Godel, Escher, Bach

Douglas Hofstadter’s Godel, Escher, Bach uses self-referencing mathematical (formal language) and English (natural language) sentences, pictures (M.C. Escher’s dragon for example), and music (Bach’s fugues) to convey the concept and its recursive nature.

— Wikipedia on Self-reference

In response to confusion over the book’s theme, Hofstadter has emphasized that GEB is not about mathematics, art, and music but rather about how cognition and thinking emerge from well-hidden neurological mechanisms. In the book, he presents an analogy about how the individual neurons of the brain coordinate to create a unified sense of a coherent mind by comparing it to the social organization displayed in a colony of ants.

— Wikipedia on Godel, Escher, Bach

2012.05.23 Wednesday ACHK

應世守略

這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。

(安:有很多人,會因為別人「忘恩負義」而不開心。如何排除這類不開心呢?)

只要了解人性就可以。

了解人性的話,自然會知道大部人地球人是「忘恩」的。那樣,你「望報」時,就不會「施恩」;「施恩」時,就不會「望報」。

既然沒有失望的機會,自然沒有不開心的可能。

— Me@2012.05.23 

2012.05.23 Wednesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Python

Basically, Python can be seen as a dialect of Lisp with “traditional” syntax (what Lisp people call “infix” or “m-lisp” syntax).

Python can be seen as either a practical (better libraries) version of Scheme, or as a cleaned-up (no $@&% characters) version of Perl.

One of Python’s controversial features, using indentation level rather than begin/end or braces, was driven by this philosophy: since there are no braces, there are no style wars over where to put the braces. Interestingly, Lisp has exactly the same philosphy on this point: everyone uses emacs to indent their code, so they don’t argue over the indentation.

Take a Lisp program, indent it properly, and delete the opening parens at the start of lines and their matching close parens, and you end up with something that looks rather like a Python program.

— Python for Lisp Programmers

— Peter Norvig

2012.05.22 Tuesday ACHK

分數中心 1.2

這段改編自 2010 年 6 月 2 日的對話。

大部分情況下,「離題」的核心原因是「自我中心」。很多人誤會,以為「自己以自己為中心」,為之「自我中心」。那不是實情。當我們批評一個人「自我中心」時,並不是指「他要求自己的生活,以他自己為中心」。「自己的世界以自己為中心」合情合理,不應批評。

但是,如果「我要求別人的生活,也以我自己為中心」,那就不合情理,會引起公憤。

大部分情況下,「離題」的核心原因是「自我中心」。意思是,看到一道題目後,你沒有詳加閱讀,細心留意題目的要求和指示。你自己想像,題目想你答什麼。你不知不覺間,假設了那道題目,是為你度身訂造,以方便你炫耀學識,或者炫耀勤力。結果,你根據了「自我幻想題目」,而不是「真實題目」來作答。

例如,題目是「蘋果有很多益處,而橙亦有很多優點。請詳加描述橙的功用。」

「題目中心」的考生,會留意「題目確實要求答什麼」、「有多少個要點要答」、「每個要點需要答到什麼詳細程度」等等。但是,「自我中心」而又「十分熟悉蘋果」的考生,一看到「蘋果有很多益處」,他的即時反應是「呀!這一回真是幸運。我正正有溫習蘋果的一課。」他會以為該題是問「蘋果的益處」,然後立刻根據那個幻像來作答。背後的心結,是「自我中心」:

一來,以為題目是為他刻意設定;

二來,因為他剛巧試前詳細溫習了「蘋果的益處」,他急不及待想立刻炫耀。他想傳遞給評卷老師的訊息是:「我有勤力讀書,請你給我分數」。 

但是,「自我中心」考生所忽略的是,考官不會根據你「勤不勤力」,或者「聰不聰明」來評分。考官只會根據你答案的準確程度來評定優劣。「離題」就是百分百「不準確」,自然百分百「沒有分數」。

記住,參加考試的目的,並不是炫耀自己的學識,而是奪取分數。如果你是目標為本,即是以分數為中心,而不是以自我為中心的話,「離題」的機會微乎其微。

— Me@2012.05.22

2012.05.22 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

What Dreams May Come

Matheson stated in an interview, “I think What Dreams May Come is the most important (read effective) book I’ve written. It has caused a number of readers to lose their fear of death – the finest tribute any writer could receive.”

— Wikipedia on What Dreams May Come

2012.05.21 Monday ACHK

朋友同事 4

這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。

.

To be trusted is a greater compliment than to be loved.

– George MacDonald

.

「友誼」建基於「互相信任」。所以,朋友之間,只要其中一方人格有問題,就自然不可能發展成,最深刻的朋友。

「人格」包括「品德」和「智力」。只要其中一方面有問題,都會構成「人格問題」。例如,醫生甲的醫術高明,但是品德差,有時會說謊。那樣,你不會敢去給他診症。相反,醫生乙友善而誠實,但是醫術奇差。那樣,你也不敢去給他治病。

簡而言之,如果一個人「可靠」,那就為之「人格完整」。如果一個人「不可靠」,無論「不可靠」的原因是「才幹問題」、「誠信缺失」或者「其他」,那都為之「人格不完整」。

而「有缺點」不代表「不可靠」。例如,我的缺點是「不懂烹飪」。但是,我從來沒有要求別人,吃我所烹調的食物。那樣,我這個「缺點」就不會導致我「不可靠」。所以,「有缺點」不一定代表「人格不完整」。

任何兩個人,如果雙方都人格完整,越熟絡,感情反而會越好。

— Me@2012.05.21

.

.

2012.05.21 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Folds, maps, and filters

Why use folds, maps, and filters?

A quick glance reveals that adler32_foldl isn’t really any shorter than adler32_try2. Why should we use a fold in this case? The advantage here lies in the fact that folds are extremely common in Haskell, and they have regular, predictable behavior.

This means that a reader with a little experience will have an easier time understanding a use of a fold than code that uses explicit recursion. A fold isn’t going to produce any surprises, but the behavior of a function that recurses explicitly isn’t immediately obvious.

— Chapter 4: Functional programming

— Real World Haskell

— by Bryan O’Sullivan, Don Stewart, and John Goerzen

2012.05.20 Sunday ACHK

分數中心 1.1

這段改編自 2010 年 6 月 2 日的對話。

至於其他科,你們有沒有遇到「古怪題目」的問題?

(CYW:例如生物科,溫習課文時,我會明白內容。但是,一到考試答題目時,卻會答來答去,也答不中要點。派回試卷時,面對著標準答案,我會覺得很奇怪,不明白為何要那樣答。我想像不到,如何可以想像得到那些答案。)

你所講的,是公開試的答案,還是校內考試的答案?

如果是校內考試,你就要考慮,校內老師的答案要求,和公開試的相不相近。不相近的話,毋須理會。相近的話,就要理會。總而言之,無論校內試的要求,和公開試的相不相近,你都要以公開試的標準為依歸。

換句話說,你要了解,生物科公開試所要求的答題風格。例如,它要求一針見血,還是詳細交代上文下理。研究具體答題內容之前,你要保證你「答題的大方向」,符合公開試的標準。

如果你風格這類大方向沒有錯,那就代表你的答題要麼答錯,要麼離題,答非所問。因為你說你明白課文內容,我假設你答題的東西沒有錯。你損失分數的主因是離題。

大部分情況下,「離題」的核心原因是「自我中心」。很多人誤會,以為「自己以自己為中心」,為之「自我中心」。那不是實情。當我們批評一個人「自我中心」時,並不是指「他要求自己的生活,以他自己為中心」。「自己的世界以自己為中心」合情合理,不應批評。

但是,如果「我要求別人的生活,也以我自己為中心」,那就不合情理,會引起公憤。

— Me@2012.05.20

2012.05.20 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Lifeguards

If you want peace, prepare for war.

– Ancient Rome

Be always ready.

— 救生員格言

Studying academic knowledge is like constructing a dictionary. You will use only a little part of the dictionary. But the whole must be always ready there.

— Me@2011.10.17

2012.05.19 Saturday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Startup 12

What is technology? It’s technique. It’s the way we all do things. And when you discover a new way to do things, its value is multiplied by all the people who use it. It is the proverbial fishing rod, rather than the fish. That’s the difference between a startup and a restaurant or a barber shop. You fry eggs or cut hair one customer at a time. Whereas if you solve a technical problem that a lot of people care about, you help everyone who uses your solution. That’s leverage.

— How to Make Wealth

But isn’t the consulting company itself a startup? No, not generally. A company has to be more than small and newly founded to be a startup. There are millions of small businesses in America, but only a few thousand are startups. To be a startup, a company has to be a product business, not a service business. By which I mean not that it has to make something physical, but that it has to have one thing it sells to many people, rather than doing custom work for individual clients. Custom work doesn’t scale. To be a startup you need to be the band that sells a million copies of a song, not the band that makes money by playing at individual weddings and bar mitzvahs.

— How to Fund a Startup

— Paul Graham

2012.05.19 Saturday ACHK

朋友同事 3

這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。

.

既然人格有問題,而又不會是對方,最深刻的朋友,不留也罷。早一點反目,好過遲一點反目。早一點反目的話,傷害會少一點。

比喻說,對於情侶來說,如果遲早也要分手的話,結婚前分手,總好過結婚後才分手。

— Me@2012.05.19

.

.

2012.05.19 Saturday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Laser mice

The laser mouse uses an infrared laser diode instead of a LED to illuminate the surface beneath their sensor. As early as 1998, Sun Microsystems provided a laser mouse with their Sun SPARCstation servers and workstations. However, laser mice did not enter the mainstream market until 2004, when Paul Machin at Logitech, in partnership with Agilent Technologies, introduced its MX 1000 laser mouse.

This mouse uses a small infrared laser instead of a LED and has significantly increased the resolution of the image taken by the mouse. The laser enables around 20 times more surface tracking power to the surface features used for navigation compared to conventional optical mice.

— Wikipedia on Optical mouse

2012.05.18 Friday ACHK

Transformers: War for Cybertron

Transformers: War for Cybertron is a third-person shooter video game developed by High Moon Studios and published by Activision.

The game takes place on the planet Cybertron, prior to the Transformers arrival on Earth. The Autobots and Decepticons are engaged in a civil war. The game can be played starting from either faction’s perspective, but begins chronologically with the Decepticon campaign. The game revolves around the use of a substance known as Dark Energon, which the Decepticon leader Megatron believes will allow him to return the planet to what he refers to as a golden age.

— Wikipedia on Transformers: War for Cybertron

.

The game’s frame rate is capped at 30 FPS. To work around this limitation, the key is to use Lossless Scaling.

— Me@2025-10-31 11:08:42 AM

.

.

2012.05.18 Friday ACHK

古怪題目 1.3

這段改編自 2010 年 6 月 2 日的對話。

凡是「非公開試歷屆試題」(non-past-paper),即使不懂做,你也不用太擔心。教科書、坊間參考書、校內功課 和 校內考試 等等之中的題目,你毋須花太多時間去鑽研。你應試集中火力去研究歷屆試題。其中一個理由是,「非歷屆試題」的質素,一定遠遠不及「歷屆試題」的。

試想想,假設有一本數學練習冊,內裡有一千道題目。如果該書由三位作者合著,很可能,那一千道題目,也主要是由他們三人設計的。

但是,在同一個公開試中,每年每科只會有一份或兩份的試卷。如果是長題目,一份試卷會有十多題。如果是多項選擇題,一份試卷會有大約五十題。而出題者的數目,一定不只是兩三個。我猜想,大概有十多人。

只要你比較「非歷屆試題」和「歷屆試題」,平均每題的創作成本,你就會發覺,出公開試題目所投放的資源,絕對是多很多。

「公開試出題者」的意思,並不單只包括設計題目的專家,而且還包括負責驗證校對的專業人員。而「驗證校對」的工作,除了要確保題目本身沒有錯誤外,還要確保那些題目的深淺程度,適合考試之用。

— Me@2012.05.18

2012.05.18 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Strong Law of Small Numbers

“The Strong Law of Small Numbers” is a humorous paper by mathematician Richard K. Guy and also the so-called law that it proclaims: “There aren’t enough small numbers to meet the many demands made of them.” In other words, any given small number appears in far more contexts than may seem reasonable, leading to many apparently surprising coincidences in mathematics, simply because small numbers appear so often and yet are so few. Guy’s 1988 paper gives 35 examples in support of this thesis. This can lead inexperienced mathematicians to conclude that these concepts are related, which in fact they are not.

— Wikipedia on Strong Law of Small Numbers

2012.05.17 Thursday ACHK

The why of love, 3

“Why do you love me?” is not a correct question,

because

you = summation of all your qualities

— Me@2011.10.15

.

“Why do you love me?”

I love you because of your good qualities.

.

“What if I do not have such qualities anymore?”

I love you for your good character.

.

“What if I do not have such a good character anymore?”

Then you are not you anymore.

— Me@2012.05.16

.

.

2012.05.17 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

朋友同事 2

這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。

.

有一個講法是,朋友不應共事。朋友一同工作的話,會十分傷感情。

這個講法大概正確。大部情況下,任何兩個人熟絡到某個程度後,就自然會反目。

但是,我已經把這個講法升級了。完整的講法是,任何兩個人格不完整的人,熟絡到某個程度後,就自然會反目。那是因為只要足夠熟絡,就自然不單會知道,並且會感受到,對方的人格缺失。

(留意,有「缺點」不表有「人格問題」。例如,我的其中一個缺點是「不懂烹飪」,但那不算是我的「人格缺失」。如果我在「不懂烹飪」的情況下,仍然要別人吃我所煮的菜色的話,那就是我的「人格缺失」。又例如,「間中遲到五分鐘」不算是「人格缺失」。但是,如果「遲到五分鐘」後,竟然沒有任何歉意,亦沒有絲毫改正的意圖的話,那就是「人格缺失」。

人不可能沒有「缺點」,但可以沒有「人格缺失」。)

而終極的完整的講法是,任何兩個人,只要其中一方的人格不完整,到某個程度後,越熟絡,感情就越差;相反,任何兩個人,如果雙方都人格完整,越熟絡,感情反而會越好。

「大部情況下,任何兩個人熟絡到某個程度後,就自然會反目」的真正原因是,大部分人的人格,都十分不完整。

我的意見是,朋友不妨作同事。如果「朋友甲」和你,因為一同工作而反目的話,至起碼,你可以得到兩樣十分重要的資料。第一,「甲」(或者你自己)的人格有問題。第二,「甲」最多只能同你作「泛泛之交」,而不會變成你最深刻的朋友。

既然人格有問題,而又不會是對方最深刻的朋友,不留也罷。早一點反目,好過遲一點反目。早一點反目的話,傷害會少一點。

— Me@2012.05.17

.

.

2012.05.17 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK