NOTES:
+备注：
-"The Evolution of Trust"
+「信任的进化」
-This interactive guide is heavily based off Robert Axelrod's groundbreaking 1984 book, The Evolution of Cooperation! I was also heavily inspired by his 1997 sequel, The Complexity of Cooperation, and Robert Putnam's 2000 book on America's declining "social capital", Bowling Alone.
+这份互动指引，是奠基于罗伯特・阿克塞尔罗 1984 年出版的《合作的进化》而成！同时，我也深受 1997 年续集 《合作的复杂性》和罗伯特・D・帕特南 2000 年所出版，《独自打保龄球》（关于美国社会资本衰落）这两本书的启发。
yes i'm a bookworm nerd, plz don't bully me
+没错我是个小书呆拜托不要欺负我。
-"Fewer and fewer people say they trust each other"
+「越来越少人说他们相信彼此」
-To see a thorough statistical take on this, check out Our World In Data. Mmmm stats
+如果想全面了解统计的数据，可以参考《用数据理解我们的世界》。嗯嗯 统计～
-"The Game of Trust"
+「游戏中的信任」
-This game is also known in game theory as the infamous Prisoner's Dilemma. The Prisoner's Dilemma is named after a story where two suspects can either squeal on their partner-in-crime ("cheat"), or stay silent ("cooperate"). I chose not to do this story because 1) in this case, both players "cooperating" would be bad for society, and 2) it's unrealistic, everyone knows that snitches get stitches
+这个游戏也是我们所知道的博弈论里，恶名昭彰的囚徒困境。囚徒困境源自于一个故事，故事中两位嫌犯都可以选择供出他们的犯罪伙伴（「欺骗」），或是保持沉默（「合作」）。我选择不用这个故事，理由是 1) 在这个范例，两位嫌犯的「合作」将对这个社会不利，另外 2) 这是一个不切实际的故事，大家都知道告密不会有好下场。
"You won't know in advance when the last round is"
+「你不会提前知道何时是最后一局」
-In the repeated game of trust (also known as Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma), it's important that neither player knows when the last round is. Why? Think about it - on the last round, both players would know their action has no consequence, so they'd both cheat. But that means in the second-last round, their actions can't change the next round, so they'd also both cheat. But that means in the third-last round... etc etc.
+在重复的信任游戏（也被称作迭代的囚徒困境），其中重要的一件事是，玩家永远不知道何时是最后一局。为何？试著想想：在最后一局，两位玩家将知道他们的行动是不会有任何后果，所以他们可能都会欺骗彼此。但这意味者在倒数第二局，他们的行动无法改变下一局，所以他们会继续欺骗彼此。这也代表倒数第三局… 等等。
-"Copycat"
+「复读机」
-This strategy is better known in game theory as Tit For Tat. It was created by Anatol Rapoport in 1980, for Robert Axelrod's game theory tournament. I chose not to use the name "Tit For Tat" because 1) it sounds mean, although it's a nice & fair strategy, and 2) a lot of the public have already heard about Tit For Tat, so if I used that name, players might just place their bets on this character because they've already heard of "Tit For Tat".
+在博奕论里，这个策略通常称为以牙还牙。它在 1980 年罗伯特・阿克塞尔罗的博奕论赛场里，由数学家阿纳托・拉普伯特提出。我没有使用以牙还牙这个名称的理由是 1) 它听起来像是卑鄙的，尽管它其实是个善良公平的策略，同时 2) 「以牙还牙」相当有名，假如我使用这个名称，玩家也许会将赌注放在这个角色上，因为他们已经听过「以牙还牙」了。
-"You may be skeptical about the Christmas Truce"
+「你可能有点怀疑我开头讲的，战壕里圣诞节休战的故事。」
-There was another guy who was skeptical, too. During the truce, a German corporal remarked with disgust, "Such a thing should not happen in wartime. Have you no German sense of honor?"
+也有其他人对于这件事感到怀疑。休战期间，一位德国的下士厌恶地表示：「这在战时是不应该发生的，难道没有一丝德国军人的荣誉感吗？」
-That man was Adolf Hitler.
+这位仁兄是阿道夫・希特勒。
You can't make this sh*t up.
+有够扯吧。
-"For culture to evolve"
+「文明的进化」
-There's a new, super-young interdisciplinary field that I'm really excited by, called Cultural Evolution. Admittedly, it's a bad name, not least because it sounds uncomfortably close to "Social Darwinism". Which it's not. Pinky promise.
+我真的非常兴奋这里有个全新，且非常年轻的跨领学科领域，被称为 Cultural Evolution 。固然这并非是个好的名称，尤其听起来会非常相似于「社会达尔文主义」，让人很不舒服。但我保证这不是同一回事。打勾勾。
-One core part of Cultural Evolution Theory is culture evolves the same way life does: through variation & selection. Variation: people differ in beliefs & behaviors, and invent new ones almost every day. Selection: people try to imitate their heroes & elders, and adopt their beliefs/behaviors.
+Cultural Evolution 理论中一个核心部分是文化进化与生活方式相同：通过变化和选择。变化：人们的信仰与行为会有所不同，几乎每天都会有新的发现。选择：人们试图模仿他们的英雄与长辈，并且接纳他们的信仰、行为。
-(Note: this is not quite Richard Dawkins' "meme" theory. "Meme" implies, that, like genes, ideas come in discrete chunks & replicate with high fidelity. This is obviously untrue. Also you can't say "meme" with a straight face these days, so whatever)
+（备注：这不是理察・道金斯的「模因」(meme) 理论。「模因」暗示文化会像是基因一般，想法会以独立方式复制但与原先保持很高的相似度。但显然这并非事实。而且这年头，很难一本正经的说出 meme 这个字，所以，随便啦）
-The reason why I think Cultural Evolution is so promising, is that it could integrate all the human sciences: psychology, sociology, economics, anthropology, political science, neuroscience, biology. The greatest problems of our time do not obey conventional academic boundaries -- so, it's about dang time we created a common language between the sciences and humanities.
+我认为 Cultural Evolution 很有希望的原因是，它可以整合所有人类科学：心理学、社会学、经济学、人类学、政治学、神经学、生物学。要解决当代最重要的问题，不可能依靠传统学术所立下的界线——所以，建立科学与人文社会学科之间的共同语言，现在正是时候。
-If you want to learn more about Cultural Evolution Theory, I highly recommend Joseph Henrich's 2015 book, The Secret of Our Success!
+假如你想学习更多关于 Cultural Evolution 理论，我高度推荐 Joseph Heinlich 在 2015 年发表的《我们成功的秘密》！
-"[Always Cheat's] exploitativeness was its downfall"
+「老油条 [...] 尝到作茧自缚的滋味」
-You may have heard that someone found a player strategy that can "exploit evolution". From the Scientific American: "[Press & Dyson's results] suggested the best strategies were selfish ones that led to extortion, not cooperation."
+你也许听过某些人发现一个「可以利用进化」的玩家策略。引述《科学人》：「[Press & Dyson 的结果]显示，最好的策略是自私剥削，而非合作。」
-Press & Dyson's findings are really important, but Scientific American confused two different uses of the word "evolutionary". The first use, the way this interactive guide used it, was to mean that the tournament's population changes over time. The second use, the way P&D meant it, was that the player's rules changes over time. For example: Detective is "evolutionary" since it changes its own rules, while Copycat is not "evolutionary" since it sticks to its principles.
+Press & Dyson 的发现是非常重要的，但《科学人》混淆了「进化」一词两种不同的用途。第一种用途，也是这份互动指南使用的方式，意味著竞赛的成员会随著时间而改变。第二种用途，P&D 的意思，是特定玩家的规则会随时间的推移而改变。举例来说：福尔摩星儿会「演进」，因为他会改变自己的规则，然而复读机不会「演进」，因为他保持相同的原则。
-So, P&D found strategies that could exploit "evolutionary" players like Detective, but their strategies still could not exploit the evolution of the tournament, because in the long run, fair & nice strategies still win.
+所以，P&D 发现可以利用像是福尔摩星儿这样「演进式」玩家的策略，但他们的策略仍然无法利用竞赛进行进化，因为长期下来，公平、善良的策略仍旧会胜利。
-"We have fewer friends -- period."
+「我们所拥有的朋友数量变少了，仅此而已。」
-Seriously, go read Robert Putnam's 2000 book, Bowling Alone. Yeah it's a bit outdated by now, 17 years later, but its core findings and lessons are still true as ever -- probably even more so.
+认真推荐罗伯特・D・帕特南 2000 年的书，《独自打保龄球》。已经 17 年了，现在来看是有点过时，但书中的核心发现和教导仍然很受用——近期来看更是如此。
"Non-zero-sum game" / "Win-Win"
+「非零和游戏」/「双赢」
-This is kinda cheesy, but I still adore the 1989 book, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People -- especially Habit #4: Think Win-Win.
+说来好笑，但我仍喜欢 1989 年出版的《与成功有约》——尤其是习惯 #4：思考双赢。
-Because, contrary to popular belief, coming up with Win-Win solutions is hard, takes lots of effort, and is emotionally painful. Heck, I'd go even further – I'd say our culture's default stance of Win-Lose "us versus them" is the easy path, the lazy path, the equivalent of activism junk food.
+因为，和一般印象相反，拿出双赢的解决方法是困难的，需要付出很多努力，且在情绪上更是极为痛苦。嗯，更进一步来说——我觉得文化里预设「敌我分明」的输赢立场，不但是抄捷径，也很是懒惰的方法，相当于行动主义者的垃圾食物。
-Anyway. Exaggerations aside, I strongly believe "Win-Win" / "Non-Zero-Sum" is something we all urgently need -- in our personal lives, social lives, and definitely political lives.
+言归正传。说真的，我坚信「双赢」/「非零和」是我们迫切需要的——在我们的个人生活，社会活动和特别是政治生活中。
-"Copykitten"
+「复读鸭」
-Just like how Copycat's original name was Tit For Tat, Copykitten's original name is Tit For Two Tats. Same rule: Cooperate, unless the other players cheats twice in a row.
+就像复读机的原名是以牙还牙，复读鸭的原名是Tit For Two Tats。同样的规则：合作，直到其他玩家在连续游戏中欺骗了两次。
-There's another forgiving variant of Tit For Tat called Generous Tit For Tat. It's got a similar but slightly different rule: Cooperate, but when the other player cheats, forgive them with a X% chance. This design, with the variable "X", lets you set different "forgiveness" levels for the player.
+以牙还牙还有其他的宽容变种，像是慷慨的以牙还牙。它的规则类似，只有一点不同：合作，但当其他玩家欺骗，会有 X% 机率遗忘。这个根据变数 “X” 的设计，可以让你设定不同玩家的「宽恕」程度。
-"Simpleton"
+「一根筋」
-Also known as Pavlov, or Win-Stay-Lose-Shift.
+也被称为巴夫洛夫（Pavlov）或称 Win-Stay-Lose-Shift （我先合作。你如果也合作，我会重复自己上一步的选择，即使是意外也一样。如果你欺骗，我会做出跟上一步相反的选择，犯错了也一样。）
-"Our modern media [...] has increased our miscommunication"
+「媒体越来越发达 […] 却也带给人们更多的误解」
-I'm only in my twenties, I don't know why I always sound like an old grump shaking my fist at a cloud. But, yeah, anyway, go read Neil Postman's 1985 book, Amusing Ourselves To Death. It's about how the communications technology we use subtly shapes our culture ("the medium is the message") and how technology that is biased towards quick & fast information (TV in 1985, social media now) turns us all into trivial, short-term thinkers.
+我今年二十多岁，但不知道为何，却总听起来像是个愤世嫉俗的老头。无论如何，请参考尼尔・波兹曼 1985 年《娱乐至死》一书，关于我们如何利用通讯科技来塑造文化（「媒体即讯息」）、资讯科技如何偏向即时、高速的讯息 （1985 年的电视，现在的社交媒体），以及我们如何变成平庸、短视近利的思考者。
Although I don't agree with everything in his book, it's a real eye-opener, and surprisingly prescient for 1985. His rant against Sesame Street is kinda weird, though.
+虽然我不能同意他书里的所有内容，在 1985 年代来看的确令人惊艳，真的大开眼界。不过他对于芝麻街美语的咆哮倒是有些诡异。
-"Build relationships. Find win-wins. Communicate clearly."
+「建立人际关系、努力寻求双赢、沟通尽量清晰。」
-Giving advice can come off as condescending, so let me be perfectly honest: I do not have any of this figured out, personally. I'm bad at developing friendships, especially with people of different political views than me. I occasionally forget about win-wins, and lapse into "us versus them" thinking. And judging by this rambling, I'm also still terrible at communicating clearly.
+这样给建议，看起来可能像居高临下的说教，所以我就老实说吧：这些忠告我自己也还没做到。我很不会交朋友，对方政治观点和我不同时尤其如此。我时不时会忘记「双赢」，掉回「敌我分明」的看法里。从这篇杂乱无章的文字，也可以看出我离清晰沟通还差得远。
-But I want to get better. This stuff is hard. Building peace & trust in the world, from the bottom up, is hard.
+不过，我想变得更好。这个很难。要由下而上，建设出世界的和平与信任，很难。
-And that's why it's worth it. <3
+就因为这样，才值得。<3
- “The Evolution of Trust” was created thanks to the generosity - of my supporters on Patreon! - Speaking of whom, here they are. THE COOLEST PEEPS: + 多亏了我的 Patreon 支持者们无私的贡献《信任的进化》才得以问世！说到他们，他们是谁呢。最酷的人们：
William O'Hanley
Zach Smith@@ -321,7 +319,7 @@
- and a special thanks to my friends who let me pester them to do playtests... + 另外，特别感谢我的朋友们，为了帮助我做游戏的测试，他们被我不厌其烦地打扰...
@@ -347,11 +345,9 @@ Yohan John