Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
surgery
pleural cavity fluid build up. Pocket so pleurex didn't help. Mom had to work so I kept dad company. Discussed with Dr. Boyer about the surgery. Afterwards, found out fibrothorax so fluids clear but lung can't expand fully. Turns out having a depressed lung is worse than removing it because of ventilation-perfusion mismatch where more blood goes to bad lung. Chest tube in. A real scare but turned out only a few days.
Mom really depressed. Better after some comforting.
烧卖 REALLY good, but a little on the dry side, prolly coz it wasn't fresh. 水煮肉片 was AWESOME, though for some reason the meat wasn't quite as tender as when I make it. I think it's coz it's too thin.
Started reading sparse PCA stuff. Math is hard, let's go shopping.
Still watching Meitantei Conan.
good poem:
人生无根蒂，飘如陌上尘。分散逐风转，此已非常身。
落地为兄弟，何必骨肉亲！得欢当作乐，斗酒聚比邻。
盛年不重来，一日难再晨。及时当勉励，岁月不待人。
Mom really depressed. Better after some comforting.
烧卖 REALLY good, but a little on the dry side, prolly coz it wasn't fresh. 水煮肉片 was AWESOME, though for some reason the meat wasn't quite as tender as when I make it. I think it's coz it's too thin.
Started reading sparse PCA stuff. Math is hard, let's go shopping.
Still watching Meitantei Conan.
good poem:
人生无根蒂，飘如陌上尘。分散逐风转，此已非常身。
落地为兄弟，何必骨肉亲！得欢当作乐，斗酒聚比邻。
盛年不重来，一日难再晨。及时当勉励，岁月不待人。
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
thoughts today
1. 我妈这三年来受了多少苦，没人有权利对她说三道四。这个世界对她太不公平了。以后我要对她好些
2. It doesn't take courage or skill to be angry. Better to convince others they're wrong than to throw it in their faces.
3. 我妈有个朋友，丈夫生前是我爸的一个病友。自从她丈夫去了后她下班的时候经常会来看我爸，检查一下他的情况，照顾一下起居。她还有一个聋哑女儿，所以曾经特意去学了手语，有的时候会教我爸做手势。今天我和我妈离开医院时，我爸突然对着我拍了拍他的胸口，手伸出来掌心向我，然后屈起了中指和无名指。这是”I love you"的手语。我突然反应过来，因为那天那位阿姨教我爸时我也在场。我立即也向他打出了同样的手势，然后我们两人会心的笑了一笑。If there was ever a moment shared that could be called "a moment", that was it =0). 我爸病的那么重，头脑还是很清楚，记性还是那么好，学习新知识的欲望还是那么强，真的让我体会到了“活到老学到老”这句话的精髓。
4. My grandfather died from being imprisoned in 牛棚 after the "anti-rightist" movement. And i remember my dad took me to 拜祭 him when i was really little. My dad would always tell me wistfully that one of his biggest regret was that his father wasn't able to see him become a father
I'm really sad that I'll most likely have to tell my child that too
2. It doesn't take courage or skill to be angry. Better to convince others they're wrong than to throw it in their faces.
3. 我妈有个朋友，丈夫生前是我爸的一个病友。自从她丈夫去了后她下班的时候经常会来看我爸，检查一下他的情况，照顾一下起居。她还有一个聋哑女儿，所以曾经特意去学了手语，有的时候会教我爸做手势。今天我和我妈离开医院时，我爸突然对着我拍了拍他的胸口，手伸出来掌心向我，然后屈起了中指和无名指。这是”I love you"的手语。我突然反应过来，因为那天那位阿姨教我爸时我也在场。我立即也向他打出了同样的手势，然后我们两人会心的笑了一笑。If there was ever a moment shared that could be called "a moment", that was it =0). 我爸病的那么重，头脑还是很清楚，记性还是那么好，学习新知识的欲望还是那么强，真的让我体会到了“活到老学到老”这句话的精髓。
4. My grandfather died from being imprisoned in 牛棚 after the "anti-rightist" movement. And i remember my dad took me to 拜祭 him when i was really little. My dad would always tell me wistfully that one of his biggest regret was that his father wasn't able to see him become a father
I'm really sad that I'll most likely have to tell my child that too
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Viva La Vida
Chock-full of historical and biblical references that flows like a cautionary tale about the corrupting influence of power from the perspective of a deposed dictator. Some have said it was Napolean, other Louis XVI. It's not a perfect fit, but my call is Louis XVI. Regardless, the French revolutionary origins are unmistakable.
So Napolean vs Louis：
1. I really liked the line, "I used to roll the dice, And feel the fear in my enemy's eyes". First reaction was Napolean's pre-Waterloo days. And yeah, it sounds really bad ass. BUT, it could also be the delusions on grandeur of Louis XVI. He did authorize French aid for the American revolution, as well as French involvement in India and Vietnam. And since he was closeted, I'm sure his advisors really trumped up th glorious of French conquests the world over. Since it's from the first person perspective, we'll never really know.
=> a wash
2. "And I discovered that my castles stand / Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand". Cool biblical imagery here. Definitely more like XVI. Napolean was defeated in battle. Louis XVI repeatedly had his castle stormed.
=> Louis XVI
3. "Now in the morning I sleep alone / Sweep the streets I used to own". This is not like Louis XVI. The royal family was placed under house arrest before Louis was executed. Napolean however was exiled and had considerably more freedom for a longer period of time.
=> Napolean
4. "Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!" Napolean wasn't the successor to the throne in the traditional sense as implied by this line. He was declared Emperor after quite sometime as the de facto ruler of France already.
=> Louis XVI
5. This is an aside: "I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing / Roman Cavalry choirs are singing". I think this is a mistake in the lyrics. Should be "Roman Calvary choirs", not "cavalry". I thought the lyrics I found were wrong, but they're actually singing "cavalry" in the song as well. Tisk tisk.
=> N/A
6. "Revolutionaries wait / For my head on a silver plate
/ Just a puppet on a lonely string / Oh who would ever want to be king?"
Unmistakably Louis. Napolean WAS a revolutionary, and he was never beheaded or had the French people wanting to execute him. Moreover, he was NEVER a puppet. On the other hand, Louis, especially late in his reign, had ceded a lot of his power to his ministers. And the 'Oh who would ever want to be king?' sounds like the whining of someone born of privilege.
=> Louis XVI
7. "Never an honest word / But that was when I ruled the world". I would lean towards Louis XVI on this one. Napolean came from humble origins and he was defeated in battle, not through him deluding himself.
=> Louis XVI
So on balance, it sounds much more like Louis XVI than Napolean. There is one point that is more Napolean, and another point that could be both. But on balance, Louis XVI just dominated.
---
"I used to rule the world
Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning I sleep alone
Sweep the streets I used to own
I used to roll the dice
Feel the fear in my enemy's eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing:
"Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!"
One minute I held the key
Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand
I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can't explain
Once you go there was never, never an honest word
That was when I ruled the world
It was the wicked and wild wind
Blew down the doors to let me in
Shattered windows and the sound of drums
People couldn't believe what I'd become
Revolutionaries wait
For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string
Oh who would ever want to be king?
I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can't explain
I know Saint Peter will call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world
(Ohhhhh Ohhh Ohhh)
I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can't explain
I know Saint Peter won't call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world"
So Napolean vs Louis：
1. I really liked the line, "I used to roll the dice, And feel the fear in my enemy's eyes". First reaction was Napolean's pre-Waterloo days. And yeah, it sounds really bad ass. BUT, it could also be the delusions on grandeur of Louis XVI. He did authorize French aid for the American revolution, as well as French involvement in India and Vietnam. And since he was closeted, I'm sure his advisors really trumped up th glorious of French conquests the world over. Since it's from the first person perspective, we'll never really know.
=> a wash
2. "And I discovered that my castles stand / Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand". Cool biblical imagery here. Definitely more like XVI. Napolean was defeated in battle. Louis XVI repeatedly had his castle stormed.
=> Louis XVI
3. "Now in the morning I sleep alone / Sweep the streets I used to own". This is not like Louis XVI. The royal family was placed under house arrest before Louis was executed. Napolean however was exiled and had considerably more freedom for a longer period of time.
=> Napolean
4. "Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!" Napolean wasn't the successor to the throne in the traditional sense as implied by this line. He was declared Emperor after quite sometime as the de facto ruler of France already.
=> Louis XVI
5. This is an aside: "I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing / Roman Cavalry choirs are singing". I think this is a mistake in the lyrics. Should be "Roman Calvary choirs", not "cavalry". I thought the lyrics I found were wrong, but they're actually singing "cavalry" in the song as well. Tisk tisk.
=> N/A
6. "Revolutionaries wait / For my head on a silver plate
/ Just a puppet on a lonely string / Oh who would ever want to be king?"
Unmistakably Louis. Napolean WAS a revolutionary, and he was never beheaded or had the French people wanting to execute him. Moreover, he was NEVER a puppet. On the other hand, Louis, especially late in his reign, had ceded a lot of his power to his ministers. And the 'Oh who would ever want to be king?' sounds like the whining of someone born of privilege.
=> Louis XVI
7. "Never an honest word / But that was when I ruled the world". I would lean towards Louis XVI on this one. Napolean came from humble origins and he was defeated in battle, not through him deluding himself.
=> Louis XVI
So on balance, it sounds much more like Louis XVI than Napolean. There is one point that is more Napolean, and another point that could be both. But on balance, Louis XVI just dominated.
---
"I used to rule the world
Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning I sleep alone
Sweep the streets I used to own
I used to roll the dice
Feel the fear in my enemy's eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing:
"Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!"
One minute I held the key
Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand
I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can't explain
Once you go there was never, never an honest word
That was when I ruled the world
It was the wicked and wild wind
Blew down the doors to let me in
Shattered windows and the sound of drums
People couldn't believe what I'd become
Revolutionaries wait
For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string
Oh who would ever want to be king?
I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can't explain
I know Saint Peter will call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world
(Ohhhhh Ohhh Ohhh)
I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror my sword and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can't explain
I know Saint Peter won't call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world"
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Do corporations have natural rights?
The SCOTUS recently ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that the campaign finance limits placed on corporations (and other civil organization like unions) are in violation of the first amendment and therefore are unconstitutional.
This created an uproar across the country. Newspaper op-ed's slammed the SCOTUS for opening the floodgates for corporate greed to take over the election process. Especially ironic is this Washington Post op-ed by a liberal decrying judicial activism in the SCOTUS (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/31/AR2010013101838.html?hpid=opinionsbox1). President Obama publicly and harshly rebuked the SCOTUS in his SOTU speech. Even Alito's response to Obama, nothing more than a slight shaking of his head and mouthing the words "not true", created great controversy across the country. But the reaction wasn't uniformly partisan. Even many conservatives were worried that the money could wreck the election process.
There are three main questions of concern here. First, do corporations (both for-profit and otherwise), unions, as well as other civil associations enjoy natural rights like an individual? Second, does money == freedom of speech? Third, will allowing civil associations freedom to spend money on political campaigns corrupt the election process? All three are relevant questions that deserve consideration.
Let's tackle the first question, do corporations enjoy natural rights like an individual. In order to answer this question, we have to think about what a corporation is. While corporations have traditionally been painted in popular culture as faceless, soulless, Machiavellian machines, they are far from it. A corporation is just a voluntary association amongst shareholders. And because the set of shareholders/owners tend to change over time, the act of incorporation places a layer of abstraction between the shareholders and the rest of society. And the management team at the corporation is the agent that represents the principals with the goal of maximizing ROI. When the corporation makes a political statement, it is implicitly a political statement from the set of shareholders via their agent. Now, of course, any given political statement from any given corporation is not going to square with the political views of all of its shareholders. But that is a corporate governance issue, and not a freedom of speech issue. Restrictions on corporations doesn't just restrict some faceless soulless entity, it restricts the rights of the shareholders of the corporation.
Secondly, is money equivalent to free speech? This is a much easier question. How would one exercise one's freedom to speak without money to purchase air time? or a microphone? How do you tweet your thoughts without money to pay for a computer and internet access? You can utter words in the privacy of your own home I suppose, but even that assumes money to pay for a home! So the question isn't how is spending money equivalent to free speech, it's how is spending money NOT equivalent to free speech!
The third and most practical question is whether having this freedom would ruin the democratic election process. The fear obviously is that mega-corporations will be forever lobbying Congress for subsidies and favorable policies. And I agree that's a very valid concern. But that is a sign that the government (democratic or not), has too much power. Why would private individuals trade so much of their time and effort for sometimes nothing more than an audience with some of the most disingenuous and unprincipled people in society? The real solution isn't to stem the flow of money, it's to remove the demand for political power. Just as there was separation of church and state, there should now be separation of economy and state.
In addition, just as a given political political statement will never square with all shareholder, it will also never square with all customers, present and future. Thus companies, unless grievously threatened, will probably shy away from an overtly political lean. Afterall, both democrats and republicans drink coca-cola.
I applaud the SCOTUS for this momentous decision. A violation to the freedom of speech (and perhaps even more importantly, political speech) was remedied. We must remember that this doesn't somehow grant human status to a corporation. Instead it recognizes the human individuals behind the corporations. And while I believe that the actual effect will be very moderate, it still makes me feel good that the principles laid out in the Constitution still means something in this country. Bravo SCOTUS.
This created an uproar across the country. Newspaper op-ed's slammed the SCOTUS for opening the floodgates for corporate greed to take over the election process. Especially ironic is this Washington Post op-ed by a liberal decrying judicial activism in the SCOTUS (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/31/AR2010013101838.html?hpid=opinionsbox1). President Obama publicly and harshly rebuked the SCOTUS in his SOTU speech. Even Alito's response to Obama, nothing more than a slight shaking of his head and mouthing the words "not true", created great controversy across the country. But the reaction wasn't uniformly partisan. Even many conservatives were worried that the money could wreck the election process.
There are three main questions of concern here. First, do corporations (both for-profit and otherwise), unions, as well as other civil associations enjoy natural rights like an individual? Second, does money == freedom of speech? Third, will allowing civil associations freedom to spend money on political campaigns corrupt the election process? All three are relevant questions that deserve consideration.
Let's tackle the first question, do corporations enjoy natural rights like an individual. In order to answer this question, we have to think about what a corporation is. While corporations have traditionally been painted in popular culture as faceless, soulless, Machiavellian machines, they are far from it. A corporation is just a voluntary association amongst shareholders. And because the set of shareholders/owners tend to change over time, the act of incorporation places a layer of abstraction between the shareholders and the rest of society. And the management team at the corporation is the agent that represents the principals with the goal of maximizing ROI. When the corporation makes a political statement, it is implicitly a political statement from the set of shareholders via their agent. Now, of course, any given political statement from any given corporation is not going to square with the political views of all of its shareholders. But that is a corporate governance issue, and not a freedom of speech issue. Restrictions on corporations doesn't just restrict some faceless soulless entity, it restricts the rights of the shareholders of the corporation.
Secondly, is money equivalent to free speech? This is a much easier question. How would one exercise one's freedom to speak without money to purchase air time? or a microphone? How do you tweet your thoughts without money to pay for a computer and internet access? You can utter words in the privacy of your own home I suppose, but even that assumes money to pay for a home! So the question isn't how is spending money equivalent to free speech, it's how is spending money NOT equivalent to free speech!
The third and most practical question is whether having this freedom would ruin the democratic election process. The fear obviously is that mega-corporations will be forever lobbying Congress for subsidies and favorable policies. And I agree that's a very valid concern. But that is a sign that the government (democratic or not), has too much power. Why would private individuals trade so much of their time and effort for sometimes nothing more than an audience with some of the most disingenuous and unprincipled people in society? The real solution isn't to stem the flow of money, it's to remove the demand for political power. Just as there was separation of church and state, there should now be separation of economy and state.
In addition, just as a given political political statement will never square with all shareholder, it will also never square with all customers, present and future. Thus companies, unless grievously threatened, will probably shy away from an overtly political lean. Afterall, both democrats and republicans drink coca-cola.
I applaud the SCOTUS for this momentous decision. A violation to the freedom of speech (and perhaps even more importantly, political speech) was remedied. We must remember that this doesn't somehow grant human status to a corporation. Instead it recognizes the human individuals behind the corporations. And while I believe that the actual effect will be very moderate, it still makes me feel good that the principles laid out in the Constitution still means something in this country. Bravo SCOTUS.
Snow
今晚下班晚了，半夜从公司往家里走。还没出公司的大门就看到门外大雪纷飞，平时熟悉的停车场已经被一层白纱轻轻的覆盖了。我小心翼翼的踏着雪走下坡子，慢慢的往回走。For about 5 minutes, there wasn't a soul in sight and not a single car whizzing by. The entire world was silent except for the distant humming of a building's heaters and the rhythmic crunching of snow under my shoes. 我突然发现我已经很久没有全心全意的去欣赏雪景了。就算前两天去滑雪我也没感到下雪的美。那是一种纯洁、温柔、让人觉得一尘不染的美，真的让我如痴如醉。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)