文革的傳人
祖國在唱紅歌。祖國山河一片紅。 文革在延續，因為有文革的傳人。 文革不是毛主席的文革，不是文革一代人的文革。是我們民族的文革。
2026年2月12日的文章。很長，不給朋友們譯了。簡單介紹一下，然後給出原文的開頭與結尾部分，以及文章鏈接。
原文標題是：How The Times Is Digging Into Millions of Pages of Epstein Files
由一位紐時記者，Patrick Healy， 采訪另外四位參與開采此Epstein 文件堆的紐時記者。那四位分別是: 紐時調查部的編輯Kirsten Danis; 紐時調查部的記者Steve Eder; 紐時 A.I.項目的編輯Dylan Freedman; 以及紐時多媒體互動部的工程師 Andrew Chavez。
這個 Epstein 的文件堆，有3百萬頁文字文件，18萬章照片，2千段視頻。
紐時此刻在動員一個20多位記者參與的大隊人馬開采此堆。這個堆有多大？給個對比就清楚了。
1971年，Daniel Ellsberg 把43卷複印的“五角大樓文件”交給紐時，當時紐時也費了很大力氣才把文件搞清楚（傳說中43卷每頁紙都沒有頁數標記，而且全體被混到一起），可那個文件是有頭有尾的，每卷不過300多頁左右，就算每卷有350頁，不過區區15,000頁，才是這個 Epstein 文件堆的0.5%，還不算照片與視頻。
紐時在開采，估計別的媒體也在開采。
下麵是文章的開頭與結尾部分轉載。其中Patrick 小夥的提問用加重黑體字，而其他四位被采訪紐時媒體人的名字也是用加重黑體字，這是原文加的，用同字體隻是“語氣忠誠”而已，^_^。
Times Insider
How The Times Is Digging Into Millions of Pages of Epstein Files
Two dozen journalists. A pile of pages that would reach the top of the Empire State Building. And an effort to find the next revelation in a sprawling case.
Interview by Patrick Healy
With Steve Eder Andrew Chavez Kirsten Danis and Dylan Freedman
Feb. 12, 2026
原文鏈接：How The Times Is Digging Into Millions of Pages of Epstein Files - The New York Times
It is one of the largest and most complex reporting projects in recent New York Times history: searching for facts, revelations and answers in the Jeffrey Epstein files.
About two dozen journalists are working through the three million pages, 180,000 images and 2,000 videos contained in the trove of files released about two weeks ago — and so far they’ve seen only 2 to 3 percent of the material. It would take years for a group that size to comb through it all and then verify information as true and publishable, given that so much of it is uncorroborated, in fragments or redacted.
How do we do this work? What are we looking for? In what ways are artificial intelligence tools helpful? What judgment calls have we been making or debating?
I recently held an online discussion about all of this with four of the Times journalists working on the Epstein documents: Kirsten Danis, our Investigations editor; Steve Eder, an investigative reporter; Dylan Freedman, the projects editor on our A.I. Initiatives team; and Andrew Chavez, an engineer on our Interactive News desk. The discussion has been edited for length and clarity.
Take us back to that moment on Jan. 30 when the Justice Department released the three million pages and thousands of videos and images. What went through your minds?
STEVE EDER: It felt different from the first “Epstein Files” deadline day in mid-December. Then, it felt like a storm was coming because we had no idea what to expect. This time, we were better prepared, with new ways to dig into the documents. I wanted to find out what was there. And it would be a lot.
KIRSTEN DANIS: I was deeply curious, because we almost never get a chance to see the investigative materials underlying any case. Reporters always wish we had subpoena power. In this case, it was like we did.
You suddenly had receipts.
DANIS: Witness statements, emails, bank records. Would this material actually put to rest any of the enduring questions we’ve had about Epstein?
DYLAN FREEDMAN: I dropped all my meetings that day. The scale of this release was hard to visualize: About as tall as the Empire State Building, if you stacked the three million pages, not to mention the multimedia files. My first thought was: How can we create a tool that’s immediately useful to find content in that mammoth trove of information?
ANDREW CHAVEZ: I work a lot with documents. This was a particularly challenging collection. It was unruly: Photos, legal records, text messages, emails. And it was way more than one person could make sense of.
OK. So you knew that this big document release was coming, as Steve said. What did your preparations look like?
DANIS: We had assembled a team of reporters, editors and others who could jump in when the time came. They were colleagues in Washington and on our Investigations, National, Metro and Business desks, and engineers and A.I. journalists. Obviously, you can’t read three million pages. So we decided to start with search terms.
EDER: Trump. Clinton. Gates. Duke of York. My colleagues and I came up with a list of those terms and others about prominent people, places and events that involved Epstein; we’ve added more every day. Some searches were more topical, seeking details on Epstein’s time in jail and death. The plan was to divide those terms and phrases among the reporters and then begin searching the files to see what we found that was new and potentially newsworthy.
CHAVEZ: My desk, Interactive News, maintains a proprietary tool for document reporting, which we knew we’d need for a collection this large. We already had the ability to search millions of pages, but downloading and making millions of pages searchable in a few hours was a new challenge. We had some ideas about how the Justice Department might release the files online, so we built what we could and ran weekly rehearsals against a set of test documents that we assembled.
Did things go like it did in rehearsal, Andrew?
CHAVEZ: There were curveballs. The way they showed up online required us to do a lot of improvising. We never imagined, for example, that they’d release these in a way that you’d have to click through more than 25,000 pages on justice.gov just to find them all. Or that there’d be broken links to sift through, and files constantly disappearing and reappearing.
DANIS: Andrew and his colleagues worked for about 10 hours to get most of the documents uploaded into our tool. We had to rely on the D.O.J.’s clunky search function while that happened.
EDER: But Dylan stepped in to make that all easier.
FREEDMAN: I knew the tool Andrew had worked on would be the ultimate repository of information for reporters, but it would take hours to get all the content indexed. I started thinking about ways to get rougher cuts of information to reporters more quickly, for breaking news.
With the help of A.I., I wrote a tool that leveraged the D.O.J.’s own search functionality to allow reporters to quickly extract every page of search results and put them in a spreadsheet. From there, we populated tabs for search results from key figures linking back to the source material, and reporters crowdsourced verifying the information.
EDER: Dylan’s improv gave us a running start on what would turn into a very long day and night.
Steve, Kirsten, you’ve been working on our Epstein coverage on and off for six years. Once you had these documents, what questions and mysteries did you want to drive at?
EDER: There have been big and basic questions about Epstein. How did he go about doing what he did? How did he get away with so much for so long? Who funded it? One of the big theories out there is that Epstein was collecting the secrets of powerful or wealthy contacts for blackmail or to gain other leverage. This has been hard to pin down over the years — it is an inherently tricky thing to prove or disprove.
DANIS: Another important question was whether there was hard evidence of other criminality. While there are people that investigators described as possible co-conspirators in Epstein’s child sex-trafficking operation, none of those names or information about them was new. We’ve gone through only a tiny fraction of these files, and there’s certainly a lot more to see. But on the question of whether there was a wide pedophilia ring: we’re not seeing proof of that.
……………..
A final question: What did you discover in this batch of documents that fundamentally changed the way you think about this story?
EDER: I’ve been on this story for a long time, so there is little that surprises me at this point. But it is still jarring to see Epstein’s communications about women and girls.
DANIS: I agree, Steve. The way that some men talk about women in these documents, reducing them to commodities whose value depends on their hair color or breast size, isn’t at all surprising. But it’s ugly.
EDER: The enormous scope of the story and the reach of Epstein’s collection of contacts still catches me off guard. You would imagine that we’d feel like we know the whole story by now, but not really. It is hard to believe that after all that has been said, there is still much to learn about Epstein and his network.
FREEDMAN: As a relative newcomer to the Epstein beat, I was shocked by the way that Epstein groomed not just women and girls but also powerful men to acquire favor. His network was so much more extensive than I had imagined. It’s the most detailed portrait I’ve seen of an elite class of society operating outside of public scrutiny. Epstein’s disturbing photographs and some of his coded language to describe girls left me with a gaping discomfort.
CHAVEZ: I don’t have the experience with this story that Steve and others do, since I was really just brought in to wrangle the documents. But I’ve seen a lot of document dumps and the material in this one really has the ability to stop you in your tracks. There’s an unfiltered nature, especially in some of the correspondence, that I just found unrecognizable.
Steve Eder has been an investigative reporter for The Times for more than a decade.
轉載後記：朋友們馬年破案順暢，^_^。
