That may or may not work -- I'm not optimistic -- but at least it's the same idea. We're changing payoffs.

这似乎无济于事,我对此也并不乐观,但至少我们得承认,它改变了收益

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

and we're not going to see the same sort of pricing model, the same sort of...

我们的定价模式就不一样了，同样的……

音乐市场的变化 - SpeakingMax英语口语达人

You could think of these as two companies producing bottled water and now we're going to get hundreds of letters saying not all bottled waters are the same, especially from Italians and the French, but never mind. Let's just pretend that they are.

把他们想象成两家瓶装水厂商吧,我估计我们会收到数百封信件,告诉我说不是所有瓶装水都是一样的,尤其是从意大利和法国寄过来的那些,无所谓了,就把它们想象成是同质的吧

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

And so if we wanted to do this here, it's again, the same thing we're just now pulling back this layer and calling them char *s not actually strings.

如果我们想要在这里这样做，再次，我们撤销这一层,把它们叫做char，*s，实际上不是字符串。

哈佛公开课 - 计算机科学课程节选

So now we're putting 2 electrons into the same p orbital, that's not a problem, we can do it, it's not a huge energy cost to do that.

现在我们在同一个，p，轨道上放了两个电子，这没问题，我们可以这样做，这样不会亏损太多能量。

麻省理工公开课 - 化学原理课程节选

now we're not just talking about 1 photon, 1/2 let's say we shoot them all at the same time at our metal, each of them having some energy that's let's say 1/2 the work function. So, just to take a little bit of an informal survey, who thinks here that we will have an electron that is ejected in this case?

我们现在不仅仅讨论一个光子，它们所具有的能量是功函数的，我们在同一时刻把它们打到金属上,我们做一个不太正式的调查,谁认为这种情况下,一个电子会被打出？

麻省理工公开课 - 化学原理课程节选