Mango's Sweet and Sour

I Chose to Climb

2006-11-19T10:24:00.000-08:00

到了Zermatt，我倒没有一点到达目的地的感觉。在这段从Brig到Zermatt的旅程，路上有悬崖峻奇，也有溪涧恬静，小森林小木屋可人，还有，在这一切一切之上，有着白雪的点缀，使所有的景物都变得寂静深邃：无论是刚刚离开Brig的稀疏白雪，在小坡上和着早春鹅黄浅绿的嫩叶，或黑白分明地影着条理清晰的葡萄田；还是在山上厚实的积雪，或藏在裸岩缝中，或覆在水流旁边，或在远处坡上衬着小森林小木屋；还有那天上飘下绵密的大雪，和那偶尔在松树上滑下到火车窗边的雪块，都是那么的使人平和而欣喜，而车厢中那仅有的另一群人放肆的目光和高谈阔论的确无所谓了。

旅途已是我的目的。Zermatt，这个在Matterhorn脚下的小镇，我只打算停留一两个小时，就着雪景喝杯咖啡换一下气，就打道回Interlaken了。出了车站，在车厢中那么可爱的雪却变得讨厌。雪下得还是气势汹汹的，但毕竟已是四月中了，即使挟着高海拔，到底还是中气不足，人烟多点的地方，已是化得七零八落，湿淋淋脏兮兮的，一眼望着前路，居然立足之处有限。眉头在每时每刻的寻找落脚点时已不知不觉地皱起来。咖啡馆也另人失望，人声鼎沸的，到处倒是兴奋的度假者，位置已是所剩无几，落座的话，不搭台估计是无可能的。

于是还得到外面流连一圈。Zermatt实在太小了，主要是成直角的两条街，其中一条小溪在镇中流过。主街也度假化得紧要，基本是滑雪器具的出租，标着英文的餐馆，买各种纪念品的小店。转过街角，触目所及，基本都是酒店的招牌。这么无趣的地方，我不禁暗暗叫苦，已准备回程，起码在干爽晴朗的Spiez打发多余的时间也是写意。

却突然瞥到一块空地，我知道很可能是墓地。我既穷也不忌讳，于是几乎从未错过遇到的墓地。比起要钱才可以参观的地方，墓地还有趣些。看着一个个生卒年份，有时还有一些题外话，出来时，往往有一些世外的恍惚，又夹有一些莫名的豁达感。

这个墓地却是比较特别，年轻人比较多。匆匆看来都是卒于大好年华，还有是大都有“xxxhorn”的文字。我突然明白，那是登山遇害的人的墓地。一个个地细看来，在含苞欲放未放的年华葬身于冰川，多少也会使人动容。但也耐不住凉薄的天性，心底还是飘过一丝讥诮：能长途跋涉甚至飘洋过海来登山，这些登山者，多是出身于富有殷实之家，若不是跑来这地，估计大部分余生还是可以衣食无忧，伴着妻子孩儿，体会着平安喜乐，即使有着一些风浪，也总比不上这生死挑战（还是毫无建设意义的挑战），真是自己找来的，何苦呢？

这边的看完，发现街对面的教堂边还有，于是意犹未尽地冲过去，在感慨和讥笑交织中一块块地看。突然，看到一块墓碑写道：

I chose to climb

还有一个锈迹斑斑的登山用的锤子在下面。句子简单，字亦不大，却激烈地冲进我心里去，把原来的感慨和讥笑驱得烟消云散。奇怪地，我那时只想起了Satan说：

Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav'n.

的气概。可能，在他心中，一种雄心，使他“farewel happy fields, where joy forever dwells”，就是“hail horrous”也毫无悔意。也想起那我从未有勇气体力机会亲身体验的雪山之颠的壮丽。但图片上的景色是多么的庄严雄伟啊，想来有人为此负上生命的风险也是愿意的，平安喜乐与此相比又算得上什么？就是一些人选择了的不甘平凡，对伟大的追求，对极限的挑战，对本原的探索，造就了我们这个世界的进步和多姿多彩。也是另外的一些人选择了甘于平凡，圆熟隐忍，造就了和谐，文明和宽容。

有选择，也受到限制，才让我真真切切地感到自己是人，不是木偶，是人。

每次看到“理性”或“理性的态度”这个词就不想把帖子读下去了

2006-11-19T10:19:00.000-08:00

Bertrand Russell曾说（大约意思）：Rationality is not shown as much in what you believe as in how you believe it.　叫多几句“科学”不代表理性，正如写多几条公式不代表rigorous一样。

甚至信教反对进化论的也未必比信进化论反对基督教的不理性。我们的精力都是有限的，兴趣和intellectual inclination不同，际遇也不同。如果一个人是在宗教家庭长大，喜欢logic和abstract thinking，从未遇到好的生物老师来把进化论说的条例清晰令人（有童年宗教背景人士）信服，但是却有好的文学老师指引他如何查文献，引经据典地支持自己在神学的argument，成人后也是从事普通工作，当然也不主动学习进化论（凭什么业余学习进化论科普比学习希腊文或解puzzles高尚有理性？），突然被人问起对进化论的看法，说不信也不希奇。另一人在secular的家庭长大，也未遇到好的生物老师来把进化论说的条例清晰令人信服，但试还是得考，书还是得背，也未遇到过好的有魅力的宗教人士来说服他来信教，成人后也是从事普通工作，当然也不主动学习进化论，突然被人问起对进化论的看法，说信也不希奇。那么在遇到同一个与宗教无关的问题（如经济），两人背景知识相同，那个更理性很难说。

我并不是替宗教人士辩护。只是想说，对成年人来说，以信仰定“理性”无济于事，除非宗教人士pre-emptive strike。Claim自己信什么不信什么是容易的事，能讲出所以然来的却不多。如果“理性”就是这样定价的，也未免太cheap了一些。

当然，一个我举的例子的推论是教育的重要性，要成年人有sensible的知识的profolio ,好老师是第一步。那么首先那老师要自己真的不是背书，不会因为自己在的是“理性”的一方而沾沾自喜，而能讲出所以然来。神学中也要非常rigor和渊博的人，轻易不能驳倒的。

Reply to Wu the Gifted on China's economy

2006-11-19T10:16:00.000-08:00

However, I tried to interpret it in a more technical point of view. Usually, growth in GDP can be interpreted as some weighted average of growth in captial, labor, and technology.

Your points of government interference of market, and the land price etc simply just addressing the (real-term) capital growth: the reason I said real-term is the cheap land price.

While for labor growth, we didn't experience high population growth, but we exprienced the idle labor flowing into as active labor, and I actually think this is the most important reason.

And technology/productivity, we experienced readily available technology, which is from aboard and well ahead of the current one.

So you it's no wonder you can have a high growth rate--provided you have decent infrastucture.

But I dissent in who is the most active sector in China? The sector with most contribution is the small business, and small scale foreign investment. Not big company. Those big companies are just "showcase" on how strong China are, but not really contribute to the growth.

I think the problem of future China will face is not the losing power of collectivism, but the drain of cheap labor and energy. These 2 problems are getting serious in the areas with highest growth rate like pearl river delta and the Yangzhi River delta. Wage for mannual workers are rising--showing the shortgage is becoming or at least the surplus of idle labor is reducing. Another problem is productivity. Now China's growth in productivity is still in terms of learning. However, as basic technology is being caught up, the training of the workers are important, as well as the health of them. However, China has little investment (and even reducing investment) in education and health care, which may harm the future productivity growth (I support free education and health care not only from a point of view of equality and justice, but also for pragmatic reason). Once there is little suitable technology to import (some technology can not be imported without high trained workers), the growth inproductivity will be slower.

Another big problem is the 2-tiered system of China: a majority of poor rural workers and a minority of well-off urban workers--and even those "well-off" urban residence are not problem-free, and they need to take care of themselves in all sorts of risks. Social distress asides, there is also a problem of market. As China grows fast and other countries can not keep up with the growth rate, China must face a problem of selling its product aboard. Exporting can not last forever for growth. However, as the vast inequality of income, and economic insecurity (you need to save for the raining days if the government won't take care of you), people are not willing to consume. This is what many people waiting in anxiety to come.

未写完，继续

2006-11-19T10:15:00.001-08:00

其实中国现在的问题是，我认为，是那个留谷种的方法非常奇怪：照你说（我不大清楚事实，但相信你的观察），是第一种方法，然后就把谷种给了一些人，人为地作出第二种。因为本来第二种虽然无一个吸引人的叫“公平”的东西，但不公平本身是很难作出moral judgement的：你不知道原来是一些人是愿意牺牲多些，所以谷种也多些，所以下一年的谷也多些，今年拼命食也不会无谷种了（Brad DeLong有一篇很好的non-technical文章关于马克思的批评，去年我转给fagus，等等可能能找到。）。但光靠私人的投资（投资的来源是for whatever reason的不公平）有一个问题：不是每种投资都适合私人方式的，教育和医疗就是。

从机构来说，私人拥有，有股东的教育和医疗机构是以一利润为目标（起码在理论上是这样），当然是不会牺牲小我。

从个人的受者来说，富有有闲的家长和有天分的小朋友不是perfect match（尽管是正相关），富有和病不是perfect match（病的case比较tricky,要更加细心分）。先讲教育。Gary Becker的理论是政府投资了家长就不再投资。但我认为一个很大的问题是有些家长无论多么投资，小朋友都只是有限的天分（而且家长不承认这点），但一些非常高天分的小朋友却是无论家长多么重视，也无能力另她得到最好的教育。那么这个社会在教育投资方面，一些钱浪费了，一些人浪费了－－双重浪费。富有和病的argument也是差不多。当然，完全政府的投资的确会使私人不投资，所以总量会降低－－所以要balance，尤其是在教育方面。

所以，即使不公平的来源是一些人开始拼命省下的第一桶金，无不道德之处，一个社会如果极度不公平，加上政府无钱（在贪污官员手中的钱不算是，我指是政府可以用，肯吐出来的钱），那么它的潜力不会大－－无论那些人多么温顺，不covet thy neighbor。因为有浪费的现象。更不用说，如果财富过于悬殊，有钱的人会尽力限制竞争，保持现状。所以极度不公平，即是来源在道德是无争议之处，因为有可“恶”的效果，所以也是一种“恶”。

我还是在这里回复再贴过去好一点，因为隔壁style有点奇怪。

2006-11-19T10:15:00.000-08:00

先声明我对你的春秋笔法绝对无任何意见，以下的不是针对中心思想（totalitarian government)－－我不大熟识这点，而是回答“为什么增长那么快”的问题。

其实有一段高速增长的过程的国家不是少数，拉美，香港，台湾，东南亚，都曾经有过，就是因为低起点。至于为什么sub-Sahara非洲没有，那么是因为起点低得不象话。Paul Krugman有一篇极之经典的文章（有点数学，但绝对是小儿科，尤其是对你来说），是说这些低起点的国家，在与国际市场交易时（即出口），为什么一些国家不能改变现状，而另一些国家可以（具体我会介绍一下）：如果一个国家的历史起点不大低的话，一些big push可以使这国家发展。中国的瞩目是因为它是一个大的国家。但中国经济发展的成绩表（就算是无虚假），如果是在增长和发展的方面来看，其实不是那么优秀－－当然，由于它大，所以问题的复杂性也比小国大得多（而且我倾向于复杂程度和size是非线性增长的），所以，同样的增长，对大穷国来说，更难，也就更珍贵。

其实增长和公平（不说社会公正问题，因为那是更在institution，和经济还是无很直接关系），很多时候要有trade-off。的确这种trade-off，我们（我是左派的，毫无疑问）看在眼里，的确痛苦。连日本，这么egalitarian的发达国家，最近在走出经济停滞时－－很多人认为是由于一系列的“松绑”政策引起的－－也开始有分化的趋势－－在很多人认为，也是由于那系列的“松绑”政策引起的。有竞争，就有winner和loser之分，无论多公平的竞争。

另外，经济的发展，资本是一个关键，消费也是一个关键。在一些非常低起点的国家，尤其是小国，这“消费”不是问题，因为可以出口。那么资本就是一个问题。也是你同样的argument：“The factory owners have a lot of money, but their consumption is limited (you can only eat that much per day, for example). So a large portion of the money goes to saving (or, equivalently, investment).”从另一角度看，就证明了这个道理。如果一个国家平均财富不高，而财富均分的效果是大家基本都把钱花光（因为无人达到“eat too much”的境界，反而是财富不均会使到一些人可以有储蓄。只要不是穷得走投无路，我们不能食谷种。要留有谷种，我们就食的就一定是少了。留谷种可以有两个办法：均分每人１００元，然后政府强制大家只能食９０元－－虽然大家的极限是１１０元，所以很想把这１００元全食了；或整个经济来说也是食９０元，但是一些人只能到手７０元，依照心性把它食光，一些人是到手１３０元，但怎么依照心性食也只能食１１０元。但我又怎么能相信政府会保管好我的谷种呢？于是我宁愿是那个不平均导致的储蓄。

当然，这有一个限度，也要看情况。对小国来说，消费不是一个问题，但对大国来说，消费不足是一个大问题－－中国不可能永远出口的。这个在supply side的增长以前行得通，以后不一定。当低端产品的世界市场差不多饱和时，国内的需求就很重要－－极度的不公平就会很成问题。美国的great depression，起码现在还在维持的consencus是gildened age的极度不公平带来。我的确是担心中国，无论制度多好象美国那样，也有这个day of reckonning。但由于美国多少是Ｍing Ｚhu社会，great depression是仅仅在经济上的灾难，因为能选出一个愿意address问题的总统（而且他有智慧又好运）。但在中国，这个day of reckonning很可能就不仅仅是一个经济上的灾难。

关于娼妓合法化

2006-11-19T10:09:00.000-08:00

我也认为高教授是对““妓权”的妓女的“歧视””，而不是对普通妓女的，但这也是有争议的观点。Yush所讲的““妓权”鼓吹者是让妓女呆在火坑里”非常值得商榷。我认为，只要是有巨大利益驱使的，把良家妇女推入火坑的，也真的是不愁人手，无论地上地下－－即使娼妓合法化，逼良为娼也是犯罪吧？在地下，由于揭发逼良为娼会导致娼妓自己也被暴露，人为地将娼妓和威胁者的利益捆绑在一起，威胁者反而得益。如果来去自由的，也很难是说是火坑了。

娼妓合法化的主要理由更是为了可以对从业人士的健康教育问题。我不由得想到Helen Epstein在几年前谈到非洲某国爱滋病的泛滥，多多少少与那个国家的经济结构有关。农村几乎不能温饱，很多农村成年男子是长年离家开矿，与妻子分居，而在矿的周围，就有很多便宜的妓寮，而那些男子却正正是家中，甚至家族中，最主要的收入来源－－通常他一人得病，就连累整个家垮下。而现在中国多多少少也有这个模式，很多青年都被逼与家人配偶分离，而很多人或者会寻求娼妓。我不知道向娼妓寻求协助是不是正道，但肯定是人道。我当然也认为，如果在一个社会，相当一部分人除了与家人长期分居外无其他办法能让自己物资上宽裕一点，的确不能说是文明，但改变这个结构不是一朝一夕的，于是副产品也不能不正视。如果娼妓无可避免，尤其是顾客也大部分是地层劳工，对健康的知识可能也不完备，合法化，以及随之而来的教育，控制（如发放安全套），以及针对这一群人的健康服务，定期体检（如果纳税人比较有能力及慷慨的话），会是功德无量的。但没有合法话，即使这些是由非政府机构来做，也很难，因为没有人会自动走出来的（甚至合法化也不是１００％效果，能覆盖５０％的人就很好了，但我们应该能做多少就多少。）

无论当初爱滋病是因为什么而开始泛滥的，我们几乎可以肯定，将来要是不能控制的话，娼妓很可能就是最重要的泛滥因数的。因为所有的教育和服务，如果要抵达目标群体的话，让他们在光天化日底下，是非常重要的。越是保守的社会，就越重要。因为保守社会关于性的教育，即使存在，也是非常马虎及不确切的（如楼下被转的高教授的关于安全套的文章－－连她也对此有误解！）。不幸的是，很少有人是天生妓女，不少娼妓也以前是“好”女孩－－即如其他保守社会里的“好”女孩一样，几乎从来没有想到听到“性”的，一旦她们入行后，这方面的缺乏，会是累己累人的（就如高教授的例子，我很怀疑是安全套的失误，也要可能是刚入行时非常懵懂，安全措施不够，病毒可能就是那时感染的－－我不知病毒的潜伏期是多少，所以只是猜测）。非常遗憾以高教授的悲悯和胸襟，都看不到这一点。

洁身自好自然是上上策，但不是每人能做的到的－－同样的节制力，有人琴瑟和调，有人离家千里就为糊口，于是后者就有可能走向娼妓。至于娼妓本身，即使是娼妓合法化的地方／时代，都是以此为耻的，一般如果有出路都不会这样，更多的是被人骗或逼的。一句话，很多人，尤其是下层娼妓及其顾客，都是生活所逼，没有理由因为一些人由于生计而要忍受极度的寂寞，一下守不住就被惩罚吧？很多道德君子从未受过试炼，就高喊着节制，说不定看着其他人由于未达圣人标准而受苦，还会有些隐隐的快感。

我等凡夫俗子，自己当然也有弱点，于是所有不伤他人的瑕疵都应被接受，而不是因为“报应”“惩罚”的意识或下意识（又一次小人之心度君子之腹，那些坚持“道德”的维护比减轻他人痛苦要重要的，下意识都是有“报应”的心态），　而去拒绝有效的办法去减轻痛苦，或痛苦的蔓延。

附：
艾滋病病人的哭诉作者:河南中医学院第一附属医院妇科主任医师高耀洁

这是一个真实的故事，她叫阿菊（化名），人生得俊俏可爱，初中毕业后，因家庭贫穷无钱上学，15岁就去深圳打工，干过发廊、舞厅、夜总会的小姐，挣了一些钱，今年才19岁。去年夏天她得了病，发烧、腹泻、全身疼痛，半年后她瘦得像一把干柴。阿菊害过“淋病”，她以为又是淋病复发了，曾到过多家医院求治，不见好转。1999年元
旦后的一天，她被某医院诊断为艾滋病，她不相信，哭着说：“我不会得艾滋病，我干那事（卖淫）时，每次都戴着避孕套……”她又到
某省艾滋病监测中心检查，结果确诊为艾滋病。阿菊仍不相信，她又去北京检查，仍诊断为艾滋病。阿菊怎么也想不通，她痛哭流涕地说：
“我干‘那一行’已4年多了，我知道‘正确使用避孕套，可以避免传染上艾滋病’。因此，我很注意……”“我看过很多宣传材料，上面
说避孕套不但是避孕的一种工具，还是防御艾滋病的一种法宝。为什么？它用在我身上就不灵呢？”

　　避孕套为什么没能使阿菊免患艾滋病？众所周知，避孕套避孕的效果并不是100％。在现实生活中，因使用避孕套避孕失败而到医院做人工流产者，不乏其人。既然避孕套连自身的“份内工作”都做不好，又怎能十分可靠地担当起防御艾滋病病毒的重任呢？

　　使用避孕套避孕失败的主要原因有：破裂、滑脱、乳胶质量差、厚度与弹性差、型号选择不当、反复使用等。艾滋病病毒较精子小2000倍以上，更易透过避孕套不易觉察的细小裂隙，艾滋病患者的每毫升精液中约有1千万至1亿个艾滋病病毒，即便正确使用避孕套，没有发生滑脱、破裂，也可能从套子的根部泄出少量精液接触女性外阴，而使其感染艾滋病病毒。艾滋病病毒使人们感染的途径有许多，不论女的阴道和外阴，还是男的阴茎和会阴，只要有皮肤或粘膜的轻度擦伤，便可能受到感染，而这种轻微的擦伤在性交时是经常发生的。另
外，艾滋病病人的任何体液内都含有大量的艾滋病病毒，随时可以感染他人。艾滋病病毒最容易侵袭口腔、直肠、阴道粘膜或其他部位皮肤上的朗罕氏细胞，先在朗罕氏细胞内大量繁殖，然后再进入血液向全身扩散。因为粘膜、皮膜表面有大量朗罕氏细胞，所以感染艾滋病病毒比怀孕机率大得多。感染艾滋病病毒，每次性接触都可能发生，而怀孕的机会每月仅有一次。避孕失败可以做人工流产来补救，而感染了艾滋病病毒是无法补救的。

　　基于以上情况，对有高危性行为的人来说，避孕套的保护效果极差。因此，盲目宣传正确使用避孕套“防御性病／艾滋病”是不负责任的，避孕套非但不能保证性乱者安全无恙，反而会助长他（她）们的放荡行为！阿菊就是一个典型的受害者，她的哭诉，给人们敲响警钟。我曾对一个推崇用避孕套预防性病／艾滋病的人说：“你不要过
分宣传避孕套预防艾滋病的作用”。他说：“你不叫他们用避孕套，叫他们用啥？”我再次告诉大家，避孕套不能有效防御性病／艾滋病，
它只能误使人们产生心理上的安全感，使人们更麻痹、更丧失警惕性，从而加速性病／艾滋病流行与蔓延。对于“叫他们用啥？”这个问题，
我的回答是：告诉群众，“洁身自爱”，这才是保护自身、家庭、社会健康，防御性病／艾滋病的好办法。

Fidelio

2006-11-19T10:00:00.000-08:00

看着乐手稀稀疏疏地从后台走出，还互相调笑着，我有点感到难以置信：这就是闻名的LSO？真是世风日下。。。坐下后，还是交头接耳的，这样的乐队，另人鼓掌欢迎指挥及其他表演者出场也提不起劲来。然而，第一小提琴的首席出来后，整个乐队，却可以在刹那间变得肃穆，变化之大，让人吃惊，于是也觉得有点意思了。

本来还为着不是staged production而懊恼（想一想最高价格为２７GBP，而在covent garden２７GBP也是勉强的边位，连舞台也看不全，再应用一下市场效率的原理，也知是有catch。。。），但一场下来，却使我认为这个歌剧，还是concert形式好。贝多芬的长处是管弦乐，不是剧情，这个歌剧虽然故事也不无聊，但还是音乐出彩一些，那些身外物还是少一些好罢。同样，我认为华格纳的歌剧也应如此处理，因为他的音乐虽然是极美极和谐，消魂之音，但故事却连老土都算不上，简直是荒谬。回归到音乐而不是追求theater的结果，只会是扬长避短。

Collin Davis宝刀未老，序曲极为张扬，加上本来现场听来的音乐就比唱片丰满，即使我是多么坚定的Otto Klempere fan，也不得不承认，这序曲比我的唱片要好。Marzeline是以为身材苗条的金发女孩唱，离我很近，于是我看到她其实比较漂亮。。。有点分心。

整晚下来，有三个出彩的地方：管弦乐，合唱，都很容易另人沉浸在其中，还有的是是那个唱Pizarro的人，也是张扬残暴，却吐字清晰，气流之间处理得很好。

贝多芬只有这一出歌剧，却寄托了他的大部分想法：对暴政的愤怒，对自由的渴望和赞美，还有更重要的，对理想女性的勾画。Leonore，这个勇敢坚贞的妻子和一般（正）歌剧中的娇弱的女主角非常不同。当丈夫被暴君锁进监牢中，有情人被迫分开时，没有顾影自怜，没有晕倒，没有发癫，没有死去，没有笨拙的营救，没有盲目的牺牲，而是假扮一少年，成功地得到监守的信任（和他女儿的爱），以打探丈夫的消息和找时机来营救，在歌剧有限的故事表现力中，仍可以看出她的聪慧和镇定（如博取Rocco信任以可以到地牢的那一片断）。而和在他之前一般misogynic的歌剧作家不同，即使坚贞的爱情是支持着Leonore的动力，但不是她丰富感情世界的全部。她厌恶暴君，同情囚犯，尽力地为囚犯争取一点的福利，尽管是微不足道的放风时间。身份一直都没有暴露，直至最后一刻，另大家惊讶地站出来捍卫丈夫的生命。

属于她的独唱段不多，没有初相遇的甜蜜，没有脆弱的回忆，有的只是对暴政的愤怒，对未来的希望，对责任的一再认定。

可惜的是，贝多芬一直都找不到，属于他的Leonore。

再说一说Christa Ludwig，我手上的Fidelio版本的主角。其实我认为真正最好听的女声都在soprano和mezzo-soprano中游移的。Maria Callas是被认为是soprano，但她的声线是比一般的Soprano（如Lucia Popp和Elizabeth Schwarzkopf）偏沉，有点mezzo-soprano的感觉。除了Chirsta Ludwig，我也极爱Janet Baker深沉的马勒歌曲。可惜偏mezzo-soprano的soprano一般成不了大气候（除了Maria Callas），一般都是配角。其实Ludwig非常有表现力，她扮的几个角色我都非常喜欢（也很难分清是喜欢角色和声音）。在Lohengrin中，比起优柔寡断的Elsa，我还是喜欢阴沉的坏人Ortrud多一些，尤其是在教堂中对质的时候，更是明显。而在Tanhauser中，我还是最喜欢Venus，不是纯洁有美德但娇弱的Elisabeth。Venus，使人着迷却不被爱的神仙姐姐（或妖女），尽力（妖力）地使爱人满足，却还是使他厌倦。Ludwig从开始的尽力诱惑他留下，到充满骄傲和尊严的“To heros only, to menials never, does my kingdom open”，到最后的绝望，总令人觉得那时人，有血有肉的人。倒是那凡躯的Elisabeth，却是那么有着美德，倒象下凡的仙子。可怜的Venus，无人能抗拒你的诱惑有如何？情欲开始尽占上风，但人最后还是向往圣洁的美德，假惺惺地要寻求救赎的。不是每个人都有彻底堕落的勇气。

Christa Ludwig是我心中的Lady Macbeth，Maria Callas，尽管也是有表现力，但我觉得还是差一点。只有能唱好沉着的Leonore，和绝望的Venus，才能唱得好这个可怕和矛盾的角色，读信时的野心初现，面对鲜血的沉着（和她丈夫的惊恐对比），加冕时祝酒的意得志满，再祝酒的强装镇定，到最后的精神分裂，人物的丰富复杂，不是整个世界就是爱情的闺房少女可以比拟的。可惜，我只能找到2nd Best的Lady MacBeth，还只是单声道的现场录音。

可能现在blond是比以前少了是因为以前可能由于交通和观念的原因

2006-11-19T09:53:00.000-08:00

blond只和blond结婚（或近似这样），现在结婚虽然不是random，但比以前random很多，我做了一点back of the envelope calculation，在情况下，blond的数量是大于０的。

suppose 我们一开始有两个人口，纯非blond的是p_1，纯blond的是p_2，没有杂非blond。之前他们之间的结婚是一定和自己一样的人结婚，但之后是random的。

suppose在任何时候t有三类人：纯blond的比例是A_t，杂非blond的比例是B_t，纯非blond的比例是C_t，我们知道A_t和C_t的最大限制是p_2/(p_1+p_2)<1,p_1/(p_1+p_2)<1。

那么他们evlove的规则是如下：

A_{t+1}=(A_t*B_t)/2+(B_t^2)/4+A_t^2 %a blond with a hybrid non-blond has 1/2 chance to get a blond child, 2 hybrid nonblonds have 1/4 chance for a blond child, 2 blonds definitely have a blond child

B_{t+1}=(B_t^2)/2+(A_t*B_t)/2+A_t*C_t+(B_t*C_t)/2

C_{t+1}=(C_t^2)+(B_t*C_t)/2+(B_t^2)/4

可能有一点不完整（check了一次了，对A_{t+1}check了几次，这个最重要的式子估计无错吧，其他两个大家将就一点吧，看在我又粗又短的手指来打了这么多奇形怪状符号份上）。

我暂时无时间研究有无及如何得到equilibrium（因为这是back-of-envelope），但估计可以做simulation看看分布如何。无论如何，我们知道A_{t+1}不会为0，因为C_t<1，所以B_t和A_t是不会同时为0的。因此A_{t+1}是不会为0的。

大家放心吧，羊牛可能会变成珍稀动物，但不会绝种的。。。

所以马拉松还得继续跑。。。

这有什么教训可以吸取的？

2006-11-19T09:45:00.000-08:00

如果看一下历史，我觉得第一个教训就是由于女性很少外在工作机会，没有可见的收入来比较，另外离婚妇女由于没有外在工作机会也缺了丈夫收入基本很少可能生存下去，因此妇女在家中的bargining power很低，在以前家务工作虽然繁重辛苦（可能比男的更辛苦，因为男的耕作时间还是一定的，而妇女的工作却是整天不停的）但不被承认。妇女很少受教育的机会，轮到家庭决定是一句“你能有什么见识”就打发了，这不仅使到家庭暴力的横行，还使妇女一些非常sensible的意见，比如摆更多家庭的资源给小朋友，少一些小朋友但集中资源在现有的小朋友身上而不是养一大堆文盲等等，如果遇到不sensible的丈夫，也没法进行。另外，连续不断的生育和养育小朋友对妇女来说是非常糟糕和危险的情况，大部分的妇女如果可以自己选择，是不会使自己engage在这种情况的。在印度，同样贫穷的省，妇女地位（就业率，识字率）高的省，婴儿死亡率明显低很多，而生育率也明显低很多，更加不用说妇女的平均寿命和男子比起来有提高（印度是女子平均寿命比男子低，和自然相反）男女婴儿的比例也比较平衡（而且有报告说男女不平衡男子过多的地方，犯罪率比较高，但暂时不能建立causal的关系）。女性基本地位的保证不仅影响到女性本身的幸福（劳动得到承认，意见得到尊重，寿命延长，也可以从连续不断的生育中挣脱出来，得到比较多的自由，更可能避免家庭暴力），还影响到下一代和人口的控制。这就是我得来的教训。虽然现在世界已经有客观的地方妇女起码在基本就业机会和教育机会上有保证，但离这个世界摆脱这些痛苦还有很长的路（不说印度，中国还有地方妇女的地位很低）。

或者你会说（听过这些话很多了），妇女解放是应该，但不要“过头”。妇女应该以家庭为重，外头的低等就业机会是应该有的，以使受到家庭暴力的女士离婚也可以过日子，女子有点收入也在家中避免没有说话的权力（看，我是一个多么decent open的男士啊），但如果你没有受到家庭暴力，你丈夫也对你可以，为什么要那么拼命向上爬冷落丈夫？

但你为什么不问一下一些工作狂男士：你没有受到家庭暴力，家中也有你说话的权力，你妻子对你也可以，为什么要那么拼命向上爬以至冷落妻子？

其实，我也认为工作狂的配偶绝对应该离婚，工作狂根本就不应结婚，因为他们没有做一个good company的条件。这，无论男女都是一样的，不是女性的教训，而应是所有人的常识（工作狂不是坏人，人如果喜欢工作就应该有这么一个选择）。在看到庄mm离婚的同时，有没有看到其实不少的工作狂男士也离婚呢？由于社会压力或社会意见（比如，认为男的一天工作16小时是正常，女的应该支持，或成功男人背后有一个女人诸如此类的意见）没有离婚的，妻子的快乐程度如何？工作狂男士勉强结婚（想要一个“正常”的家庭），由于社会对工作狂女士配偶比对工作狂男士配偶要仁慈，其实，是拖累了一个本来应该平凡快乐的女子了。

Brad DeLong批评"He said, she said”主要是因为记者对要报道的东西没有任何知识

2006-11-19T09:43:00.000-08:00

而且也不屑于去寻找有用的讯息。如果为了公众知情的记者，在某个题目上，除了报道某官员说过什么外（这个当然要报道，否则说谎也没有纪录了，但不仅仅止于纪录谁在采访时说过什么），还应去寻找硬数据，从公开出版物（虽然是公开出版物，但一般公众是没有精力细看的）中去寻找对公众知情非常重要的讯息。公众应该知道的，不仅是官员和反对者说过什么，还应该知道technocrats严肃时的意见－－这个意见通常在采访中不容易得到，但记者做一下功课还是可以的。媒体的监督不一定take side，WSJ和Economist很难想像会支持Brad DeLong的观点。但如果仔细地看中期报告，你会发现tax cut不能self-finance甚至是总统的僚幕的意见。只报道总统说了些什么，而不看严肃的出版，是非常非常浅薄的新闻行为。

Supply-side基本的理论是非常原始和静态的（经济学的本科一年级微积分的在unconstraint maximization经典习题是Laffer的税收题目），但现在基本上正经的active的宏观经济学家基本没有正眼看过这方面，是因为当你从动态去看（宏观经济现在基本的paradigm），如果不减spending，政府借债去finance tax cut，有一个东西叫Ricardian Equivalence，说的是和不减税结果是一样，这倒是经济学界的consensus。对于一个理论上原始得接近没有根据，和在实证上（里根那几年）没有根据的理论，是和一钱不值差不多，当然，可能也有价值，但即使那样决不是现在这个非常原始的状态，可能需要一个很聪明的人把它work的条件弄出来，这么多年了，好像还没有－－要知道这个理论如果可以做出来使经济学家信服，可是有钱人的福音，财政支持大大的。Hoover的聪明人和有名望的学者是很多的，AEI和Cato虽然没有正经的中立的学者，却有很多很多的资金，但还是弄不出来使大部分经济系吸收到教材中，所以精力有限时disregard it也无不可。

一般复杂的问题答案都不易，为什么提问的人必须有答案呢？弄清问题的原因和种种相互作用的因素本来可能就要花时间，但总比没有足够的讯息就行动或形成one-sided的意见，那不是勇敢，而是reckless。现实本来就不是那么顺利地遵从发现问题－－分析－－解决问题一气呵成的。那么一气呵成的是中国报纸社论，不是真正的深思。能够想到某一步，尽管没有最终的解决办法，不隐瞒partial的想法，也不胡乱编造一个圆满的结果，是负责的表现。能够感受到一个问题的复杂，能够感受到trade-off时的痛苦，是intellectual maturity的象征。

伊拉克问题原本很简单，根本就没有打的理由，不打就是了。打了之后，问题变得复杂，解决办法暂时没有是不奇怪的。

Elisabeth Schwarzkopf上个礼拜逝世，享年90岁

2006-11-19T09:40:00.000-08:00

她可谓真正的声色艺俱佳。象洋娃娃一样漂亮，声音非常美丽，但我对她印象不大好（并不是因为她加入过纳粹党），可能是因为她和Christa Ludwig曾经在Verdi和requiem和莫扎特的Cosi fan tutte中一齐，我还是太喜欢Ludwig所以相对之下还是她被忽略了。总的来说我觉得她的确是优雅，相貌声音都优雅，却是少了一些生机。在费加罗婚礼上更如此，如果那个Suzanna的扮演者比较的出彩一点，她的伯爵夫人就容易被忽略。她最出名的是Richard Strauss的玫瑰骑士的角色，可谓是那角色的经典，我却没有听过，因为对Richard Strauss还是不大喜欢。

相比之下，Maria Callas的确不算美人。在Maria Callas的一张选集中居然见到这两个可谓最顶尖的prima donnas一齐的相。１９５７年，其时她４２岁，依然甜美非常，在这可能是抓拍（因为都没有望镜头）的相中，抿着嘴浅笑，娴静而又精致。但在镜头右边的Maria Callas，斜挑的眉，夸张的眼睫毛，半开的嘴唇，在那一刹那中，却是能担得起风华绝代这词的，那是一种热情所透出来的生机，在几乎半个世纪后，还可以从一张静止的相中表达出来。那时Maria Callas才34岁，比Schwarzkopf还要年轻8岁。20年后，也就是在Onassis离开她和Jacqueline Kennedy结婚的８年后，Maria Callas在巴黎孤独中去世，享年53岁。

也就是所谓情深夭寿。

聊斋2你离我远一点！

2006-11-19T09:39:00.001-08:00

我去游水的地方总要经过一个坟场。昨天晚上，天已经基本黑下来后，我游完水走回家经过坟场的时候，依稀看见一只比肥猫猫要大一点的东西，悄悄走近一看，蓬松的尾巴，尖尖的耳朵和嘴，消瘦的体型，敏感的眼睛，分明就是一只狐狸，她（只是不知是小钳还是硬拧）对我还是比较顾忌，定定的看了我大约一分钟，测出我并无Y染色体后，就敏捷地跑入树林了。

见到她的时候，我实在太amazed（看来狐狸魅力男女通杀啊）。她走了后我才意识到我们的相遇地点。。。

然后经过一户人家时，发现院子里的垃圾筒上站着一只猫猫。一只猫猫呀，我又如何能不停下挑逗一下呢。只见这猫猫低眉顺首，眼睛半开半闭，煞是哀怨动人。无论我如何挑引，她就是基本不动，只是偶尔有意无意地轻轻抬手一下，又摆低了。我的手又不够长去摸她，她这样以静制动的策略果然成功，引得我心痒难耐。正当我要走火入魔，元神出窍之际，却突然发现猫猫其实半闭的眼睛里闪着诡异的绿光，在电光火石之间，我却还懂得连忙拔腿逃跑，才避免一出可能发生的天妒英才的人间惨剧。。。

还是你看到问题的实质，也几乎和炸药奖得主心意相通了

2006-11-19T09:39:00.000-08:00

引用:
长江学者也是一样。给一些教授每年十几万，你总不能说知识分子待遇低了吧。至于你只拿十分之一，那时你没本事，努力争取吧。看，花不多的钱，解决了多大的问题。如果有人去追究“他凭什么拿我十倍的收入，他有没有我十倍的工作量或贡献？”那就太死脑筋了，对不对？

其实不紧是中国，在发达国家，winner takes all是一种趋势，star professors的人工高很多，还有tenure制度，都是这种制度的反映，而且也不限于学界，在商界也如是。

这是有理论基础的：有的人能力高，有的人能力底，，但雇主不清楚，而且而雇员的工作水平和能力及努力不是永远一对一的，这有着运气的因素－－当然，能力高的人工作水平高的可能性大，而同样的能力，努力的人的工作水平高的可能性也大。于是，对雇主来说，最佳的办法是使能力高去竞争，发挥他们最大的潜力，赢家的奖赏很大，而对不是赢家的，雇主也就让他们活命的人工了。

现在的问题不是薪酬的不平等（这也有问题，但要解决winner takes all这个问题，不容易），而是决定谁是winner的过程不公平。

On Liberal Art Colleges

2006-11-19T09:38:00.000-08:00

除了一个担忧就是这些书院可能WASP比较predominant，所以一个华人女孩子可能会难融入外（应该check一下他们的亚洲人多不多），但除此之外这些书院的确是最好的选择（在同等的表现和父母经济能力的情况下）。不少elite的研究大学（尤其是大的公立学校如UCB），都是有一些基础课很多人一齐上而TA去教小的tutorial的。研究大学，无论是多么的elite的研究大学，先生们拿tenure时标准永远是研究第一，讲书几乎是最后的。起码在经济系，不少的在很好的系给刚刚出道的人的time management的建议是（已经比较赤裸裸地）不要摆太多时间在讲书上－－当然话还是含蓄的，但绝对没有含蓄到一个智力正常的人有可能误解的程度。但书院的先生们一般都是以讲书好不好为评介标准。

另外，其实刚刚进大学说独立也是应该学着独立的年纪，但环境的突变等等还是对小朋友有一定的冲击的。当然也应该自己交朋友，但如果先生们是比较关心的，还是对情绪有很好的帮助，可以慢慢地从家庭生活过渡到独立生活，比起大大学那种自生自灭要好得多，尤其如果你女儿不是非常非常外向的话，有点可怜。

如果你女儿是非常聪明想做学术，在书院虽然不能接触到大牌教授，但在同等级数（ivy vs seven sisters or williams or amherst，NYU Boston vs 次一级，etc etc）的书院绝对不会比同级大学更被埋没，因为她完全可以是得到很好很对位的推荐去读好的研究生院。如果你女儿是准备到医界法律界商界，书院可能提供一个更加全面的教育，而最重要是更健康的心理。另外，New England的学校也好一点，不危险的outdoor的气氛很浓厚，你女儿可能会养成比较健康的生活方式。当然，如果准备投身工程界，可能要从本科开始读，但除此之外，liberal arts是最好的基础了。千万不要浪费本科在商科上！！！（不是经验而是教训。。。）

见过williams和amherst毕业的，我觉得气度真的有点不一样，比起elite大学毕业的人也是这样，虽然不比其他elite大学的人聪明，但除了智力外，人实在太多维了。可能他们的竞争没有那种elite大学那么厉害，但由于和先生关系近，学得也不少，但没有那种竞争出来的变态，小书院可能更容易有fraternity（不是那种组织，而是那种精神）。

这另我想起我的猫猫

2006-11-19T09:37:00.000-08:00

我的猫猫一岁大的时候，我们又养了一只小猫猫，应该还在哺乳期吧，但也可以食固体的东西，我们都是喂鱼+饭的。小猫猫来的时候，大猫猫开始比较敌视，但几日后就很友善的，食饭时让小猫猫先食，平时得闲就把小猫猫拥在怀里用舌头帮他清洁羽毛，而且经常用自己的nipples帮小猫猫喂奶，直到小猫猫都几乎成年还是习惯地躲在大猫猫的怀里饮奶，简直是母爱泛滥。。。我们旁观者都几乎动容了。。。

除了一点，大猫猫是一只男的猫猫。

估计那nipple是pacifier吧。

这当然是不正常，大人们看不过眼，大约几个月后就送走了小猫猫。

我有一个hypothesis, 当初其实我不大清楚小猫猫是男还是女的。可能是女的，而大猫猫有Lolita complex（如果是男的，有gay-Lolita complex），而他的nipple是兴奋点。。。

Oh my God，基本正确？？？？？用数据说话这么艰难么？

2006-11-19T09:35:00.000-08:00

此人基本都是anecdote加胡乱猜测。

引用:
利润等于产品的销售额减去生产成本。为了获得高利润，资本家一定要把生
产成本中工人工资的部分压到最低，低到如果再低就没人干了为止。这就是我小
的时候听说的万恶的“剥削”，这种观点和人类发展史的事实完全是黑白颠倒。
从来工人就没有养活过资本家，而都是资本家养活工人。比如，资本家开了电视
生产厂。给了工人做工的机会。工人在这个工作位置上施展了自己的工作能力，
生产出合格的电视。工人领取了工钱养活全家。社会有了电视。很明显，工人要
有饭吃，社会要有电视，整个事件的起动开关捏在资本家手里。

最保守最右派的经济学家，只要他／她是受过正统训练的，都不会这样说。其实，在学校修过econ101的学生都不会这样说。假设市场是efficient的（因此没有政府干预是最好的，如果不efficient，反而是政府干预的原因／借口），劳动，产品，资本市场都是efficient，工人的酬劳是他／她的marginal productivity（即生产函数对劳动投入的偏导），资本家的收入是资本的marginal productivity，而额外利润是零（自由efficient的产品市场没有额外利润）。因为你pay不够工人，工人会投奔另一资本家，直到资本家pay工人高出marginal productivity of labor的话才不愿意。这个intuition在econ101反复强调，而这个也是经济本科的基础数学课中constrained optimzation的lagrangian的经典HW题目。还有那个资本家养活工人更加可笑，祖师爷爷Ricardo这么悲观的人也不会这样说，他说

引用:
No man produces, but with a view to consume or sell, and he never sells, but with an intention to purchase some other commodity, which may be immediately useful to him, or which may contribute to future production. By producing, then, he necessarily becomes either the consumer of his own goods, or the purchaser and consumer of the goods of some other person.

资本家要利润也得有人买东西么。

引用:
谈到雇主的负担就必须先要谈谈美国的4-6%的失业率。以格林斯潘的思想为
代表的美国经济学家长期以来把美国的失业率微调在4-6%。（符合美国国情。）
他们认为，如果失业率高于6%，就会给就业的人带来过多的负担和社会不稳定因
素。如果低于4%，雇主就会遇到解雇困难。雇主不喜欢的雇员他不能解雇，因为
市场上没有足够失业的人做后备。雇员也会为此而要挟雇主增加工钱。

天，最保守的政治家也不会这样说，经济学家更加不会这样想（除非是和大资本家有connection）。合格的经济学家都不认为你可以这么轻易地“微调”失业率，如果可以微调，那么欧洲的经济学家认为１２％的失业率“符合欧洲国情”？如果失业率过高，经济学家倒是会找原因，希望有措施可以减低（但谋事在人，成事在天）。而那个4%的失业率下限对通胀的压力（不是“要挟雇主”的问题，而是经济学家认为“要挟”了一个marginal productivity要高的价格，是一个illustion，从而会使市场被distorted）大家还在吵，这位仁兄倒是比经济学家们先一步要定论了。

还有，布殊的减税对失业率的作用很低，不比random地派钱更刺激经济。

看看数据吧

2006-11-19T09:34:00.000-08:00

引用:
反观欧洲富国，提供了全民过高的福利，100%全民医保。国家的负担太重。
因为所有的开销全是雇主多交的税。

从OECD的数据看，美国的医疗占gdp的份额是15.3%，OECD的平均数据是8.9％，这么大的开支还叫15%的人take risk，真是非常无效率。第二的瑞士是占了11.6%,　第三的德国10.9%，远远落后。

仔细看一看，美国医疗占gdp份额是15.3%，而政府开支占的是45%，那么政府的医疗开支是占.45*.153=.06889，而OECD的平均政府开支占政府开支的73%，于是平均政府医疗开支占gdp为.73*.089=.06497。看不出美国纳税人在政府医疗开支上的负担轻到那里去。一些指标（主要欧洲比较富裕的国家）：

国家　支出／gdp 公共支出比例公共支出／gpd 医生护士病床婴儿死亡率／１０００人平均寿命
US 15.30% 45% 6.88% 2.4 7.9 2.8 6.9 77.5
Switzerland 11.60% 58.40% 6.77% 3.8 10.7 3.8 N/A 81.2
Australia 9.20% 67.50% 6.21% 2.6 10.4 3.6 4.7 80.6
Canada 9.90% 70% 6.93% 2.1 9.9 3.6 5.3 79.9
Germany 10.90% 78,2% 8.52% 3.4 9.6 6.4 4.1 78.6
Italy 8.40% 79.10% 6.64% 4.2 5.4 3.7 4.1 79.7
France 10.50% 78.40% 8.23% 3.4 7.5 3.8 N/A 80
UK 8.30% 86% 7.14% 1.9 9.2 3.6 5.1 78.5
Netherland 9.20% 62.30% 5.73% 3.6 14.2 2.8 4.1 79.2
Sweden 9.10% 85% 7.74% 3.3 10.3 2.2 3.1 80.6
Japan 8.00% 83% 6.64% 2 9 8.4 2.8 82.1
OECD 8.90% 73% 6.50% 3 8.3 4.1 5.7 78.3
N/A是因为我看不懂那部分法文。

可以看到，美国的政府医疗开支（即纳税人的钱）是除了，德国，加拿大，法国，英国和瑞典外最高，在１１个国家里是中间，国家负担根本不轻。而私人负担（包括雇主买的保险）还是大头，那些“负担重”的国家，基本上国家已经承担了很大一部分了（如德国英国法国，是负担了超过75%的医疗开支，但美国只负担了45%），但德国法国才比美国多不到2%的gdp，但除了法国的护士外，两国其他的指标都比美国好。美国这么大开支（包括政府负担）的效果？人均寿命最低，婴儿死亡率最高，比OECD平均还要高（要知道OECD还包括了墨西哥土耳其，那比美国落后很多，还不足以拉下OECD的平均水准）。

欧洲的劳动市场和全民医疗保险无关，相反，印象中有研究指出美国现在有一些公司搬到加拿大是因为加拿大的全面保险制度使雇主省下不少提供给雇员的医疗保险的费用（加拿大可能从税收中finance一部分，以后个人每年交几百元的premium）。欧洲的劳动市场问题是劳动法例对雇主非常严苛，很难解雇员工。而那些“在欧洲穆斯林家庭的孩子大学毕业后很难找到工作”不是近年来的事，而是从来欧洲没有一个很好的integrate移民的政策，移民难以融入社会，形成ghetto的状况。这位仁兄真的是想当然了。

花容月貌

2006-11-19T09:32:00.000-08:00

以前S脸上时有痘痘，我很喜欢取笑她。其中一次，我就取笑她是“花容月貌”，她立刻就能领会到前两个字是指她的脸有如花面猫，但后两个字还是怔一怔，没有等她反应过来，我就说“花面猫的尊容，月球表面地貌”，结果引来一阵追打。

昨天接到她的明信片，说是趁着这段闲暇时间最后疯狂地到处游历。第一站是成都，食了著名的麻辣火锅，于是变得“花容月貌”。每次接到她的明信片或和她聊天时，总是能从这写年少的暗号中能依稀辨出当年的心境，过后总是甜丝丝的，然而又不能抗拒物是人非的无奈，深夜中，就在这甜酸交替之间，忍不住潸然泪下。

这进化心理学可能有点道理。。。只不过association !=causation。。。

2006-11-19T09:19:00.000-08:00

在这个例子，起码这causation不是那么强的。。。因为两个蓝眼睛的父母的确可能有啡眼镜的小朋友。。。那个估计的“原因“（two parents with blue eyes will always have blue-eyed children）本身自己就是概率上的问题，不是绝对的。。。

加上这位兄台的说话会使人对进化论（达尔文而不是拉马克版本）误解。。。这样rephrase一下是不是好点：“天生喜欢蓝眼镜的女而且只喜欢蓝眼睛BB（有杀错，无放过）的蓝眼睛的男由于为别人养BB的可能性比其他蓝眼镜的男来说少很多，因此他们的BB能养得更好，于是这个trait的能够更容易被遗传下来。。。“

其实，如果他们是天生喜欢蓝眼睛的女的但对BB眼睛是没有偏好，估计为别人养BB的可能性也是很大的。。。所以要看是不是进化（即无意识）的原因，还要看一下蓝眼镜的男对BB眼睛颜色的偏好。否则我怎么也想不起那个mechanism是怎么样进化的。

当然，如果不是gene而是meme方面的原因，就好解释了一些：蓝眼睛的爸爸观察到绝大部分蓝眼睛父母的孩子都是蓝眼睛的，于是告诉他们蓝眼睛的儿子：记得要娶蓝眼睛的女的，那样如果BB是啡眼睛的话那么非常大可能性不是你的，但渠啡眼睛的女的就没有这个好处了。。。这样世代相传，蓝眼睛的男是被人洗脑了也不自知。。。于是潜意识才觉得蓝眼睛的女的有吸引力。。。

Opinion to Li

2006-11-19T09:17:00.000-08:00

不是吧，Li好像还是对傅雷先生不以为然。。。

只是傅雷先生的严谨是众所周知的：他不是翻字典去译的，而是细读一次，记下生词研习，再细读，再记下生词（他抱怨过自己每次读能掌握的生词不多，所以新研习的生词可能不记得），如此反复几次才使到对整个作品可以不用工具就能了然于胸。而且不仅对文字严谨，对背景也非常严谨，加上本来就是艺术科班出身，也在法国多年，本身在那方面的修为很深，看傅译巴尔扎克，有很多很多的注脚：包括器物，人物（比如提到一些艺术家音乐家，我第一次听提香，拉斐儿，华多就是从小说中看来的），加上其他小说中出现的事件等等。看了小说，还可以在西方艺术方面很长见识。此外，傅雷的文字功底也是非常好的（只是可能措词在今人看起来有点过时），某人（好像是金圣叹？）就提过，在"高老头"中，他把femme（女人）根据语境（比如是说话的人物的教育程度，职业，社会等级不同，或是在旁述的语气）分别是译成：女子，女人，婆娘，娘们儿等，非常灵活，可见译书是已差不多是书在心中的了。我不认为对傅雷的不以为然是没有一点点的狂妄。

此外，作为曾在中大天天可以见到陈寅恪故居的学生，虽然不是不可批陈寅恪，但作为自己alma mater主要的文化heritage，写起来整个文章应该要谨慎一点吧？他对"della"的看法不准，但却轻轻巧巧地就把这个没有把握的东西写进去作为论据。这个问题是小问题吗？一点也不！因为

1）这个"della"的看法不是非常难或晦涩，因为我作为一个没有任何外语训练的人可以从一些侧面找到证据去反驳，虽然不敢说100%应该推翻，但可以说是九成九肯定在人名中"della"的译法和在人名中"de"的译法是一致的，应该是音译才是标准。对于一个把翻译作为饭碗的人来说，查一下正面和侧面的证据是一个很大要求吗？

2）这也不是笔误，而是intended地拿出来的。从上下文来说，是用来指正钱中书水平低的唯一证据。对指责陈寅恪的证据我不能分辨，但从这里的严谨性看来，可能不是无懈可击的。

所以说在提高自己的严谨性前，随便指责人是有点不大好的。

当然，Li对妓女合法化的看法是和我一致的，这点我支持。其他的就是没有太关心了

Politician choosing

2006-04-23T14:57:00.000-07:00

However, I guess if you are exercising your duty as a citizen, the criteria is not really on ideology, especially for a 2-party system like America's. As long as the propoganda is not very strong (not very optimistic these days though), the public are more or less informed, though not perfectly. The parties' policy should be then appealing more or less the interest portfolio (economic, social, religious etc) of the median votes. I guess the divergence of the policy is from 80% of estimation/perception error (might due to ideology though--ideology might gives out perception bias)+10% party ideology+10% self-interests of party members,supporters, lobbyists.

Citizens are doing a better service to their countries/their interest group by voting according to 20% policy+80% competence. You want to choose someone who can work for the country, efficiently. I.e. you'd better vote like choosing a servant, not a leader.

As more or less the policies are appealing the median voters, so even you don't like a particular policy package (alas, the policies of politicians are not a la carte), you know it's not that far away from the other side. A dramatical change of policies is not on regime change, but on a universal and profound change in people's mind.

I guess, under the conditions that human are not perfect and policies are appealing median voters, the people I would vote is the one with tracking record of sensible management and with nuanced views on many problem (alas, the latter one is always out of power as the public want some "determinent" people with simple arguments), and the most important, have a sense of reality and being willing to bow before the facts and numbers. The reality is complex, once check and balance is there, the most important thing is competence.

So for example, while facing budget surplus, which is better, cutting tax or spending on some government project? We don't know, until we know how to cut or how to spend. To do this correctly requires expertise that the politician doesn't have and the ideology doesn't generate. It requires the politician has the wisdom to choose the right people to do it and the power to manage those people. As both sides can have a good solution and a bad one, the person's ability to generate the best under the constraint of party ideology/interest is the best. It's the result that counts.

To reduce inequality, we need to know how this inequlity(usually as a snapshot--one year income difference) comes from? Permenant income difference among people or increasing proabability of getting a really bad year for everyone? For the former, is the difference of price of skills increases or the difference of prices of capital and labor increases or both? For the later, is the skill composition needed by the company changes a lot or the company is transferrring its risk to its employees? Each of the source requires difference cure, even if ideology agrees that inequality is a bad thing (usually parties agree, just to different degree). And hwo about the relation of (the current type of) inequality and growth? How about mobility? Those are details you can not get from the public speech, and the only way you want it have some satisfactory solution is to elect some one who admit the fact first, and then can find the right person to accomplish it.

The Original Thread

为什么怒江人民只指望着建坝？

2006-01-30T06:31:00.000-08:00

Copy right of EYU, just in case it will be deleted later on. Comments following.

为什么怒江人民只指望着建坝？

怒江大坝争论之初，我偏向于反坝一方，唯恐大坝一修，再也看不到传说中的怒江原始景观。然而由兴坝人士陆续披露的材料显示，当地的自然环境早已经受到严重破坏，连当地人“可持续发展”都不能保证。就像在我出生前，三峡滟滪滩奇险就被人定胜天炸掉。早已缘逝，何由纠缠？

兴坝一方的宣传中，致富是建坝的一条主要理由。当地人民赤穷且没有别的致富资源，修坝后，当地人民能因为水库增加收入。我理解的致富机会包括，拿到一笔移民安置费搬迁到自然条件支持“可持续发展”的地方，以及水库运行产生的一些工作机会，比如成为水库职工，或者因为水库而产生的服务业。

在如此恶劣的自然条件下，为什么怒江人民不移民他乡，而是固守着绝地，每年需要国家财政的扶持来勉强生存？是什么能够让他们改变固守绝地的立场，支持建坝，尽管许多人将不得不移民？显然，对故土的归属感并不能阻挡人民对富裕生活的追求，建坝带来的富裕希望已经使当地人民义无反顾的支持建坝。

新移民将要前往的支持“可持续发展”的去处，大概并非从前不存在，因为建坝才凭空冒出。移民也并不是只有靠建坝移民安置费才有能力迁移到新的居所，只不过因为建坝，他们才能名正言顺的搬迁到指定的去处。于是这恩典的搬迁也成为恩典方的德行了。

每日一禁果

2006-01-11T03:55:00.000-08:00

達明一派

This is my 2nd favorite song after "十個救火的少年"

每日一禁果

園林內有個人　常常問我要什麼
根本選擇不多　每日都只有蘋果
人人話我太傻　完全沒有顧後果
偏偏選擇芒果　我問芒果有毒麼

＊別人那一個　並沒什麼吸引我
是牛頓　自己想太多
別人看不過　落力用心感化我
食蘋果　讓芒果〔醫生〕遠離我

葡提下有個人　言談類似哲學科
說青春好像生果　種什麼得到什麼
旁人望見幼苗　連忙問我種什麼
假使不是一夥　我就等於怪物麼

重唱　＊

檸檬　西瓜也是禁果
橙　石榴受到折磨
提子　香蕉控罪更多　都不妥

重唱　＊,＊

A reply to a reply

2006-01-10T13:09:00.000-08:00

Original post

I share lots of your opinions. But before I go on, it might be worthy to state our difference which might be the source of our (likely very rare) divergence. I sense that you are a person with veyr strong sense of justice, the sense of right and wrong. While what I hope is just less suffering because I am too pessimistic on the nature of human being.

1. a. I did not read the review in that degree of detail. But it would be difinitely wrong if they use the year rather than the year piror to the transition (because the transition might not neccessarily take place at the end of the year). However, using the year piror to the transition is only a second best one (better than the exact year), but it's only better for turmoil than for peaceful transition because turmoil needs a bigger grassroot anger which needs more time to accumulate (because greater transition cost). Rather, in a peaceful transition, people might be more short-memory (smaller transition cost). As we don't specify when the event took place (beginning or the end of the year), the year piror would be a better approximation for the turmoil taking place at the year end than the peaceful transition at the same time. Without monthly data, some dummy var would be helpful.

1.b. I don't know too much about the political arena during the great depression. But difinitely socialism/communism was active that time, as "Road to the Wigan Pier" suggests.

2. I agree with you on all these 3 points. But about a and b I actually don't care that much because those people more or less have choice between leisure and self-fulfillment. To be honest, I have antipathy on those kind of anti-modernization whine "capitalism make human not human", "captialism is driving people into cold money machine, more material but less happiness" etc.etc. I don't deny there is some grain of truth in those argument because victim to our weakness towards peer pressure is still a victim. But it's difficult to gain my sympathy (espeically I don't think it's likely to change the institution to something better). And there is still big difference between "human" resource and natural resource. It's easy to put a stop sign if people are exhausted. And even this generation of people are weak in health, it's easier to catch it up in the next generation. So it's more reversible than the damage done in the environment. Moreoever, that kind of laboriousness was a norm rather than an exception for our ancestors (quoted from DeLong:"Man’s work is from sun to sun, and woman’s work is never done.”). Regression from the golden 50s for sure, but not really a big deal.

2.c."The world does not need more wealth, but it needs a better distribution. "Your belief, my belief, but not that the guys with great wealth. And moreoever, the people in the poor country are not some material machines waiting for the patronage from the rich country. They are human too. They need self-realization too. They (especially those decently above the survival line) have their pride. Even "giving", needs more subtlety than at the first sight. Not to mention it will be bad for their survival in the long run.

3.a.Not really knowing the history because information about it is almost blank in my education. But I agree this openning theme that the problem is just hidden, not disappears.

3.b.Can not agree more! Actually Stiglitz (see above) talked about the problem in US. I think the perception (er...I am reluctant to use expectation as expection is something, technically speaking, is what likely come true) of higher growth and higher upward mobility is what make the society tolerating unjustice and iniquity. (again, this is through both the calming effect and the effect of ethical standard--with application of Rawls' idea on how ethical standard should be made--or are made).

3.c.I really couldn't say too much about it. This kind of interaction is really too complicated to me. Wondering whether there is a simple answer of yes and no in every country.

3.d.I also hope you are wrong. But I am afraid that you are right.

Let me have some comments of my own. My feeling is that the effect of economic conditions (growth included) on progressive ideas are asymmetric. When economy is bad, with rare exceptions, progressive ideas recede. However, when economy is booming (especially this booming is shared widely), it might not be a good force for progressive ideas. Uneven booming is particularly dangerous to progressive idea: poor people have nothing to be proud of except for national prestige. This illusion is the cheapest cheap luxury (borrowed from "Road to the Wigan Pier") a ruling class can provide to the ruled. Good contemporal examples from both China and America.

This is also my feeling on the relationship of growth and environment. When you are pushed to the edge, you don't care about the animal, the environment. You don't care about the people around you. You even don't care about your own future. You just want to survive this every moment. Hence bad for substantiable growth. However, will an economic growth (especially at not very wealthy stage) be good to the environment? Very doubtful. As Cantonese being more and more economically well-off, the demand of wild animal on the dinner table was increasing. As economic growing, many developing countries are experiencing worse pollution. Will a countinous growth eventually change people's mind on the environment? Definitely. Environment is a normal good, the wealthier you are, the more you desire. However, as it's difficult to reverse, the price of a good environment might grow faster of several order of magnitude than the economy. You want to change. You could not.

I am more and more looking forward to the paperback of Friedman's book

2006-01-10T08:57:00.000-08:00

The Ethical Economist

This review by Joseph Stiglitz reads much better than DeLong's (despite all my admiration towards Prof. DeLong), simply because an economist with heavier technical inclination will feel more at home with his arguments. Because he is more careful, treating problems as complicated one, as they actually are (like he said, Friedman's treatment is of great merit for being nuanced, but not as nuanced as he wants).

Stiglitz gave out one example against growth-only mentality, which I also stress quite often: extrenality of the green-house gas emission. It is very likely that the price of growth in US or China must be paid by a peasant in, say, Ethiopia, because the effect of green house gas emission to global warming (hence something more worrying than poor islands, the failure of crops dued to strange weather--not neccessarily warmer, due to weaker ocean currents) is not directly causual but statistical (hence you can not find the culprit responsible for that, but there must be some), and we don't have an institution ensuring good global cooperation.

Another argument is that higher growth doesn't really brings better social welfare, with US as an example. However, just one technical note on his application of John Rawls' idea of justice into welfare comparision: median income would be more informative than mean income, but far from sufficient. You need the whole distributions, and check about the stochastic dominance of them.

I should stop here because writing review on review is a bit crazy (especially before I read the original book). But my feeling now is that Stiglitz's review is not tightly targetting Friedman's book. Rather, he use it as a starting point to state his own ideas. Indeed, the review is more like a political essay plus economic general reading than a pure book review. Never mind, the abudance of these kind of reviews is precisely the reason why I love NYRB.

Brad DeLong on China and growth in a review on Friedman's new book

2006-01-10T03:54:00.000-08:00

Growth is Good

Benjamin Friedman's new book "The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth" sounds an interesting book (I hestitated because the first review I read is by...er...Jeff Madrick).

Idea is simple, and so familiar to us--economic determinism. Higher (Friedman is more cautious to say higher and evenly distributed) economic growth will in turn making a more progressive, tolerant society. Period. Deteriorating economic situation in the south states is mainly what Thomas Frank complains as reason of raising conservativism there in his "What's the matter with Kansas?". George Orwell has similar worries (either socialism or Facism) in his "Road to the Wigan Pier". Excuse to self: as this book seems so revelant to the other, I can delay my review of these 2 excellent books until I finish the 3rd one.

However, as I shared pretty much of Friedman's views as presented by DeLong, I have reservations. As a half-brewed neoliberal and a person caring about reality, I believe in physical limit. Yes, the boundary of the physical limit can be extended by advance of technology (as what had wonderfully took place in the history: luxury becomes convenience then becomes neccesities etc), I am worrying about the speed of pushing the boundary by the technology is not fast enough to accomodate the desire of growth. That's being say, the desire of growth might lead us to touch the boundary defined by the current and near future technology level, and has to have the environment compomised. And it will include some damage can not be reversed without a huge cost. Besides, I don't believe in pure fatalism. We can do something. I believe education (board sense, education of progressive ideas) is a co-force of economic conditions, and substantial growth will never take place if it doesn't take place in enough number of people's minds first. Moreover, I am not comfortable with the ethical implication of pure fatalism. Suffering from proverty is a surething doesn't mean we can not do anything to reduce this suffering.

Reflection on Cantonese

2006-01-05T08:24:00.000-08:00

现在的粤语和所有方言一样，都是口语，所以你会觉得粗俗。但正是这个粗俗才有生命力，因为距离我们日常生活不远，饮食男女之事，自然是用饮食男女的语言表达，才会合适（连“诗经”都有源于民歌）。那些除志摩的诗（正宗的，不是强伯翻译的），用粤语读出声来是很搞笑的，相信你用你的方言来读，也会觉得如此。想当初我们看“情深深，雨蒙蒙”时（粤语配音版），简直是笑到不成样子，而我和我的同学都一致认为“新月格格”比“还珠格格”好笑一百倍。

至于粤剧，由于有音乐做缓冲，加上用的古文较多，所以正经的语言读起来不会那么另人作呕。下里巴人也看粤剧，所以还是有一些口语（尤其是独白时），但总体来说，粤剧的词和古典的元曲比起来，所谓“雅俗”，程度相似，如果你一定要分雅俗的话。而我认为，尤其是后来写的乐曲（尤其是唐涤生的），还有了一点过分追求“雅”的倾向。就拿我最喜欢的“紫钗记”（唐涤生作品）的两段来说。“拾钗”，有口语如语气词“呀”，“呢”和其他口语如“羞家”“我”“你”等，“剑合钗圆”中，有“距（音，是“她”的意思），“真既”，“咪”等，但基本读起来，还是比较咬文嚼字的。很多老人的古文和典故，和其他地方的老人一样，都是从粤剧（或他们家乡的戏剧）来的。

Some murmur about sage and mint

2006-01-05T08:23:00.000-08:00

一般而言，herb可以有两个作用：用它本身的味道或辟腥。其实我对sage（不知golden sage有没有特别之处）和mint用得很少，但看过的食谱还是有一点印象。

先讲mint，其实估计中国的食谱也有mint，因为我以前看中医（？！），好像是因为咳，回家时看了一看药方，好像是有薄荷入药，估计薄荷已经被中国人知道很久，没有理由没有食谱的。

但我只是用过它来做沙律，很简单的生菜，番茄，mozzarella，和一点斩碎的蒜头（但不是到蒜蓉的程度），没有basil的情况下，将每块mint的叶子撕成几块，再加extra virgin olive oil。我试过几个版本：我认为最好吃就是以上的版本，但一般人认为沙律要有一点酸味（我认为番茄已经够酸的了），我建议是只加Balsamic的醋，而不是柠檬汁。我认为一般沙律的dressing是柠檬汁好一些，但这个是例外。因为柠檬汁是尖的，薄荷也是尖的，但是不同的尖：柠檬汁是针的尖，薄荷是刀片的尖，而他们在一起时，再厚的extra virgin olive oil也压不住。我试过一次（最可恶是我有一个习惯，用柠檬汁时还物尽其用地刨一下柠檬的zest，一般是很好的，又不太酸又有香味），于是那沙律只可以倒掉（罪过罪过，非洲的小朋友请原谅我）。而Balsamic的版本还过的去，因为虽然Balsamic虽然是酸，但其实除了酸味外，它的总体还是厚的（所以我认为喜欢它的人是又要酸味，但其实又讨厌尖的味道，连生菜都觉得太sharp的人），再加上olive oil，就可以压得住薄荷的尖了。

然后我在外面吃过虾，鱿鱼圈，青口作为appertizer，做法都是煮熟了再加斩碎的herbs和蒜头（那蝶青口是加了番茄汁做底）。这几个appertizer用herb我不大清楚，但明显的加了薄荷，所以估计你可以将海鲜煮熟，将basil和薄荷斩碎，再斩碎了蒜头，加一点柠檬汁（那几个菜都明显的不是用balsamic，都是用一些透明的醋，不过估计柠檬汁在这里无问题，因为海鲜是腥的，不怕尖的味道），有兴致的话可以加番茄汁做底。那几个菜都好吃，不过可能海鲜怎么煮都好吃的缘故，所以薄荷的作用待考。

然后好像很久以前吃过hummus时，见过有人order mint tea，然后我在看那些人怎么弄：就是将一枝薄荷枝放入杯中到滚水（不过可能是绿茶，因为好像很多食谱都是用茶，薄荷一起的），那颜色很漂亮，碧绿的，比新龙井还要漂亮，因为成枝的薄荷比一片片的茶叶漂亮，只不过我觉得会很难喝。

其实我是没有用过sage，除了一次被我以前的房东点：她告诉我溶了牛油，再趁热加斩碎的oregano和sage在里面（以前家里种了sage, oregano, basil, rosamary和薄荷），用来蘸面包（European-style，硬硬的，不是一般美国的软软的多士）。不过我劝你为稳妥起见，还是不要试，因为我是牛油爱好者（that's where my waistelist comes from），都觉得不怎么样，没有再试第二次了。还是直接的牛油好一点，或者是斩碎basil和蒜头，加extra virgin olive oil，等一下在蘸。

我见过很多食谱都是要sage的味道的，你可能很容易碰到，到时记得自己也有一棵就行了。

至于辟腥，其实我觉得sage本来就有一点腥味（这是我不喜欢的原因）。以前看过，说sage是很强的herb，估计就如亡秦的花椒八角一样，未到极腥荤时（如内脏），不应乱用，否则就容易夺味。反正我也不吃很腥的东西，如果一般的鬼佬法烧鸡，用rosamary（成枝的）就很好了。

conclusion：sage and mint是食之无佳味，弃之可惜。应该种着到时要用时就不用专程买。如果专门种，当然是basil和rosamary好（可惜我的宿舍不能中rosamary，太大棵了）。

Happy new year!

2005-12-19T10:09:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow I will set off for a long vacation. Won't come back until new year.

Too much unhappy things took place this year. And I also lost many good friends in this year. Too many. I don't know why. Maybe because it's vicious cycle.

Anyway, I wish you happy and healthy. And a promising new year.

关于进化论的调查

2005-12-18T10:53:00.000-08:00

今天突然心血来潮（yeah! 我的"Ancestors' Tale“终于在礼拜五到达，今天开始拜读，刚看到DNA triangulation部分），于是找出很久以前在一个论坛见到的一个深得我心的帖子。

”I think we need to expand this question into two dimensions.

Group A tells the survey taker they believe in evolution. A1 could score above random on a basic evolutionary biology True/False test with statements such as "Evolution proceeds from lower life forms to higher ones" and "'Survival of the fittest' means the best organisms survive and reproduce while inferior ones die off or fail to reproduce". A2 could not score above random.

Group B tells the survey taker they believe in creationism. B1 could score above random on a basic biblical creation True/False test with statements like "the story of creation was revealed by Jesus in a sermon preached in Rome" and "the biblical book of Genesis contains two contradictory accounts of the creation of the universe." B2 could not score above random.

I claim:

The number of people in A2 and B2 far exceed A1 or B1, and thus dominate the statistics.

You cannot draw useful conclusions from movements from A2 to B2 and back.

A2 people are far more likely to make bad practical decisions from their ignorance than B2 people.

A1 people are far more likely to make good practical decisions from their knowledge than B1 people.“

记得在刚进大学时，我也象其他低年级没有外教的学生一样，到处自己找鬼佬来练英文，有一次碰到一个明显是传教士的人（BTW，这人面目清秀，举止文雅，和其他在中国一般都是色狼的鬼佬非常不同，可见教会非常居心叵测。。。er。。。用心良苦）。那是我见到的第一个基督教人士，于是非常好奇，在他preach上帝的仁爱没有几句话时，我就问他怎么reconcile上帝和进化论（我那时对两者都懂一点点，觉得是矛盾的）。他一句就说达尔文是错的。我反应很大，说："but there's plenty of fossils evidence!"（在中学，我们的主要证据是化石）。他回答了一句“but they can be faked"，我当时不能反驳，一直在思考那句话，以下他说了什么我都不知了。

但我没有当即查资料（因为在知道Dawkins前我对生物兴趣的确有限），只是从此以后不敢大声说自己相信进化论（那时我连Lamark和达尔文的分别也不知）了，虽然我还是相信它，但知道这种相信的基础是相信，不是被说服。现在我当然被说服进化论是对的，于是也敢大声说，但我还是非常感激那人，因为怀疑的心态自此起。。。

Adam Smith!

2005-12-16T11:56:00.000-08:00

When editing my profile, especially with the impression of Gertrude Himmerfalb's book in mind, I realized I have never read Adam Smith's "Wealth of the Nation".

OK, this is nothing really significant. What makes it significant is that, despite all my appearance suggesting otherwise, er, I am an economist in training....

Another round of depression...

2005-12-16T11:55:00.000-08:00

I will be alright after that. I need to be strong. Once this cycle is past, I will be fine again.

Be strong.

就着心灵感应说一个小事

2005-12-11T05:01:00.000-08:00

话说Freeman Dyson就着Charpak和Broch的书“Debunked!"在NYRB发表了一篇评论，前面写得很好，自然是我喜欢的书评样子，最后却象吃了一只苍蝇那么难受，就是他说了“I am suggesting that paranormal mental abilities and scientific method may be complementary.”实在另人惊讶，还举出光的波粒二象性去举例什么是“complimentary"，我自然不能反驳他，因为我不是科学家，可能他的原因是已他自己的专业的思考为基础（如Richard Dawkins的对人类中心主义的反对）但再往下看，顿悟：他有亲戚在从事此业。于是也只能叹一声，人都是有盲点的。象Freeman Dyson那么聪明有学问的人（不过不是攻击教徒，Freeman Dyson是一个Practicing Christian)，在这一点都未能理解"anecdot is not evidence"的道理。

未完，没多久，可以预料的，在skeptics上MIchael Shermer自然是不能放过他的，除了一些其他人的讨论，Shermer还专门写信给NYRB抗议。NYRB算是我最最喜欢的杂志了，这一次却另我非常失望。Shermer的信直指这也许和Dyson获得的Templeton奖有关（就是非３月份我们讨论过的一个NB奖物理学家汤斯获得的那个宗教奖），虽不客气，但Dyson本来得巨额奖金也是光明正大，也不该忌讳。但是，Shermer那信在我看来非常有力，居然NBRB没有刊登（NYRB刊登的读者来信有些是无理取闹，但这封绝对不是，况且初读时我还期望Dyson会回应因此一场辩论展开）。若我不是skeptic的常规读者，还不知道这事。连我认为最认真的杂志也有（以我小人之心去度）为尊者讳的习惯，看来尽信书不如无书。

Michael Shermer's letter to the editor

关于广东的番石榴及其他生果

2005-12-10T10:28:00.000-08:00

我们有时也叫“花捻”，记得在我乡下村头就种了很多，差不多就成了一个园子。在广东，种在屋子边的树不多，只有：香蕉，蒲桃，杨桃，黄皮，龙眼和番石榴。橙和荔枝一般是种在果园里的，而芒果以前是用来绿化的，果很小很小，经常是没有成熟青色的就掉下来。木瓜我们是用来煲汤不是用来当生果吃的。香蕉不是传统的木本的树，不可以爬，而且广东吃香蕉的方法是吃熟不是吃生的，于是被斩下来后还有一段日子才可以吃。杨桃和蒲桃味寡，黄皮倒是香气浓郁，酸甜可口的，只是肉薄，往往只是皮核之间的一点点汁水过过口瘾而已，都不是讨喜的生果。于是一般可以边摘边吃的好生果只有龙眼和番石榴了。一般在屋子前后种的龙眼树都很大棵，是祖先留下那一种，树底和最底分丫很远，不是业余的人可以爬的。我表姐以前的家里有一棵（还是石“夹”，就是肉很爽，很厚，核很小，每一粒大的可以吃的龙眼边边都有一粒小的未发育的小龙眼），我们于是要爬上三楼，用一枝竹，竹的顶端用打斩开，于是有一条缝，我们（其实是表姐不是笨笨的芒果）用它来夹住龙眼枝，于是芒果的蛮力此时派上用场，扭几下，粗暴地把枝折断，在扭的过程中，那枝把那缝塞的很实，于是把竹收回后，龙眼们就稳稳地落在两个馋嘴的人手中。

而我每次暑假回乡下都要去那个村头的番石榴林。我很喜欢吃番石榴，觉得很好吃（虽然芯的确是很难消化），但不知为什么在广东卖的那么贱。有两种：一种名叫“胭脂红”，据说是比较上品，比较小，比较圆，熟了是黄色的，有一抹淡淡的红，比较软，比较甜，芯比较软滑，种子比较小，一般人是不知不觉就吃了下去；另一种名不详，比较大，比较长，青色的，熟了也是主要是青色的（只是没有那么青），比较爽，比较酸，芯很硬于是很少人吃下去如果不是非常馋嘴的时候，我是非常喜欢这一种的。番石榴树比较矮，分叉得也很矮，树枝还算结实（尤其那时芒果还未长成大肥婆），我尤其喜欢有时皮掉下后树干是滑滑的，夏天穿短裤时爬树是凉凉的。但番石榴树是非常招惹毛毛虫的，有时你食得兴起时，会很恐怖地见到一条色彩鲜艳红黑相间的毛毛虫从你身边悠悠爬过。那种毛毛虫是会让你身痒（传说，我自己未试过），但还是吓不到我。而在龙眼树上比较多的是那种甲虫，会十分强烈味道的那种。如果把番石榴的叶子弄碎，会有一种比较强烈的味道，是有点象由加利树的味道，我很喜欢，很提神，于是经常辣手摧叶。可惜我没有多少机会见过它开花，于是也没有什么印象了。

其实我最喜欢还是爬它的树，我是非常笨手笨脚的人，于是很多专业的树都爬不上，但这番石榴的树实在太业余了，加上树枝的质感（掉皮后）非常好，我很喜欢爬。我还可以吊在树枝上打单杠呢。

至于小动物们偷吃，很可惜我在广东没有见过松鼠，所以不知它们吃不吃番石榴，不过广东有很多雀仔，而雀仔们是很喜欢吃胭脂红番石榴的。哥哥们告诉我雀仔们会拣（怎么做得到呢？？？），于是被雀仔们啄过的都特别甜和好吃，所以应该摘。虽然他们经常欺骗我，但这一次没有，因为我试过的确是特别甜。不过我不喜欢甜的，而且觉得吃雀仔们剩下的生果很恶心，于是也没有摘。我们是摘下就生吃（对，就是洗多不洗那种，在广东番石榴卖得实在太贱了，于是也没有什么人打理喷农药，我简直怀疑村头那些树是用作商业用途，因为我们可以随便爬树随便摘，也未受过任何干扰。）。至于沾盐水，那时我们对付菠萝的方法，至于为什么，大人们的官方说法是菠萝容易上火，盐水可以降火，如果不信中医，那么这种说法也是没有根据的。

在珠三角，还有一种树是很常见不过不知应不应归在果树上。那时一种榄，但和olive有所不同，是黑色的，我们叫“乌榄”，煮后质地是粉粉的象番薯，但有一点松的香味（榄树的树脂不少，在这一点上很象松树，不过我也知他们是没有多大联系的）。乌榄是一般用来腌咸菜的，统称“榄豉”，又有两种：一种是生就分成两半被剥下，放在盐水里腌，有点象这里腌的olives，但又有些不同，总之我是不能形容，但非常喜欢，可惜在市面没有得卖，只有少数人会做（我有幸姑姑会做），估计也会渐渐失传了（唉，当今有谁会喜欢吃咸菜呢？）；另一种又名“榄角”，就是你们在粤菜馆可以点到的“榄角蒸鱼”会用到的，是煮了后再腌。而我最为喜欢但又非常少机会吃到的（因为榄的收获季节不是寒暑假，家里也很少主动买榄来吃因为好像只有我一个喜欢），就是新鲜下的榄（我有幸可以参加过一次下榄，就是用一枝竹很粗暴地打那棵树，然后榄就会落下来，就象你很粗暴地打一个人，那人会落泪一样。然后我们旧可以在树下捡），倒上新鲜的开水，很滚很滚的那种，等一阵间，榄就被煮（烫？？？）熟了，剥开皮（皮在咸菜中是可以吃的，但在这里会被剥开扔掉），就象一个非常小小的番薯，但好吃多了，然后在细白砂糖中滚一滚，就可以吃啦，由于榄有一点松的香味，再加上甜甜但不是太甜的糖，是很好吃的，而且一粒一粒地吃更是过瘾。剩下的核也有作用，里面有果仁，就是叫“榄仁”，用于作菜（尤其以前是没有如腰果等等进口的果仁时），或做一种叫“五仁月饼”（听起来很好听，但非常难吃，那个仁不是仁慈的意思，是果仁的意思。）。我见过提取榄仁的过程，乡下不少妇女在家务边从事此业。第一步叫“斩榄核”，就是把核斩开拔出榄仁（那时有一层红色的衣），而砧板是特制的，大约有.8米高，就是一树桩，而因为榄树是便宜木材中最硬的（因为太多了），于是那砧板也是通常是榄树树桩，倒真有点“煮豆燃豆萁”的味道了。

Missing...

2005-12-08T09:42:00.000-08:00

芒果踩蓝袜，
小闪上红妆。
蛋头或抵饥，
何及灵气芳。

Shine is very beautiful,
Mango is a blue-stocking.
"Egghead may be edible!"
true wit is mocking...

I do not dare to go to bed...

2005-12-06T13:55:00.000-08:00

I am afraid I will dream of the mistreated kitties if I fall into asleep.

Especially when my sweet emotional stablizer dissapeared from my life.

Alive

2005-12-06T04:37:00.000-08:00

But I am feeling sick...

Will I die?

2005-12-05T11:07:00.000-08:00

I ate chicken yesterday. I feel headache and feel like catching a cold today.

Avian Flu?

If I don't come back tomorrow...

昨天试了用花雕来腌了一阵鸡

2005-12-05T10:14:00.000-08:00

然后放在局炉里局，吃时皮居然有广东腊肠的味道。

你可以试试。

傅雷说的对，韩德尔的确比巴赫有“人味”得多

2005-12-04T09:22:00.000-08:00

连宗教的音乐也如此。以前为什么没有发觉？

３个同年人中，Scarlatti最有灵性，居上。韩德儿悦耳可亲，次之，巴赫也严峻了点。。。

为什么我的CD数量中，三人却反转呢？

也许巴赫总是在最当眼的位置吧？零售业的资本家也真是坏。。。

Addict to shopping...

2005-12-04T05:26:00.001-08:00

I swear, I swear, that when I entered the Virgin Store,
In my mind there was only Messiah for Christmas.
Then I came out with brunches of Otto Klemperer's,
realizing I've been paying 100 pounds and more.

Hey but my Bohm's Die Zuaberflote doesn't come with libretto,
This 12.99 pound one is perfect under the conduction of Otto.
With cold air outside we'd better have Greshwin,
and that piece by Shostakovich definitely tunes me in.

Naxos is conducting a messy price reduction,
and I can not give up that Rigoletto production.
Bread only in the coming weeks, maybe with sweetcorn,
But with the sweet "For unto Us A Child is Born".

Fairy Tale...

2005-12-03T11:10:00.000-08:00

Long Long ago (acient enough, like all fairy tales), there had been a palace in a tropical country whose name was known to no moderner. There was a big royal garden surrounding the palace, with a banana tree, a pineapple tree (yes, at that time, pineapples grew on the trees) and a mango-litchi tree...what? yes. A mango-litchi tree.

Not long before that long long ago, the mango-litchi tree was only a litchi tree, fresh off her sub-tropical hometown. Litchi, then as now, was not a tropical tree. So she was unhappy, until one day she saw a princess with shining eyes coming, talking to herself:"where can I find the boots for my kitty?". Litchi remembered her kitty back home, and was so moved. She immediately like this little shining princess. And she spotted litchi too, smile to her, and she also told many many things to Litchi, who is good at nothing but arimathic, counting her falling baby fruits each time after a wind. Her Royal Highness Princess Shine loved to eat mango. So litchi eventually learned how to grow mango. Then here came our mango-litchi tree.

One day, our princess had a new kitty, and he is extremely cute, with eyes of dolphin shape. But bad thing also happened to this paradise-like garden. Because of global-warming (that long long ago is long long ago before ice-age), the sun became very hot, no longer that gentle source of energy. Princess was strong but still can not bear it. Worse, mango-litchi began to drop pre-matured fruits because she was tired under the burning sun. One of them was dropped on the princess's head. Princess was hurted.

Princess have to go to another palace in milder weather to cure herself. She bought her kitty with beautiful eyes of dolphin shape with her. But she didn't bring mango-litchi because she knew that she will be strong, she will take care of herself and try hardest to bear more mango fruit and litchi fruit. But the kitty needs the princess care. He needs her most.

Mango-litchi is waiting for princess return with the most mellow fruit of her...

We can not control everything...

2005-11-30T11:12:00.000-08:00

But I have the best wishes to all people who had lighten my life, brought me joy...

Today seems my lucky day

2005-10-08T02:32:00.000-07:00

But I don't know why it's still so warm in October...

I can not feel the crispy cool autumn air....

Trees are still as green as in summer,

while leaves were falling this time last year...

忘记了应该衬上中文打油一首（如以往一样，无平仄对仗那些考究）：

秋风当清冽，
何来暖十月？
去年此时候，
黄叶枝头别。

I am very unhappy...

2005-10-05T15:49:00.000-07:00

I don't know how to say...Maybe I will be mad in the near future...

I am upset, deeply...

2005-09-26T10:49:00.000-07:00

NY Times is asking for money now...even for the most recent contents.

I used to love it so much, not only for Paul's columns but for Nicholas Kristof's and Maureen Dowd's, and even...when I am bored and need something crazy with sane appearance...David Brooks.

OK, among them, only Paul is indispendsable (and Paul's unofficial website is forbidden to post new columns...with the fate of those already posted unknown...). Kristof is also very very good. But now I have to make choices...either giving up or paying...both would cause pain. I had got used to the good style for news report in WSJ, so it's very unlikely I give up the electronic subscription. I also love Martin Wolfe, so I have to buy FT at least once/twice everyweek (OK, I have to got used to reading paper in the library, so this item can be saved). And NYT is so important in my idea-forming mechanism (OK, I confess I can not form an opinion of my own. I am not an independent thinker). The price tag is $49.95/yr. And of course, I will not give up my NYBR subscription.

Oh, how much I love The Guardian! You can even find articles SEVERAL years ago FOR FREE, which NYT could not do even at its zenith of generosity. Oh...but Gordon Brown is swearing to make Britain more American...The Guardian might be following its counterpart's case across the Altanic...Time to back up everything I can grab from The Guradian...

Call for a boycott to McDonald's

2005-09-23T10:29:00.000-07:00

Today I found a small leaflet in McDonald's (yup, I went there to grab a supersize french fries and coke), claiming that they don't use ANY GM food or GM feed fed chicken/cattle/pigs/etc, at least in UK (together with the committement of animal welfare).

OK, I don't care you sell unhealthy food--selling food w/ high fat low fiber to kids isn't a nice thing to do, but it's also their guardances' obligation to make sure the kids have only healthy food. And as an adult, of course, I am responsible for me own waisteline.

But they make the decision of not using GM related food for ME. As a big client for many food ingredients, their refusual is not a small blow to the GM argriculture. They don't have to do it. Use it and keep it silent won't hurt that much. Why not put more energy on developing more tasted and healthy food, and promote them? Hypocritical.

If McDonald's really want to be a responsible business, sponsoring GM food research, promoting GM food proven to be safe, helping to reduce the food price and make food more cheaply available to people in poor country, is doing much more good than promoting animal welfare (not an emeny of Peter Singer. Not a fan either).

But if it's not entirely McDonald's fault, rather, it's the environment here is so hostile to GM food that McDonald's is unable to carry out business unless...I just feel the hypocrisy of those gentiles in western countries...driving SUV to the forest and eating organic food...oh, how nice to be in tune with the nature! Let those can not afford organic food starved (I still can not forgive the GMphorbic what made some African countries declined the food aid corn from America when facing famine a couple years ago).

I decided to go for Burger King for my random indulgence to junk food, though much less tasted. If those fast-food chains in this country all plead on a "natural ingredients" selection, it's good time to lose weight...

Random Thought

2005-09-12T12:32:00.000-07:00

太反感那些”中国人现在如何如何。。。该如何如何。。。“。　我有自己的生活要过（不是争第一，而是希望能食饱饮醉衣着光鲜之余还有钱买书买CD兼且游山玩水蒲吧沟女），要保住饭碗，为什么要扮正义？在中国有多少中国人拒绝擦鞋？擦中国人鞋就是醒目，擦鬼佬鞋就是无骨气？我也喜欢玩自闭冷淡，只喜欢和合得来的人打交道，懒理讨厌的人，凭什么中国人就要我另眼相待？想当初我出柜和我ex一起的时候，绝大部分鄙视是来自于中国人的（当然，不排除鬼佬－－包括来自非洲的黑人－－的表面功夫做得好），我都未来的及”极力竞争甚至排斥其他华人“，就已经被排挤了。都好，我本来就和中国学生没有什么共同语言（literally, because of my poor madarin)，扮一下受害者还可以搏一下同情。

所以我喜欢这句：”But this applies to anyone (Chinese or not) and you don't have to do it by appealing to ethnicity. “对自己，死猫自然是不能食的，正常智商的人都会抗争到底。对别人，要正义，对象是不应分种族性别国籍的。正义感和恻隐是人性，正是因为是人性，它们也与其他人性竞争：贪婪，妒嫉，自得，懦弱，自私和偏袒。那文章所提倡的，只不过是批着正义外衣的自私和偏袒而已－－比起赤裸裸的懦弱来说，那个是五十步，那个是百步，就看你的口味是偏向于雕琢还是天然了。

最喜欢强伯的一段，大意为：

成功人士的另一条特质是从小生活在一个充满歧视的环境，我（强伯）想，这一点我倒符合。我的确是生活在一个充满歧视的环境：我歧视金毛，我歧视擦鞋仔，我歧视二世祖。。。

Squirrels are fun...

2005-08-31T07:09:00.000-07:00

"Squirrels have been observed eating white oak acorns preferentially and burying the much more bitter red oak acorns for later use, since ground moisture causes the tannins to leach out over time. "

acorns

But how do they remember where they had buried the acorns?

It's amazing.

Follow-up of "对“当代中国知识分子的反社会人格和道德虚无主义”一个细节的异议"

2005-08-20T12:51:00.000-07:00

Latino2 said:

""Lula"是他的母亲给他起的小名，相当于老中叫“铁旦”，“狗剩”一类的。巴西人热情，不拘陈规，喜欢用小名称呼朋友，也喜欢朋友用小名称呼自个。Lula的姓是 "da Silva" (meaning from the lowland forest)

他的原名里没有"Lula"，后来才加进去的。

"Lula"从政后喜欢人们继续叫他的小名，以表示和人们的亲近。后来外国媒体也跟着叫，就叫成真的了。"

田牛said:

"没有人会重新翻译戴高乐的中文名字, 老德的大名叫Charles André Joseph Marie de Gaulle."

对“当代中国知识分子的反社会人格和道德虚无主义”一个细节的异议

2005-08-19T14:23:00.000-07:00

当代中国知识分子的反社会人格和道德虚无主义

"他给《外国理论家作家论形象思维》（中国社会科学出版社1979年版）写序，就把Pico della Mirandola错译成“毕柯·德拉·米朗杜拉”。米朗杜拉是地名，della是意大利文，相当于英文的of，这个名字正确的翻译应该是米朗杜拉的毕柯，而毕柯的真正全名叫乔万尼·毕柯（Giovanni Pico)"

如果你去查一查Wikipedia，就很容易发现那个Mirandola是连自己的词条也没有（http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Mirandola&go=Go），前几项都是与Pico della Mirandola有关。查"Shunde"（顺德）都有反应。　估计Mirandola的确是源于地名，但应该是封地，而最早得到封地的那个贵族的后代把那个东西加在自己的名字里，我们可以把它当作姓的一部分，如巴西总统（Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva），或很多南美人的全名。不过译法我就不清楚。巴西总统被叫Lula，但估计没有人翻译他的名字为“小发的路那“。可能现在的平民社会中，叫路那就够了。

而钱钟书的时候，"xx de(della,da,du etc etc) xx”，只要不是英文的“of”，大都被音译为“xx德（德拉，达，杜）xx”，傅雷的巴尔扎克非常明显，如果这是错，罪不责众。而且，英文也不把那个“de"翻译的，反而钱钟书（还有傅雷）的译法更符合“国际规则”。

看一看傅雷译的“高老头”的一段，“人间喜剧”最重要人物的出场场面：

"欧也纳·特·拉斯蒂涅纯粹是南方型的脸：自皮肤，黑头发，蓝眼睛。风度，举动，姿势，都显出他是大家子弟，幼年的教育只许他有高雅的习惯。虽然衣著素，乎日尽穿隔年的旧衣服，有时也能装扮得风度翩翩的上街。平常他只穿一件旧大褂，粗背心；蹩脚的旧黑领带相得马马虎虎，象一般大学生一样；裤子也跟上装差不多，靴子已经换过底皮。" (from: http://www.shuku.net:8082/novels/foreign/laotou/laotou01.html )

英文版：

"Eugene de Rastignac was a thoroughly southern type; he had a fair
complexion, blue eyes, black hair. In his figure, manner, and his
whole bearing it was easy to see that he had either come of a noble
family, or that, from his earliest childhood, he had been gently bred.
If he was careful of his wardrobe, only taking last year's clothes
into daily wear, still upon occasion he could issue forth as a young
man of fashion. Ordinarily he wore a shabby coat and waistcoat, the
limp black cravat, untidily knotted, that students affect, trousers
that matched the rest of his costume, and boots that had been resoled." (from: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1237/1237.txt )

如果有人可以找到法文版的”Pere Goriot“，可以在第一章的１８段找到对照。

And from "Eugunie Grandet":

"庭长先生三十二岁，有一处名叫蓬丰的地产，年收入七千法郎"

And

"城里只有六位居民有资格出入他的公馆。前三位中最起眼的人物是克吕旭先生的侄子。自从这位青年当上索缪初级法庭的庭长之后，他在克吕旭的姓名之后，又加上了蓬丰这一名称，而且力求让蓬丰的身价超过克吕旭，他的签名已经改成克·德·蓬丰。辩护律师一旦冒失地照旧叫他克吕旭先生，出庭时马上就会后悔自己糊涂。凡是称他庭长先生的人都能得到他的庇护，他对叫他德·蓬丰先生的人更报以满意的微笑。"

From : http://www.shuku.net:8082/novels/foreign/glt.html

我的法文很差。如果有人懂得拉丁语言的话，请指教。

A vegetarian salad most Chinese will love

2005-08-11T08:56:00.000-07:00

Very easy, given that it has quite sophisticated taste. Got inspiration from a Italian-Portugees party.

Ingredients: Peppers, penne (or other pastas), tomatoes, garlic, olives, fresh basil leaves, extra virgin olive oil, salt

1) Grill the whole peppers (use oven or grill) until the skins turns dark and burns.

2) Boil the penne until al dente. Rinse it in cold water.

3) Meanwhile, cut tomatoes (I usually use cherry tomatoes), cut olives into small pieces and chop the garlic (don't need to be very fine--don't chop it into paste.)

4) Put the garlic and salt into the salad bowl. When the peppers are ready, peel the skin and get rid of the seeds inside. Put it into the salad bowl THEN pour extra virgin olive oil lavishly.

5) Break the peppers into medium pieces with fork and/or dinner knife.

6) Put penne, tomatoes and olives inside. Tear the basil leaves into small pieces and put them in. Toss and ready to serve.

Note: 1) you can add a bit lemon juice if you want it to be more conventional salad. Don't add balsamic though.

2) Grill pepper, garlic and olive oil themselves constitute another dish: a traditional Portugees salad, great if spread on the bread. Perfect with Caipirinha!

A vegetarian Cantonese Low-Mein

2005-08-11T08:55:00.000-07:00

Ingredients: Cantonese dry noodles, scallion, oil, veggie of your choice (my favorite is string beans), soy sauce, crushed dried chillies, sparse salt (optional) and garlic (optional).

1) boil the veggies and put them at the bottom of the plate.

2) Meanwhile, cut the scallion into strips (cong si, as you will put on the steamed fish). Don't cut it into small pieces (cong hua, as you will put on the steamed eggplant). The wrong cutting would ruin the whole dish! If you use garlic, cut it into very fine pieces (best if it became a paste).

3) boil the noodles, when it's done, put in on the top of the veggies. Naturally it would bring some water, don't try to drain it since it will keep the noodles from sticking together.

5) Heat the oil.

4) Meanwhile, add soy sauce and toss. Put the scallion strips (and garlic) in the middle of the noodle, as corncentrated as possible.

6) When the oil is very very hot, switch off the power, and add crushed chilli inside the oil.

7) Pour the hot oil towards the scallion, as quickly as possible. Ready to serve. It has a very decent apperance.

Note: 1) Serve it as soon as possible, toss it before eating so that the noodles can be dressed by oil equally.

2) The above is a whole dish. But if you don't put veggies at the bottom, the scallion and noodle alone can be very good company of Cantonese rice congee, perfect for breakfast.

A sentimental post...

2005-08-03T12:25:00.000-07:00

What happens when you see a real soulmate in life? The same passion on math, the same passion on the same composers, the same passion on the those little tricky things...And you can not love him. You know there is no future between you two.

More and more recognize the reality that I can not escape loneliness. People said genius are lonely, why I have to suffer this as a common person...

Depressing...

What happens on xys?

2005-07-30T04:10:00.000-07:00

I can not get there for 3 days...

What a pity...everyone should know cats don't like sweet at the first time...though readers of Brad DeLong and Scientific American website might knew it already...

Why Cats Don't Cotton to Sweets Explained

2005-07-28T02:49:00.000-07:00

There is a kitty
eating jam everyday.
Now they say candy
won't make a cat gay.
Merely the smell of cherry
made Fidelio stay?
Will he still be happy
when sugar is taken away?

Why Cats Don't Cotton to Sweets Explained

Already put into the amazon wish list...

2005-06-23T12:50:00.000-07:00

Poor guys in America are still waiting for the paperback...

Bought to you by the father of Shock Theapy:

The End of Poverty

International Rescue Committee accepts donation outside US

2005-06-05T02:41:00.000-07:00

IRC

Darfur's genocide

2005-06-05T02:10:00.000-07:00

Nicholas Kristof wrote a heartbreaking piece today (he had cover this topic for a year, which I closely followed)

A policy of Rape: "'It's simple,' one woman here explained. 'When the men go out, they're killed. The women are only raped.'"

And he also mentioned how you can help in his blog:

How to help (info. for those in America

I will check out the website for donation to Doctors without Borders in UK later.

Ah, when facing ideologists enemy, realists lose...

2005-06-02T08:31:00.000-07:00

Tax Breaks for Rich Murderers

Nice article, though I don't have time to read the book.

One thing interesting (and which I don't agree with) is the accusation of pragamtism of Clinton (Blair) government, and his uneasy on the internet's role in politics. Nevertheness, my observation seems a confirmation of his reasoning. I still have faith on that policys should be expedient, should be based on circumstances rather than principle. I still have faith that more decentralized information is better than none. Sadly, it seems this is the real life...

Alas, when facing ideological lunatic fringe, realists lose...

A quick note on xls's article below

2005-05-30T08:02:00.000-07:00

Besides valuable experience and insights, this is definitely a cynical one, a misnomer. This should be called: "Some notes on (how to lead others believe you are doing good) social science research". One very conspicious point is that no trivial topic in the hot field.

Alas, I found myself sympathy on this, in a more politically correct way. Actually, my view is that there is no trivial topic at all. All discoveries of the unknowns (no matter how small, how inconclusive) is desirable--I am still a god-damn idealist. The only question is whether it is economic (i.e. worth the additional financial resource). Face it, most of the people can only make trivial contribution, but our whole civilization is built on this trivial sands. In particular, though it's not within my intelletual taste, I think those "use same methodology with different data set" are actually very worthy things to do. Consider the boredom of doing so, it is even a very admirable thing to do. Methodology is only means, not the ends in social science. All the tools are provided based on the assumption that it would give us a better understanding of this world. In my department, with very high concertration of theorists who always play around with math, there is (although not very obvious) trend to despise empiricalists--they are regarded simply as people with inferior technical skills (but I am sure none of those theorist has the technical skills of a genuine mathematician). I have inclination of abstract thinking too. But we should not being abstract for the sake of being abstract. The empiricalists works are equally important. After all, we are in a field of "economics", not "aesthetic mathematics".

Strangly, both xls and Nielsen mention work-life balance and family. A slap on the face of Lawrance 80-hour-work-week Summers.

Nice articles about research

2005-05-30T06:34:00.000-07:00

Most (if not all) visitor to this obsure blog should be frequent visitors or the writer of Amygdala. However, if you are not, here is a nice piece from there, together with the piece by Michael A. Nielsen. My notes will follow (distantly) later on.

Some notes on Social science research

Nielsen: Principles of Effective Research

Bon Appetit!

Brad DeLong on Paul Krugman on housing bubble...

2005-05-28T01:56:00.000-07:00

No time to write so just treat you with a nice blog.

Paul Krugman Gets in Touch with His Inner Friedrich Hayek

He is really stupid...

2005-05-21T05:42:00.000-07:00

Bush vowed to veto stem cell bill

Granted, if US keeps this trend it's acting at its disadvantage. But US's lost won't neccessarily be other's gain. It's very sad to see the most powerful country with best research resource is not actively involved in this field with unlimited potential to help people. We human being as a whole might wait for some more time to see progress than the case if US were more dedicated.

Let's celebrate!

2005-05-20T14:23:00.000-07:00

UK scientists clone human embryo

Stem cells tailored to patients

Salute to those dedicated researchers!

Now they are celebrating the centenary of Einstein's 2 main theory

2005-05-11T08:18:00.000-07:00

Einstein's devil

Recall that in Bern, The Einstein Haus did not open to the public until April 22nd, the day I left Switzerland from Basel, and one day after I leave Bern for Basel. A pity, isn't it?

But the lady is so nice, she lead me to have a quick look at the apartment (she said, "for one second".) and gave me a short introduction. I don't know why it was "open for office use". Those guys in the museum didn't look like enjoying...

Hair...

2005-05-11T06:38:00.000-07:00

Last night I found a fair in my blanket. Brown long hair. It isn't mine. Natalie's. I don't know why suddenly I lost control and cried. Bad thing, too headache to get up this morning.

I remeber I had a sweater with material like the blanket. Each time Clean climbed on my knees, the sweater will absorb lots of his hair. When in school, Susan would pick Clean's hair from my sweater for me, one by one. "Clean wants you to miss him in the school, so he left so much hair on you in the weekend." She said, smiling. "I love Clean for his hair even though I never seen him."

"I would leave my hair on your sweater so you will miss me all the time during the winter break. But you shouldn't let Clean put his hair there" She said before putting her head in my arm, just like everytime she had trouble solving a problem. But when I was home and missed her so much, I found my sweater did not absord her hair, not even one.

But Clean's hair was still there, even though after a year, after many washes of my sweater.

Hair is lingering, like feeling...Very difficult to get them off.

Something out of dream...

2005-05-06T12:54:00.000-07:00

Found the book "The Emperor's New Mind" by Roger Penrose, as recommended by an xys article. Then found the foreword by Martin Gardner, the God Father of entertaining math. Then thinking...this book should have some impact when published. Thus check the NYBR's archive.

Guess who wrote the review?

John Maynard Smith.

Something like finding (the non-existent) Jascha Heifetz, Pablo Casals, Vladimir Horowitz playing Beethoven's Triple Concerto under Arturo Toscanini. At least, at least, at least, I have David Oistrach, Mstislav Rostropovich, and Sviatoslav Richter playing the same repetoire under Herbert Von Karajan.

That piece must go with that book...

If I have more time to think and write......

2005-05-04T12:59:00.000-07:00

I should write something on this:

The Shostakovich wars

Why I like PK that much?

2005-05-01T12:25:00.000-07:00

Just check xls's comment. It's the writer part of PK I admire most. His writing is really really funny, full of irony.

Of course, the economist part of PK is also very very good. But as I don't like economistsn that much, PK as an economist is not as admirable as PK as writer (I know I know I know, it's ridiculous as it's from a economist wannabe.). Of course, as training in the economics profession emphasize mathematics, he has the sharpness and rigor absent from most humanist-trained writer.

Actually his language skill is even visible in the academic article--you can recognize that's a PK work. And his research style is the kid of whiz kid--very simple and conventional method, creative use, and surprising and profound result, and--yes! can explain some puzzling phenomenom. Classical example is the one about path-dependent developement. Give reference later since it's not at my hand.

English site for "Howl's moving castle"

2005-04-29T09:53:00.000-07:00

You can see the english trailer there.

Howl's moving castle

Which NY Times columnist are you?

2005-04-27T14:11:00.000-07:00

I am Paul Krugman!!! Of course, my hero.

You are Paul Krugman! You're a brilliant economist
with a knack for both making sense of the
current economic situation and exposing the
Bush administration's lies about it. You
somehow came out as the best anti-war writer on
the Op-Ed staff. Other economists hate your
guts for selling out to the liberals. To hell
with 'em.

Which New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Save the code and find out how to write it later.

Above is the link.

Enjoy.

Another free market guy...

2005-04-24T13:48:00.000-07:00

Ah, I do hope myself living in the world in your mind...But no pain, no gain doesn't mean gains will certainly follow pains.

"Boom and recession are built-in components of economic cycles" are views of those RBC guys who are not smart enough to be engineers and rocket scientists, thus have to make a living by taking economics. You are dealing with people. All those fancy periodograms, impulse response stuffs are generated by people's behavior (aggregated, yes, but not entirely liveless, psychologically free), not some lab device.

Other schools have different views on whether government should have a role too. Keynes would be spinning off in his tomb (plus, FDR) when you say government should NEVER interfere. Don't tell me he is osolete( I agree). Government interference worked in pulling US out from the great depression. It didn't work in some occasions. Whether it works or not depends on situations. It's not a principle, or, hmm...dogma.

I think a simplified tax code would be better (It gest my vote at least for aesthetic reason). But the ugly tax code in US is not result of government, it's the result of lobbist thus numerous amendments on tax reduction etc. Many are by half-archieved libertarians--not by socialists. They won't archieved their goals fully (as a cold hard fact in life, when you deal with people, heterogenous and envying people). As long as you think people need some forms of government service, and some least form of redistribution (so the poor won't starve to death), some one has to pay tax. Those who don't want will try to lobby. As government are dynamically changing, ugly tax code comes.

"IF a governement not the market can do it, communist countries would've ultimately won", alas, Mr./Ms. Dichotomist, there are more than 0 possibility in the spectrum with pure market and pure planning on both ends. Which point you strike in as the optimal? Not found in a single volumne of "Capitalism and Freedom", "Road to the Serfdom" or "Communist Manifesto". It also depends on each countries economic structure (that's why statisticians are hired) and the culture--some cultures are more egalitarian than the others. And even though you are lucky to get one point, it's not forever--thus they call it policies, not principles. People's tolerance can change. No to mention many countries did not see it the point or how to get there.

And Europe's ailment are not entirely because of its "socialist" agenda. Demography is a biggest one, as a consensus. Innovation is less good(though still very decent), mostly because the culture in less open to foreigners thus less able to brain drain. And UK's employment picutre look more rosy than the American one after a laissez-faire guy took office. Britain's pre-war glory? That's just some abnormality. A such small country with 1/4 of the population of US can be a superpower? That's not because Britain was doing superemely. Just because other big countries were doing so badly.

I am not defensing the legislation proposed--simply think it might scare off people's confidence on investing in the country. As your only right point states, property right does matter. Not as a principle, but as calculation based on human nature of the investors--they don't invest or they even flee this country if they believe you would be behave nastily, and you need their money. So don't use this extreme does unless things go very very bad.

One thing you might be interesting: the socialist UK have a private pension system, and guess what? Now the poor eldly losing money in the stock market are feeling miserable and want helps from the government. Oh, you guys! Didn't we say that you manage your own money and take all the risk when we strike the deal? You said you want to be your own. And where is the individual responsiblity? But they have the votes. Human are envying. You can either change it or deal with it.

And UK doesn't have a constitution, mind you.

Original post is the link below:
http://www.xys.org/forum/db/93/87.html

RE:美国民主制度批判 [六] -- 来自美国粥厂的报告

2005-04-12T14:45:00.000-07:00

"或者通过税收，或者通过其他和平手段，使得财富分布不这么荒谬。可是美国的民主制度已经存在了二百年，为什么这一切并没有发生"

The whole post is misleading. The numbers listed shouldn't be too far away from the truth, but the conclusion, as quoted above, is a leap of faith.

Even though it does not take place in American currently, but why does it take place in Canada, Australia, and most western European countries? (in cluding Britain?) Why did the New Deal take place in America in 1930? Or moreover, why America's reaction to depression was the New Deal and great society, while Europe's reaction was war?

All the above countries have democratic system currently, with varations only in forms. America is just one observation in the sample of democracy. On average, the countries w/ better political system are more equal than those without (except for some "fail states" that people are equally poor). The reason that it takes place in western Europe and Canada and took place in America in 1930, not in America of 2000 lies in culture, not the system itself (though the system is not perfect).

One thing almost all informed people agree is that there must be trade off between equality and the growth of economy (though both of them can head south simultanously when things go very bad, e.g. the plutocracy and the following 1929). And the more stable, equal society you want, the higher tax you need to pay if you are in the higher income bracket.

Some fact:

1) There are 19% of the American claiming to be the 1% richest people in the country, and a further 20% believe they would enter the top 1% in their life time! (source: either The Economist, December 21, 2002; or Financial Times, January 25–26, 2003. I quote someone who quoted these sources)

2) A couple years ago, US was highly critized for using abosulte measure--a multiplier of food need as proverty threshold, while most developed countries are using relative ones. I could not find the direct proof, but it seems things improve little from below quote (source:http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povdef.html#3)

Poverty thresholds were originally derived in 1963-1964,using:U.S. -Department of Agriculture food budgets designed?for families under economic stress
-Data about what portion of their income families spent on food

These two facts reflects more or less the American's mentality: they are optimistic, and their care to the less lucky goes no further than keeping them alive--not about how well they feel fit as a member of society. Letting everyone share the progress of the society is not their main concern. I think those are the hybrid of Protestant values, individualism and libertarianism.

If they are more optimistic, they will put more weight on the policy to make them pay less tax IF they got rich, less on the policy to make them a decent life if things got messed up in their life. Or they simply think they are rich when they aren't, and hate policies actually doing them good. And they will tend to have more faith the social mobility (well, even America doesn't lage in mobility among industrial countries, it definitely doesn't lead, either). A certain dose of such mentality is very good for vivid economy. Unfortunately, the wealthest nation in the world is receiving more than a fair dose.

But I believe Americans are egalitarian in their nature. They are simply misinformed. But when inequality becomes egregious, and people will wake up from the myth of "American Dream", great society will be reinstalled. Hopefully this time is less painful than last time.

And another thing is American's obsession on "growth". Now we are in a world where capital are flowing freely (almost freely). And countries w/ most friendly capital policy and regulations, other things equal, would get more capital. Thus there is something like "race to the bottom", and I predict the world will become less and less favorable to the labor (lessen only by slower population growth, which makes labor scarcer--but we have huge bases for India and China), until the day of reckoning.

But those things have little to deal with a political system.

NYPL is selling art pieces to raise fund

2005-04-11T04:33:00.000-07:00

I don't know how to put the link. But check out an article today in NY Times.

Sad. NYPL is GREAT. Everyone had visited has to agree. And SIBL is my favorite place of lingering.

2 years ago, the research libraries of NYPL had to close one additional day, because of insufficient fund.

I regard selling art pieces as desperation. Valuable things should be the last restore.

Today's reading note...

2005-04-11T04:08:00.000-07:00

Don't want to reply it in xys. Some clowns are fighting fiercely on Japanese matter. And most of the people just don't care but flattering the host anyway. Paste it here because I want to keep the article (hopefully the reply by ziyu later). But if the author(s) protest, I have to put it off. Copyright of EYU. All flaws in the English notes are mine.

As always, sharp and integrated. And as always, I am sympathetic to the author's points.

1) Unfortunately, we have some "friends" that actually harm our cause to protect the envirornment. This problem is particularlly acute in China, where people are making decision based on like or dislike of people, rather than evaluating risk and benefit. Let alone the possibility that government had already decided, and all those sounds and furies are just fig leaves.

...to be continue tomorrow, if I am not that lazy.

怒江大坝争论应该出自理性质疑--EYU
在怒江大坝争议中，很不幸反对方的声音被强词夺理的环保运动员占据了主流，为赞成方提供了无数一戳就穿的漏洞，有向对方有意无意卖破绽之嫌。但是，就像环保的正确性并不代表环保人士一切行为就天然正义，我们也不能因为环保运动员行为不端，就否定某项环保主张。本来我不想加入讨论，以免与这些环保运动员纠缠不清，但是现在的问题是，舆论一边倒宣传环保运动员的胡言乱语，间或对赞成修坝方断章取义，而有理性的大坝质疑声则几乎闻所未闻。我觉得有必要呼吁理性的质疑声音积极发言，至少也起到一份监督作用。

怒江地区有联合国教科文组织命名的世界文化遗产丽江古城和世界自然遗产三江并流，我至今还未曾有缘瞻仰，即使出于自私的目的，也不希望这些无价之宝受到破坏。方舟子在云南考察了300多公里的怒江河段后指出，坝址是在两千米以下原始植被已经严重破坏的河段，在三江并流区域之外。这是迄今为止我读到的最详细的描述，在此以前赞成或反对建坝的代表人士好像都没有提到这些事实。但我还是有个疑问，虽然大坝的蓄水位在1570米，但建坝后会不会影响1570米以上的水文地质？对坝区外的三江并流区域有什么影响？以前黄河三门峡大坝造成河床淤积，倒淹上游潼关，类似问题会不会在怒江发生？

方舟子批评植物学家越界谈地质问题，移民问题，认为他这样做“和普通人没有任何区别，我们完全可以不认真对待”，那么物理学家何柞庥和电脑专家赵南元谈环保问题是不是也应该“我们完全可以不认真对待”？“当地的政府官员、当地的群众⋯⋯一直都在说，怒江建坝一定要赶快地上”，这些普通人的言论是不是“我们完全可以不认真对待”？

连带问题是，水电专家“水博”评价怒江水电对国民经济的效益是权威，但他的专业能评价世界自然遗产的价值吗？这像请一个冶炼专家来估计青铜器能够练出多少纯铜，从而证明可以用青铜器解决部分地区铜材匮乏一样。

我赞成专家论证，而最后决策由民众来决断。也许民众的专业知识不够专家那么深刻，但决策是靠常识常理的综合，普通民众有足够的智慧来为自己的利益做选择，民主的社会也应该由民众自己选择自身利益。在大坝问题上专家所需要的应该是唱好他自己本份的那一出戏，让民众听懂，水电专家讲水电，地质专家讲地质，植物专家讲植物，生态专家讲生态，最后由民众在详细知情的情况下做出选择。

另外，我不赞同方舟子说“他们这些“环保人士”都自称是NGO，是非政府组织，这些“环保组织”许多实际上是拿国外有政治背景的组织的钱的，像这样的还能不能算NGO，我觉得可以商榷”，这里一没有说明“国外有政治背景的组织”是怎样的政治背景，是不是别有用心，是怎样的别有用心，二没有说明拿“国外有政治背景的组织的钱”是不是有条件，是怎样的条件。笼统的对普通听众说“许多实际上是拿国外有政治背景的组织的钱的”，跟某些人向也许还不熟悉方舟子的听众说方舟子一边拿着国外公司的专利费，一边国内学术打假一样，我以为是不合适的。

For those who like reading...

2005-04-10T14:59:00.000-07:00

This is a very good source for free books, er, most are outdated copyright-absent books (you might call them classic)

http://www.gutenberg.org/

A symbol of depression...

2005-04-02T11:33:00.000-08:00

sitting before the computer and waiting the pope to die...

Pathological.

Hey got a visitor!

2005-04-02T11:21:00.000-08:00

xls, my whole hearted welcome.

Switzerland is something 2 weeks later.

Meanwhile, err...Grading! Evilest among the evil.

And have to had tones of programming done before embracing the moutains...who invented computer? curse to death (oh...maybe died already. Never mind).

But maybe some travelling diaries out there later (keep ur finger crossing...)

For my possible visitor...

2005-03-22T13:19:00.000-08:00

Nothing new. Sorry. Would be more serious after my trip to Switzerland.

No edelweisse. They will bloom only from June to September.

But I can see the lovely glacier.

And I would be the lonely backpacker.

With me, there is only wildflower.

Not gorgeous, but quite shy and adorable.

That would make my life seems acceptable.

Mango's Sweet and Sour

2004-11-21T05:19:00.000-08:00

Mango's Sweet and Sour

Mango's First Post!!!

2004-11-17T13:18:00.000-08:00

Welcome!