基因編輯存在大量的道德問題。雖然基因編輯可以為治療和治愈疾病帶來諸多樂觀前景，但是這項技術(shù)也可能會導(dǎo)致不公平現(xiàn)象加劇，尤其是這一技術(shù)成為富人特權(quán)的話。

　　我很驚訝這些問題竟然沒有引起公眾的足夠關(guān)注。當(dāng)今最受關(guān)注的是人工智能這一話題。然而，基因編輯值得受到類似的關(guān)注。

展望未來

　　雖然我從未寫下過新年愿望，但我一直會為新的一年制定明確的目標(biāo)并實現(xiàn)這些目標(biāo)的方案。隨著年齡的增長，這兩件事正變得越來越一致。因此，今年，我為自己準(zhǔn)備了2019年的新年愿望。我正致力于學(xué)習(xí)并思考技術(shù)可以對我們生活質(zhì)量產(chǎn)生重大影響同時也會帶來復(fù)雜道德和社會鼓勵的兩大關(guān)鍵領(lǐng)域。

　　其一是隱私與創(chuàng)新之間的平衡。例如，我們?nèi)绾问褂脭?shù)據(jù)來深度了解教育或健康問題，同時又可以有效地保護(hù)人們的隱私？

　　另一個是在教育中使用技術(shù)的問題。軟件對學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能起到多大的幫助？多年來，人們一直在激烈討論技術(shù)對教育的巨大影響。人們對此持有懷疑態(tài)度無可厚非。但我認(rèn)為，最終事情會往好的方向發(fā)展。

比爾·蓋茨2018年終總結(jié)思考感悟中英全文 比爾蓋茨心得體會英文原文

　　Every Christmas when I was a kid, my parents would send out a card with an update on what the family was up to. Dad’s law firm is growing, Mom’s volunteer work is going strong, the girls are doing well in school, Bill is a handful.

　　Some people think it is corny, but I like the tradition. These days, at the end of each year, I still enjoy taking stock of my work and personal life. What was I excited about? What could I have done better?

　　I thought I would share a few of these thoughts as 2018 concludes.

　　One thing that occurs to me is that the questions I am asking myself at age 63 are very different from the ones I would have asked when I was in my 20s.

　　Back then, an end-of-year assessment would amount to just one question: Is Microsoft software making the personal-computing dream come true?

　　Today of course I still assess the quality of my work. But I also ask myself a whole other set of questions about my life. Did I devote enough time to my family? Did I learn enough new things? Did I develop new friendships and deepen old ones? These would have been laughable to me when I was 25, but as I get older, they are much more meaningful.

　　Melinda has helped broaden my thinking on this point. So has Warren Buffett, who says his measure of success is, “Do the people you care about love you back?” I think that is about as good a metric as you will find.

　　It may sound grand, but I think the world is slowly going through a similar transition to a broader understanding of well-being. For most of human history, we have been focused on living longer by fighting disease and trying to grow enough food for everyone. As a result, life spans have gone up dramatically. Technology has played a key role in that through vaccines, medicines, and improved sanitation.

　　We still need a lot of innovation to solve problems like malaria or obesity, but we are also going to be focusing more on improving the quality of life. I think this will be the thrust of many big breakthroughs of the future. For example, software will be able to notice when you’re feeling down, connect you with your friends, give you personalized tips for sleeping and eating better, and help you use your time more efficiently.

　　There are not the same clear measures of these things as there are for diseases, and there may never be. But there is nascent work in this field and I think it is going to accelerate.

　　As I look back on the year, I am also thinking about the specific areas I work on. Some of this is done through our foundation but a lot of it (such as my work on energy and Alzheimer’s work) is not. What connects it all is my belief that innovation can save lives and improve everyone’s well-being. A lot of people underestimate just how much innovation will make life better.

　　Here are a few updates on what’s going well and what isn’t with innovation in some areas where I work.

Alzheimer’s disease

　　I saw two positive trends in Alzheimer’s research in 2018.

　　I saw two positive trends in Alzheimer’s research in 2018.

　　One is that researchers focused on a new set of ideas about how to stop Alzheimer’s.

　　The first generation of theories, which dominated the field for years, emphasized two proteins called amyloid and tau. These proteins cause plaques and tangles in the brain, clogging up and killing brain cells. The idea was to stop the plaques and tangles from forming. I hope these approaches pay off, but we have not seen much evidence that they will.

　　In the past year, researchers have doubled down on a second generation of hypotheses. One theory is that a patient’s brain cells break down because their energy producers (called mitochondria) wear out. Another is that brain cells break down because part of the immune system gets overactivated and attacks them.

　　This is a great example of how improving our understanding of biology will reduce both medical costs and human suffering.

　　The other trend this year is that the Alzheimer’s community focused on getting more and better access to data. We’re working with researchers to make it easier for them to share information from their studies broadly so that we can better understand questions like how the disease progresses.

　　Over the past few years, the U.S. government has dramatically stepped up funding for Alzheimer’s research, from $400 million a year to over $2 billion a year. There is also a big push to create better diagnostics.

　　The only problem where I don’t yet see a clear path forward yet is how to develop more efficient ways to recruit patients for clinical trials. Without a simple and reliable diagnostic for Alzheimer’s, it’s hard to find eligible people early enough in the disease’s progression who can participate in trials. It can take years to enroll enough patients. If we could find a way to pre-screen participants, we could start new trials more quickly.

　　But there is so much momentum in other areas—scientific tools, better diagnostics, improved access to data—that as long as we can solve the recruitment problem, I am confident that we will make substantial progress in the next decade or two.