機遇創生論 1.6.1

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 18 日的對話。

.

這個大統一理論的成員,包括(但不止於):

精簡圖:

種子論
反白論
間書原理
完備知識論:學海無涯 唯勤是岸 學海無涯 回頭是岸

自由決定論

它們可以大統一的成因,在於它們除了各個自成一國外,還可以合體理解和應用。

在故事《龍珠》中,主角只要找到七粒龍珠,「神龍」就要出現,實現你一個願望。雖然只有一個,但可以是任何。

年輕時,我有一個讀書壓力,覺得有很多重要而精采的東西要學習,沒有足夠時間;覺得只要學少了任何一樣,就會損失慘重。

其實不然。

閱讀一門通用知識的書本到一定數量後,你會發現,資料和知識會重覆。那時,你就再沒需要,閱讀該個主題的書籍。反而,再閱讀的話,會搞亂你在該門學問上,已建立的知識體系。

那就有如在該門知識中,你已經找齊七粒龍珠,「神龍」出現了,你可以實現任何願望。

— Me@2020-06-27 05:36:42 PM

.

.

2020.06.28 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

機遇創生論 1.3

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 18 日的對話。

.

你可以花一生的時間,去令到自己受歡迎;但是,你的喪禮將會有多少人出席,還要視乎當日的天氣。

.

萬事俱備,只欠東風時,就應該立刻離開,讓東風做事,不要阻礙東風。

亦即是話,一件事情的發展結果,受眾多因素影響。有些你控制得到,有些你控制不到。你既要盡力處理,你控制得到的部分,亦同時要盡力去忽略,你控制不到的部分。

千萬不要干涉,大自然的內政,因為,那只會弄巧反拙。

例如,如果你想受人歡迎,你可以做的,就是認真工作,善待自已,以誠待人等。最終會不會受歡迎,那不在你控制範圍。

試想想,如果你企圖保證,自己受歡迎的話,情形會怎樣?

情形就是,你會不斷地提醒他人,你自己的存在。那只會為他人,帶來極大的滋擾。那反而會令你討厭。

原理上,你就應該化成磁鐵,盡其在我地,增加自身的吸引力。重點是,你只可以吸引,而不能拉扯。

正如磁鐵一樣,它只能吸引磁性物質。其他東西,並不會受其吸引。

題外話:而更重要的問題是,為什麼要追求「受歡迎」呢?「受歡迎」的好處,真的大於壞處嗎?

而「不要干涉大自然的內政」,並不代表,「種子論」是「被動」、「消極」的。或者說,那是有意義的「被動」和有策略的「消極」。

那並不是負面意思下的被動消極,原因是「種子論」的行動三部曲,其實也相當上進積極。

第一部,要盡你自己的能力,獲取最多的情報,有關哪裡的土壤,最有機會讓農作物茁壯成長。然後,在那些範圍播種。沒有種子,就不可能有果實。 

第二部,有種子,亦不一定會果實。所以,你要積極不做事,積極去等待。除了定期的灌溉和施肥等工序外,並沒有任何行動,令你可以保證某單一棵植物,一定開花結果。

第三部,而要訓練到自已,習慣在適當的地方和時間,去「積極不做事,積極去等待」的技巧是,先做其他東西,同時在其他土壤播種。

而這正正回應了第一部:正正是因為,在某一指定地方有成果的機會極細,你要在最多的土壤,灑下最多的機遇種子;而底線是,不要多到自己管理不到。

.

一件事情的發展結果,受眾多因素影響。有些你控制得到,有些你控制不到。你既要盡力處理,你控制得到的部分,亦同時要盡力去忽略,你控制不到的部分。

While we are free to choose our actions, we are not free to choose the consequences of those actions. Consequences are governed by natural law.

— The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People

— Stephen R. Covey

那只是理論比喻。執行「種子論」的真正難度在於,有時,在事情完結前,很難去分清該事件中的哪些部分,是「可控部分」,而哪些部分,卻是「不可控部分」。

亦即是話,「謀事在人,成事在天」之中,哪些部分而要由「你」去「謀」,而哪些地方是由「天」去「成」,事前不一定知道。

所以,那不會有公式答案,只能靠自己或他人的學術知識和實際經驗。

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,

the courage to change the things I can change,

and the wisdom to distinguish the two.

「經驗」的近義詞,是「錯誤」。它們不同義的地方,在於「經驗」可以累積,「錯誤」不一定可以累積。

「種子論」的重點,並不是給予你,一條必勝的方程式。

「種子論」的重點是,令你知道,無論如何,你也會遇到無數次的失敗;那是正常不過的事。「種子論」的重點是,令你不再害怕失敗,從而,你會勇於嘗試,敢於超大量地犯錯。

「種子論」的重點是,重複犯同一個錯誤本身,並不能提高成功的機會率。

「種子論」所要求的「不斷犯錯」是,每次也是「新的錯誤」。「新錯誤」的意思,並不只是相對於你來說是「新」,而是相對全人類來說,都是「新」。

別人犯過的錯誤,你也不可以再犯。

一千萬次的失敗,可以兌換一次的成功。

而一次的成功,卻可以兌換一千萬次的應用。

— Me@2020-02-24 10:52:08 PM

.

.

2020.02.24 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

機遇創生論

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 18 日的對話。

.

如果要把,我們討論過的理論,例如,自由決定論、反白論 和 種子論 等,像合體機械人般的形式,砌成一個大理論的話,你覺得那個大理論,名字應該是什麼?

那個大理論,必須有一個正式名字,以後討論問題需要它時,才容易提及。

(安:除了創作那個大理論的名字外,還有什麼話題?)

你想到那個大理論名字後,自然會引起很多新話題。

.

不過,我們討論的東西,太過廣泛,很難用一個名字,統攝全部。

.

不如直接收做「機械人論」?

(安:不行。我都想過這個名字。但它非常誤導。「合體機械人」只是比喻。整個理論和機械人無關。)

好。我們再一次釐清,現在的問題:

我們討論過的「自由決定論」、「種子論」和「完備知識論」(亦可名「完備人生論」),可不可以用一個名字,就捕捉到它們的精粹?

「副作用機械人」?

(安:不如直接用你的名字,命名那個理論。)

唔得喎。我的名字,要留待用於,更加偉大的東西上。

可以可以叫做「果實理論」?

「種子論」是起點,「果實論」是終點。然後,每個果實內,其實又有很多新種子。

.

「緣份管理學」?

(安:我覺得「管理學」好像令個理論降級了一點,因為一般而言,「管理學」並不是,太高深的學問。)

那怎麼辦?

「緣份機械人」?

(安:叫做「人生攻略理論」?)

不行。雖然尚算準確,但是不夠精采。

還有,「人生攻略理論」令人聯想到很多東西,而大部分也不是,我們那個合體大理論的內容。

.

「緣份攻略」都不行,因為感覺有點怪。

(安:那就不如叫做「緣份理論」。)

「理論」很空泛。不應把「理論」,視為名字的一部分。

— Me@2020-01-29 12:23:38 AM

.

.

2020.01.30 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Bus Stop 5

I am the first in the queue because I have missed the last bus.

— Me@2009.09.13

.

If you are the smartest person in the room, you are in the wrong room,

.

for you should have gone to a better room.

— Me@2019-12-21 07:11:21 PM

.

for you deserve a better room.

— Me@2020-01-25 04:47:13 PM

.

.

2020.01.25 Saturday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

大學經濟

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 18 日的對話。

.

我猜想,當一個人改變存在型態時,會立刻或者將會,知道很多生時不知道的東西。但是,那些新知識,未必包括你想知道的東西。

比喻說,由中學升到大學,你將會學到,很多超過中學程度的知識。但是,如果你中學時,沒有讀過經濟科的話,單單是「升大學」本身,並不會令你,立刻獲得經濟科的知識。

大學生「由零開始學經濟學」,都同樣要花時間;分別是,通常而言,比中學生「由零開始學經濟學」,速度會高一點。

(問:不一定呀。中學生比較年青,腦袋理應高速一點。)

無錯。

方便起見,暫時用同一個人來比較,例如你。

「中學的你」可以因為腦袋較年青,學習新事物比「大學的你」較快。「大學的你」可能因為知識和經驗較多,學習新事物比「中學的你」較快。

視乎情況,因人而異,沒有一定的答案。

但是,至少你會同意一點:

如果你中學時,沒有讀過經濟科,在大學時要「由零開始學經濟學」的話,你會立刻看大學程度的經濟書,而不是由中學教科書開始學。

— Me@2018-06-05 11:54:51 AM

.

.

2018.06.07 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

技術細節 3

親歷其境 3

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 18 日的對話。

.

一切文學,余愛以血書者。

— 尼采

.

剛才講到,我想去升學那間大學的物理系,其獨特優秀之處。

世界上,只有極少數大學,提供超弦理論的課程。而且,那個碩士課程,不是純修課式。它為期兩年:第一年是上課,第二年是研究。

.

對於我現在這個年紀,單純知識的吸收(簡稱「學習」),沒有大意義。對我有大意義的是,研究和製造。

或者說,即使一個人對學術有極大興趣,十分喜歡學習,都不應做「永恆學生」。「永恆學生」在這裡,作負面意思用。「永恆學生」的特徵是,知識多而能力差,簡稱「高分低能」。

留意,所謂「知識多而能力差」,其實就即是,知識流於表面,未詳細到可以應用。例如,即使你對中國象棋中的每一隻,行走的方法,非常熟悉,那並不代表,你「懂」怎樣下棋。

要真正下到棋,你要靠不斷嘗試,長期的實戰。那樣,你才可以獲得下一個層次的知識;令自己對於象棋,知得足夠詳細,詳細到足以有效實行。

有時,知易行難,是因為知得不夠深入;

有時,行而無效,是因為行得不夠徹底。

永久單純地,吸收新知識,而沒有下一個層次的發展,是沒有意義的。或者說,知識上,只有輸入而沒有輸出,是病態。

所謂「下一個層次的發展」,可以是:

1. 應用

隨著越來越多次的應用,你於該個領域的知識,再不是依書直說,而是真才實學。

2. 傳播

如果你要傳播知識,必須靠說話或文章。

無論用兩者的哪一個,你必須透過自己的「語言」。換句話說,你必須為舊知識,創造一個新的包裝;即使,有時,你是不自覺地那樣做,未必意識到自己正在從是創作。

還有,有時,你亦會無意中,有知識上的新發現—在為舊知識創造新包裝時,竟然引發了新知識。

3. 研究

透過舊知識,發掘新知識。

— Me@2018-05-05 10:06:15 AM

.

Know the subject—At the Dale Carnegie public speaking class, which I highly recommend—they say anyone can make a good speech if he or she has _earned the right_ to speak on the subject in question. How do you earn the right? By living through the subject or by doing extensive research on it—which is arguably another form of living through it. Same principle applies to how-to writing. You cannot do high school student research. That is, find 21 facts and write an essay that consists solely of those 21 facts. Rather you need the proverbial iceberg of unused facts under the “tip” that is your book. The good news is virtually everyone has lived through something that fits that criterion. And, with a year or so, we can all research something that interest us to the point where we can write about it. The key to bad writing is assigned topics—the standard of high school and college teachers.

— John T. Reed

.

.

2018.05.06 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

More College Advice – GPA

I know this has been discussed before here, but I find Joel’s comments about having a high GPA questionable. I’ve never paid much attention to GPA scores when hiring, except to wonder why some candidates with mediocre GPAs in the 3.0 – 3.3 range brag them up. If anything, I’m interested in people who have quirky grades all over the map due to taking strange, challenging, and diverse courses.

It’s hard for me to believe that people in hiring positions really care much about high GPAs, unless they themselves have high GPAs (ignoring HR drone filters). If so, that’s already a minority. Even in this group, though, especially those with very high GPAs, my experience has been that its not really a factor.

At best, it’s a slight positive in the general hiring world, and can actually count against one when seeking employment, as in Bs don’t hire As. I tend toward very high GPAs myself (3.9 in my just completed graduate work, albeit it’s business strategy).

So I’m curious, does anyone here agree with Joel on this to the extent that the GPA counts (or would count) as important if you were hiring someone? Are you a high GPA yourself? I’m curious if there’s a correlation between high GPA and this attitude.

— Mongo

— Monday, January 03, 2005

You know the old saying, “The world is run by C students”[.]

— ted knight

— Monday, January 03, 2005

From my experience from college (and this is just my experience, so don’t flame me), the people with high GPAs were generally hard working and responsible, while the people with low GPAs were either slackers, people that made excuses (“oh, I had sooo much work to do”) or just not good enough to get high grades. I wouldn’t really want to hire most of the people I knew with poor GPAs. Some were very good, but I wouldn’t trust them to do be responsible and do their job even when things got boring.

I got a 3.91 from a top 10 CS program, and that helped tremendously when I was looking for jobs and internships. Companies were contacting me and asking me to apply, I didn’t have to seek them out. A friend of mine who graduated at the same time as me, from the same program, just found a job recently almost two years after graduating. He said a lot of companies wouldn’t even look at him because of his low GPA.

Other friends decided they couldn’t find a good job, so they’re going to grad school. Well, big surprise, they can’t get into a good grad school either with their low GPAs.

So yeah, I think it matters a great deal. One thing I noticed was that the people that had to pay for college themselves and had to work through college (like me) took it more seriously and got better grades, while those whose parents paid for it oftentimes didn’t care too much, took way too long to graduate, etc.

— sloop

— Monday, January 03, 2005

— The Joel on Software Discussion Group (CLOSED)

2016.01.19 Tuesday ACHK

Passion Test

The Top Idea in Your Mind, 6 | 事業愛情觀 6

.

To check whether a project is your true love, ask yourself:

Am I willing to spend INFINITE time on it?

— Me@2015-07-05 04:26:24 PM

.

Do you want it to be one of your lifelong projects?

Are you willing to follow it up for your whole life?

— Me@2015-07-12 11:00:11 AM

.

.

2015.07.12 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Intelligence and Wisdom

A few days ago I finally figured out something I’ve wondered about for 25 years: the relationship between wisdom and intelligence. Anyone can see they’re not the same by the number of people who are smart, but not very wise. And yet intelligence and wisdom do seem related. How?

What is wisdom? I’d say it’s knowing what to do in a lot of situations. I’m not trying to make a deep point here about the true nature of wisdom, just to figure out how we use the word. A wise person is someone who usually knows the right thing to do.

If wisdom and intelligence are the average and peaks of the same curve, then they converge as the number of points on the curve decreases. If there’s just one point, they’re identical: the average and maximum are the same. But as the number of points increases, wisdom and intelligence diverge. And historically the number of points on the curve seems to have been increasing: our ability is tested in an ever wider range of situations.

The wise are all much alike in their wisdom, but very smart people tend to be smart in distinctive ways.

— Is It Worth Being Wise?

— Paul Graham

2015.07.03 Friday ACHK

天空堤壩

Talent at its best and character at its worst

.

Lord Acton said we should judge talent at its best and character at its worst. For example, if you write one great book and ten bad ones, you still count as a great writer — or at least, a better writer than someone who wrote eleven that were merely good. Whereas if you’re a quiet, law-abiding citizen most of the time but occasionally cut someone up and bury them in your backyard, you’re a bad guy.

— Paul Graham

.

才能方面,如果一個人的最高點是可以接受的話,你就可以錄用他,即使他有其他任何才能缺點;

品德方面,如果一個人的最低點是不可接受的話,你就千萬不要錄用他,即使他有其他任何品德優點。

— Me@2010.03.06

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

才能方面,一個太陽可以照亮整個天空;

品德方面,一條裂縫可以摧毀整個堤壩。

— Me@2010.03.06

.

.

.

2010.03.07 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

大學選工 2

這段改編自 2010 年 8 月 11 日的對話。

.

但是,那也只是枝節,比較膚淺,只是順帶一提,不是核心方法。

實在一點的方法是,在大學時代,盡量爭取最多的實習機會,從而認識最多相關行業的同事。那樣,遠在大學畢業之前,就會有一大批相關行業人士,和你共事過,知道你的工作態度和能力。

所以,大學時代,除了學業上有很多工序外,在事業上,同時亦有不少功夫要準備。

留意,由開始尋找,到找到一份心儀的工作,大概需要一年。所以,如果你在大學畢業時,才開始的話,你很可能要,花上一年的時間,處於全失業的狀態,或者立於半失業的境地。

「半失業」的意思是,你要暫時做一些,沒有前途的工作。那不會是你嚮往的經歷,因為,你不會事先知道,那個「暫時」,會「暫到何時」。

— Me@2015.03.29

.

.

2015.03.31 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Intellectual, 3

There are two kinds of people: intellectuals and non-intellectuals.

Don’t do the opposite kind of work.

Do not judge an intellectual’s life by a non-intellectual standard, or vice versa.

— Me@2011.07.28

2015.03.25 Wednesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK