但是，当我住在佛罗里达州时，吞食塑料的死海豚经常流到岸上，无论如何，我还是在墨西哥湾沿岸收集垃圾，许多人希望最大程度地减少我们的物种对他人造成的伤害。
Likewise with social media. I feel responsible for my contributions — or lack thereof — although I’m under no illusion that these choices matter much in the grand scheme. But they matter to me, and to my circles.
社交媒体也是如此。 我对自己的贡献(或缺乏贡献)负有责任，尽管我丝毫不幻想这些选择对宏伟计划至关重要。 但是它们对我和我的圈子都很重要。
So I’m circumspect online. I post rarely, and I limit how much I engage with the posts of others. It’s bad for professional brand-building, perhaps, but at least my excited utterances aren’t adding to the sturm and drang.
所以我在网上谨慎。 我很少发帖，而且我限制与他人发帖的程度。 也许这对建立专业的品牌不利，但至少我激动的话语并没有增加动荡。
In happier times, I thought of myself as an online version of the Parisian boulevardier, or or flâneur, a “passionate spectator” who reveled in the bustle, people-watching and not saying much. Now I see my online activity through a public health lens, and these are the measures I take: I stay six (metaphorical) feet away, wear a (metaphorical) mask, wash my (metaphorical) hands frequently.
在更快乐的时代，我认为自己是巴黎大道的在线版本，或者是flâneur ，一个“热情的观众”，陶醉于熙熙,、人们注视且不多说。 现在，我通过一个公共卫生镜头来查看我的在线活动，这些是我采取的措施：我保持六(隐喻)脚的距离，戴着(隐喻的)面具，经常洗(隐喻的)手。
Practically speaking, what that means is stepping back: devoting less time to scrolling and giving more consideration to what I click on and read, its sources, and what amplifying effects brought it into my feed.
实际上，这意味着退后一步：花更少的时间进行滚动，并更多地考虑单击和阅读的内容，来源以及将其带入我的提要的放大效果。
It means resisting the urge to directly engage: pausing before diving into that conversation, or sharing a quip, or even before expressing joy or outrage. In that pause, you may find — as I often do — that the expression seems unnecessary. The world doesn’t need two more cents.
这意味着要抵制直接参与的冲动：在进入该会话之前或在共享聊天之前暂停，甚至在表达喜悦或愤怒之前停顿一下。 在此停顿中，您可能会发现-就像我经常做的那样-该表达似乎不必要。 这个世界不需要两美分。
And it means taking the time to rinse off the muck of opinions and feelings that we wallow in online, and to refresh with a good book, a conversation, or a piece of art.
这意味着要花时间清理掉我们在线上沉迷的意见和感觉，并用一本好书，一段对话或一件艺术品来刷新。
社交信息消费的模型 (A model for socially distanced information consumption)
Watson, who advises tech companies on what tomorrow will bring and famously predicted this pandemic, shirks social media almost completely. The platforms are “the enemy of focus, attention and depth,” he says, promoting discord and dissatisfaction.
沃森(Watson)为科技公司提供明天的建议，并著名地预测了这一大流行病 。沃森几乎完全避开了社交媒体。 他说，这些平台是“焦点，注意力和深度的敌人”，加剧了不满和不满。
Watson advises taking in news slowly, pausing often, and reading on paper whenever possible, calling it “a vastly superior technology” for handling complex topics. As a futurist, his counterintuitive approach includes reading retrospectively, digging into dated publications as he prepares to make predictions. He says this allows him to see an expanded landscape and draw more connections. And it helps him feel calm enough to think clearly: Looking back, he sees what turned out to be important, and what was just noise.
沃森(Watson)建议缓慢地，经常地暂停新闻，并尽可能在报纸上阅读，称其为“处理复杂主题的卓越技术”。 作为一名未来主义者，他的反直觉方法包括回顾性阅读，在准备进行预测时挖掘过时的出版物。 他说，这使他能够看到更大的景观并吸引更多的人脉。 这使他感到足够冷静，可以清晰地思考：回头看，他发现原来重要的是什么，仅仅是噪音。
Each of us can limit that noise too. The coronavirus crisis has shown the status quo isn’t fixed. Everything can shift quickly, and we all play a part — our actions spreading sickness or promoting wellness. The same goes for the information pandemic. We can’t save the internet, but we can mind our spaces, limiting the harm we cause through careful and responsible engagement.
我们每个人也可以限制这种噪音。 冠状病毒危机表明现状尚未解决。 一切都可以Swift转变，我们都可以发挥作用-我们的行为传播疾病或促进健康。 信息大流行也是如此。 我们无法挽救互联网，但是我们可以留心自己的空间，通过认真负责的参与来限制我们造成的伤害。
翻译自: https://forge.medium.com/language-is-a-virus-and-you-can-help-flatten-the-curve-2df78e2f79c7
centos7遏制白名单