Maybe Merton Miller is right-- these things are "neutral mutations" and changes in dividend policy are meaningless.

也许莫顿·米勒是对的,这些都是"中性突变",变更股利政策是无意义的

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

And then remember how you solve this 'cause otherwise completely useless exercise.

记住我是怎么解决这个问题的，否则就是一次,无意义的演练了，对吧。

哈佛公开课 - 计算机科学课程节选

The genome starts piling on mutations that mean nothing; that's how they date the branches of the genome, by looking at the number of neutral mutations.

基因积累了许多无意义的突变,这就是他们如何鉴定基因分支的年代,看中性突变的数量就行了

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

What's the point? Again, you can have things that are syntactically legal but not semantically meaningful, and static semantics is going to be a way of helping us decide what expressions, what pieces of code, actually have real meaning to it. All right?

重点是什么？重申，你可以有东西在语义结构的逻辑上有意义,但是在语义上无意义，而static语义,将是一个帮助我们,决定哪些表达，哪部分的代码实际上，有意义的途径，好么？

麻省理工公开课 - 计算机科学及编程导论课程节选