Tuesday, January 26, 2010
American dream
To wake up to the beat of your own people... pumping iron, dashing a couple of miles, well rested, body ready, spirit full.
grumbles from upset guy in urology
"""
guy[to doc]: uhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!! FUCK!!! did you fucking for get to use lubricant???!!!!!!!!
doc: oh shut up! most guys can take it
guy: fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!
doc: want me to stop? you fucking wimp??
guy: hey! fuck you! uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhgg!!!!! uuugh!!! ugh!!!! ouuuch ou ou ou ou!!!!!!!!! fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!
doc: com'on, only a few more seconds!
guy: yeah! but you didn't put on any lubricant!!!
doc: oh you fucking wimp, fine. comeback and I'll give you a full body sedative.
guy: fine!
doc: most guys can stand it, what's wrong with you!
guy: [[waits for him to withdraw completely]], hey! I know people up high, and you aren't young! I'll fucking make a call and make sure you get what you deserve when the time comes!!! fucking piece of crap!
doc: hey! you wimped out, wasn't my fault
"""
guy[to doc]: uhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!! FUCK!!! did you fucking for get to use lubricant???!!!!!!!!
doc: oh shut up! most guys can take it
guy: fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!
doc: want me to stop? you fucking wimp??
guy: hey! fuck you! uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhgg!!!!! uuugh!!! ugh!!!! ouuuch ou ou ou ou!!!!!!!!! fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!
doc: com'on, only a few more seconds!
guy: yeah! but you didn't put on any lubricant!!!
doc: oh you fucking wimp, fine. comeback and I'll give you a full body sedative.
guy: fine!
doc: most guys can stand it, what's wrong with you!
guy: [[waits for him to withdraw completely]], hey! I know people up high, and you aren't young! I'll fucking make a call and make sure you get what you deserve when the time comes!!! fucking piece of crap!
doc: hey! you wimped out, wasn't my fault
"""
An Altruistic Intellectual Working Models
Some years ago, late '04 I think, I wrote to some friends(almost all of whom have their advanced degree by now) about an intellectual work model that is without identity and monetary reward (but not without individualism nor identity). I admit that it's kind of childish, but it goes something like this: (and I apologize to my own blog if I've already posted this before)
"""
Criticism 0: It looks like I thought of this while failing out of graduate school... Couldn't quite compete in reality, so tried to make up a virtual world where I might have a chance.
Criticism 1: Try to think of an antagonistic environment that this was trying to overcome. The anonymous authors could come up with some kind of code to communicate with empathetic reviewer, (or if possible, through non-empathetic reviewer) in order to gang up on somebody that they don't like. So, ..., if you piss some people off, they can still kick you out.
Criticism 2: It's hard to guarantee responsible posting. What if somebody fakes data?
Criticism 3: They can always hack the computer and find out who's who in real life and dis you in person. There is probably no escaping reality... Sadly, digital security is not trustworthy enough yet for this to
Criticism 4: Sciences as they are is already very political. It is probably not possible to hide who the actual researcher is because of his research approaches.
Criticism 5: Allows for research motivated, (possibly entirely), by evil motivations.
Criticism 6: Ignores a most fundamental aspects of modern research: money; nobody will give money to such an organization, and without money, this is effectively without merit.
Criticism 7: Without monetary return, nobody would participate and contribute money making content.
Criticism 8: Who will be it's public officers? There is no single person who is trust worthy to all.
Criticisim 9: The organization's relationship to the real world is not addressed sufficiently. What if it breaks a law?...
Criticism 10: How to handle ownership of, say, a professor's work who has obligation to his university, or scientist's work to his company?
Criticism 11: Hasn't been thought through carefully in terms of how it works, what it does (who decides topic? can it even be productive without any legal or social restrictions?) , and how it works with existing research/intellectual world. What if the machines are hacked or the company is
Criticism 12: What's the difference between intellectual work and artistic work?
Criticism 13: More trouble than it's worth. Might as well admit that the world sucks and live with it... When people find out that they can't take advantage of other people, they will not participate.
"""
- Researchers are given secure and secret access to a research forum under uninformative pseudonyms.
- Each person may be allowed to have more than one identity, but they cannot change the name once it is established.
- They discuss/produce with each other under pseudonym.
- They will share ideas, data, analysis, and perform simultaneous and instantaneous peer review--but entirely anonymous.
- Posts are read-only. Corrections can be posted, but original public posts are kept immutable.
- In order to guarantee anonymity, one approach is to use trusted reviewers (voted by democratically based on past behavior). These trusted reviewers will receive all discussions and summarize into either notes, or short write ups.
- All significant participants to a piece of research(poster, scripts, paper, book, code, algorithm, ASCII art, etc., etc.) are listed as an author/owner(using pseudonym).
- Reputation is established purely based on collective recognition of past timely contribution and clarity of explanation. External reputation is also established by external recognition--see later point on that.
- The ultimate empirical approach by blinding participants to irrelevant aspects such as: race, sex, height, age, language, geographic location, time zones, financial status, government backing, religion, left/right handedness, balding or not, eye color, B.O. hidden agendas (so optimizes intellectual output without regard to the underlying motivation because past experience indicate some of best research come out of very racist and very evil scientist--thus the "mad scientist" cartoon caracture)
- This intellectual work organization can participate in the larger scientific community by submitting work (with pseudonym affiliated with this organization) to established venues.
- Larger work can be published as books but following conventional publication review, editorial and approval process. Money goes toward the organization for future research.
- Patents belong to the organization and the anonymous authors. It's licensing is managed by authors who will come to agreement via small amount of private discussion and public declaration of decision.
- Some small number of public servants must be delegated to implement outward facing aspects of the operation.
Criticism 0: It looks like I thought of this while failing out of graduate school... Couldn't quite compete in reality, so tried to make up a virtual world where I might have a chance.
Criticism 1: Try to think of an antagonistic environment that this was trying to overcome. The anonymous authors could come up with some kind of code to communicate with empathetic reviewer, (or if possible, through non-empathetic reviewer) in order to gang up on somebody that they don't like. So, ..., if you piss some people off, they can still kick you out.
Criticism 2: It's hard to guarantee responsible posting. What if somebody fakes data?
Criticism 3: They can always hack the computer and find out who's who in real life and dis you in person. There is probably no escaping reality... Sadly, digital security is not trustworthy enough yet for this to
Criticism 4: Sciences as they are is already very political. It is probably not possible to hide who the actual researcher is because of his research approaches.
Criticism 5: Allows for research motivated, (possibly entirely), by evil motivations.
Criticism 6: Ignores a most fundamental aspects of modern research: money; nobody will give money to such an organization, and without money, this is effectively without merit.
Criticism 7: Without monetary return, nobody would participate and contribute money making content.
Criticism 8: Who will be it's public officers? There is no single person who is trust worthy to all.
Criticisim 9: The organization's relationship to the real world is not addressed sufficiently. What if it breaks a law?...
Criticism 10: How to handle ownership of, say, a professor's work who has obligation to his university, or scientist's work to his company?
Criticism 11: Hasn't been thought through carefully in terms of how it works, what it does (who decides topic? can it even be productive without any legal or social restrictions?) , and how it works with existing research/intellectual world. What if the machines are hacked or the company is
Criticism 12: What's the difference between intellectual work and artistic work?
Criticism 13: More trouble than it's worth. Might as well admit that the world sucks and live with it... When people find out that they can't take advantage of other people, they will not participate.
淫词 {{青年以下大大不宜}}
乳者，奶也。妇人胸前之物，其数为二，左右称之。发与豆蔻，成于二八。白昼伏蜇，夜展光华。曰咪咪，曰波波，曰双峰，曰花房。从来美人必争地，自古英雄温 柔乡。其色若何？深冬冰雪。其质若何？初夏新棉。其味若何？三春桃李。其态若何？秋波滟滟。动时如兢兢玉兔，静时如慵慵白鸽。高颠颠，肉颤颤，粉嫩嫩，水 灵灵。夺男人魂魄，发女子骚情。俯我憔悴首，探尔双玉峰，一如船入港，又如老还乡。除却一身寒风冷雨，投入万丈温暖海洋。深含，浅荡，沉醉，飞翔。
here, here,
also apparently, not 赋 as indicated according to some sites。web says it's written by 陈独秀。Some things of similar form:
棍者，棒也，男人胯下之物。
其数为一，伸缩自如。
发于娘胎，死于花甲。
白 昼伏蛰，夜来站岗。曰棍棍，曰棒棒，曰单枪，曰金刚。从来美人必争地，自古英雄霄汉场。 其色若何？红烧香肠。其质若何？火炼金刚。其味若何？茉莉花香。其态若何？百兽之王。 动时， 如脱缰之马。静时， 如一卷棉花。高颠颠，强硬硬，雄姿姿，火烫烫。夺妇人骚情，发男人气魄。 扬我独傲首，探汝一只螃。单枪一匹马，妇人换绵羊。除却一身寒风冷雨，投入万丈火爆海洋。深探，浅徊，沉醉，梦乡
菊者，肛也，人跨下之物。
其数为一，收扩自如。
发于娘胎，止于百年。
平 素含羞，出恭则花开。曰菊花，曰后庭，曰肛门，曰桃花。从来排泄必经地，自古男女皆尽然。 其色若何？红若脂粉。其质若何？张弛有道。其味若何？鲍鱼之肆。其态若何？蚌壳歙张。 动时，如玉茎喷薄。静时，如娇花含怯。湿润润，软绵绵，开且阔，金枪前。夺男人精华，涨男性雄姿。 扶我玉箍棒，探尔一黄龙。孤身鞭单骑，男女变狗熊。消却一身寒雨潇湘，置身万丈别样海洋。深探，浅还，沉醉，梦乡。
穴者，B也，妇人腿间之物。
其数为一，吞吐自如。
发于黄髫，成于豆蔻。
平 素不语，夜展光华。曰水鸡，曰密洞，曰桃源，曰私处。从来英雄用武地，自古霸王练枪场。 其色若何？初施粉黛。其质若何？初夏新棉。其味若何？醍醐灌顶。其态若何？蓬门初开。 动时，如狮子开口。静时，如婉尔一笑。软咚咚，滑腻腻，粉嫩嫩，水灵灵。夺英雄精血，发霸王豪情。 操我霸王枪，探你盘丝洞。九浅需一深，内射最欢畅。老夫聊发少年狂，能够多P更爽。跳蛋，电棒，滴蜡，捆绑
only capable of messing things up
Chinese saying: "成事不足，败事有余" (see baidu)
reminds me often of the people who write viruses and hack other people's computers.... so talented, but not smart enough to accomplish anything.
reminds me often of the people who write viruses and hack other people's computers.... so talented, but not smart enough to accomplish anything.
An episode of "What's Worse"
This is an episode of "What's worse"...
"""
What's worse?
Having a family but too busy working to make a living to spend any time them
or
Not having a family because I'm too busy working to have any time for a family
?
"""
"""
What's worse?
Knowing God and finding out that he has forsaken me
or
Not Knowing God at all.
"""
"""
What's worse?
Having a family but too busy working to make a living to spend any time them
or
Not having a family because I'm too busy working to have any time for a family
?
"""
"""
What's worse?
Knowing God and finding out that he has forsaken me
or
Not Knowing God at all.
"""
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Easy Day
Okay, this is a repeat, but, previously I had thought that the navy seal's motto was
"The easiest day was yesterday."
This statement implies that the training gets easier. Because, on any given day d, day d-1 was easiest. But on day (d+1) the easiest day is d. This means day d is easier than day (d-1). aha, each day gets easier.
I was properly corrected today:
"The only easy day was yesterday."
Which is definitely different.
Day d: the only easy day is (d-1)
Day d+1: the only easy day is (d)
so...... on day (d+1) day (d-1) is not easy having experienced day (d)... Hmmm, so..., seems like the same statement as above.
But still, I recall admiring the training when I heard about the navy seal as a teenager... And certainly, I didn't realize the implicit series until recently, and this realization in no way decrease my admiration for the training.
And of course, I should mention that I also realize that "getting easier" may imply a growth of the trainee, that the trainer cannot keep providing harder and harder days. Which would make sense as well.
"The easiest day was yesterday."
This statement implies that the training gets easier. Because, on any given day d, day d-1 was easiest. But on day (d+1) the easiest day is d. This means day d is easier than day (d-1). aha, each day gets easier.
I was properly corrected today:
"The only easy day was yesterday."
Which is definitely different.
Day d: the only easy day is (d-1)
Day d+1: the only easy day is (d)
so...... on day (d+1) day (d-1) is not easy having experienced day (d)... Hmmm, so..., seems like the same statement as above.
But still, I recall admiring the training when I heard about the navy seal as a teenager... And certainly, I didn't realize the implicit series until recently, and this realization in no way decrease my admiration for the training.
And of course, I should mention that I also realize that "getting easier" may imply a growth of the trainee, that the trainer cannot keep providing harder and harder days. Which would make sense as well.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Castle haha
Castle: "Yeah, I almost ordered a Russian bride once..."
....
"A check-mate"
hahah!!!
(as in a Czechoslovakia, nationality near Russian, companion, but also a state of game play in chess, a game popular in Russia, and probably also popular in the Czech Republic)
....
"A check-mate"
hahah!!!
(as in a Czechoslovakia, nationality near Russian, companion, but also a state of game play in chess, a game popular in Russia, and probably also popular in the Czech Republic)
To err or not to err
Same old question. Should we throw exception or return error code? In a long running process, what principles should we follow in the design to handle the rare, the expected, and the unexpected?
I've been struggling with this problem for about 5 years now. (shorter than the time I've been writing code)
There are many ways to analyze this, but certainly one way is to look at our goals and costs of achieving these goals.
Okay, so let's drop the act and face the facts: There will be errors and there will be cases that you haven't thought of and murphy's laws are enforced in most industry settings.
The goal is very very important. The goal here is to:
1.) run to achieve the goal of the software
2.) communicate from one piece of code to another piece of code an expected error. (program continues correctly)
3.) communicate from one piece of code to another piece of code an unexpected error. (fail, or continue gracefully)
4.) communicate to operator of program that the program is in need of immediate attention.
5.) communicate to operator of program the total amount of problem (fatal or not) the program encountered in it's entire lifetime.
The cost of these error handling modes are consumed are:
1.) immediate cycles in cpu to generate error message, log to disk, etc.
2.) network/storage costs to store this error.
3.) human attention: oncall receives a message marked "PRODUCTION ERROR!"
4.) machine/human resources required to analyze the log of error and notable conditions.
Considering these aspects may help me to design the error handling system.
I've been struggling with this problem for about 5 years now. (shorter than the time I've been writing code)
There are many ways to analyze this, but certainly one way is to look at our goals and costs of achieving these goals.
Okay, so let's drop the act and face the facts: There will be errors and there will be cases that you haven't thought of and murphy's laws are enforced in most industry settings.
The goal is very very important. The goal here is to:
1.) run to achieve the goal of the software
2.) communicate from one piece of code to another piece of code an expected error. (program continues correctly)
3.) communicate from one piece of code to another piece of code an unexpected error. (fail, or continue gracefully)
4.) communicate to operator of program that the program is in need of immediate attention.
5.) communicate to operator of program the total amount of problem (fatal or not) the program encountered in it's entire lifetime.
The cost of these error handling modes are consumed are:
1.) immediate cycles in cpu to generate error message, log to disk, etc.
2.) network/storage costs to store this error.
3.) human attention: oncall receives a message marked "PRODUCTION ERROR!"
4.) machine/human resources required to analyze the log of error and notable conditions.
Considering these aspects may help me to design the error handling system.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Healthcare
A discussion on nationalized health care:
"""
me: Health is a fundamental human right, much like the right to life, liberty, and expression. The US government should protect this right as does to protect these other rights.
him: But competition is the most important mechanism to guarantee efficiency, improve equality, and reduce all negative effects of greed. The only way we can make health care work is if the agents providing health care are put in competition with each other.
me: Well, as you know, the US government provides many basic service to it's citizens (actually to its residents): It spends money to pro-actively protect life through police force and fire companies (that makes effort to protects all residents from death).... It set up roads so people can travel, and do all those other things that people do on roads. This is done because it is recognized (and democratically agreed) that these are very very basic actions made to protect it's citizens and residents. I feel that health, basic health, life protection health care is a basic service. It should be provided for free, like police and fire company, and roads, ....
him: Well, no. The reason why that won't work, is the same reason why so many roads are broken with potholes and police fail to protect it's people, and police brutality and all kinds of injustices. It won't work because there is no competition. The natural selection mechanism is the only thing that will ensure that the best affordable service is provided.
me: Yeah! but precisely because we want to provide very basic service, which does not have a payoff directly to support these services, that it cannot be privatized. There is no way that they can provide that service AND still make money. e.g. paid police? nobody can afford that, and government provides it "at loss" The consequence of privatization is that substandard service will be provided and nobody will be healthy.
him: ...many examples about why competition will bring the bestest and britest out of people...
me: ...same example but change such that the competition forces people to do inhumane things because it optimizes criterion of competition...
him: well! fine! here's why it won't work! The reason why nationalized health care won't work is the same as if you asked the government to provide food for all of its people. They will fail.
me: .......................................................(long silence)...............[[ Mmmm, .......... Hmmmm... I change my mind. I do think governments will fail to provide basic food supply to its people.......... (they certainly have, repeatedly)... such a simple thing... and they fail at it... and health care, even basic health care is a more complicated thing. Hmmm........]] You are right.
him: [[happy with winning argument.]]
me: [[unhappy]] [[murmer in my breath, as Galileo, Health is as basic a right to human just as the earth moves around the sun]]
"""
"""
me: Health is a fundamental human right, much like the right to life, liberty, and expression. The US government should protect this right as does to protect these other rights.
him: But competition is the most important mechanism to guarantee efficiency, improve equality, and reduce all negative effects of greed. The only way we can make health care work is if the agents providing health care are put in competition with each other.
me: Well, as you know, the US government provides many basic service to it's citizens (actually to its residents): It spends money to pro-actively protect life through police force and fire companies (that makes effort to protects all residents from death).... It set up roads so people can travel, and do all those other things that people do on roads. This is done because it is recognized (and democratically agreed) that these are very very basic actions made to protect it's citizens and residents. I feel that health, basic health, life protection health care is a basic service. It should be provided for free, like police and fire company, and roads, ....
him: Well, no. The reason why that won't work, is the same reason why so many roads are broken with potholes and police fail to protect it's people, and police brutality and all kinds of injustices. It won't work because there is no competition. The natural selection mechanism is the only thing that will ensure that the best affordable service is provided.
me: Yeah! but precisely because we want to provide very basic service, which does not have a payoff directly to support these services, that it cannot be privatized. There is no way that they can provide that service AND still make money. e.g. paid police? nobody can afford that, and government provides it "at loss" The consequence of privatization is that substandard service will be provided and nobody will be healthy.
him: ...many examples about why competition will bring the bestest and britest out of people...
me: ...same example but change such that the competition forces people to do inhumane things because it optimizes criterion of competition...
him: well! fine! here's why it won't work! The reason why nationalized health care won't work is the same as if you asked the government to provide food for all of its people. They will fail.
me: .......................................................(long silence)...............[[ Mmmm, .......... Hmmmm... I change my mind. I do think governments will fail to provide basic food supply to its people.......... (they certainly have, repeatedly)... such a simple thing... and they fail at it... and health care, even basic health care is a more complicated thing. Hmmm........]] You are right.
him: [[happy with winning argument.]]
me: [[unhappy]] [[murmer in my breath, as Galileo, Health is as basic a right to human just as the earth moves around the sun]]
"""
Monday, May 04, 2009
your silence and my silence
"In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends"
-MLKJ.
I will admit, that I am silent more than I should be and often at important junctures. I hope to overcome this shortcoming though...
But, I also hope I will remember your silence and the silence of those around me.
-MLKJ.
I will admit, that I am silent more than I should be and often at important junctures. I hope to overcome this shortcoming though...
But, I also hope I will remember your silence and the silence of those around me.
Sunday, May 03, 2009
gota talk about that pig cold
Okay, so call me stupid, but why do they call the bird cold "avian flu" but the pig cold "swine flu" Does the parts of speech not match?
The adjective for of or pertaining to pig is "porcine" so..., correspondingly, "porcine flu".
Of course,... they never spoke of "bovine mania",... probably because it sounds like crazy _for_ cows, instead of "mad cows"
YMMV I suppose.
The adjective for of or pertaining to pig is "porcine" so..., correspondingly, "porcine flu".
Of course,... they never spoke of "bovine mania",... probably because it sounds like crazy _for_ cows, instead of "mad cows"
YMMV I suppose.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Shakespear's Tombstone
Brilliant even in death:
And if it must be...Good friend for Jesus' sake forbear
To dig the dust enclosed here!
Blest be the man that spares these stones,
And curst be he that moves my bones.
Good friends for goodness sake forbear
To peek the register enclosed here!
Bless be men who spares the load,
And curse be he who mod's my code.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
肉麻博客strikes again
"""
Commit!?? That's what you do when you go to the insane asylum
"""
heheee, good one.
Commit!?? That's what you do when you go to the insane asylum
"""
heheee, good one.
Monday, February 16, 2009
The duality of love (来自肉麻恋爱博客）
"""
One time, a very dear friend told me that she permits her husband, departing for the wild wild far east, to engage in safe sex with other women--with the restriction that he must change partner each night, so that he does not fall in love with them... (so that he does not develop feelings...)
Recently, I've come to a similar decision... Except I told my s.o., who is also afar, that development of loving feelings is not only allowed but highly encouraged with and for other people, except that I have a limit too: that no physical relationship takes place, no exchange of fluids, and minimized touching of skin.
"""
sigh... what a sad turn of events for the owner of 肉麻博客。Looks like the puppy love will soon turn into a massacre! A blood bath!! What a travesty of all that is holy beween people!! What torture these two people put themselves and their Loving Other Halves through!!
uhh!! I cannot bear to read this blog any more !!!!!!!!!!!
One time, a very dear friend told me that she permits her husband, departing for the wild wild far east, to engage in safe sex with other women--with the restriction that he must change partner each night, so that he does not fall in love with them... (so that he does not develop feelings...)
Recently, I've come to a similar decision... Except I told my s.o., who is also afar, that development of loving feelings is not only allowed but highly encouraged with and for other people, except that I have a limit too: that no physical relationship takes place, no exchange of fluids, and minimized touching of skin.
"""
sigh... what a sad turn of events for the owner of 肉麻博客。Looks like the puppy love will soon turn into a massacre! A blood bath!! What a travesty of all that is holy beween people!! What torture these two people put themselves and their Loving Other Halves through!!
uhh!! I cannot bear to read this blog any more !!!!!!!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)