Only Change is Forever!

Puss in Boots

2012-01-27T18:13:00.004+08:00

I've not blog for a while cuz I've been busy with lots of stuff since my last blog. Works are getting hectic a bit and family as usual demands time. Anyway, I was still able to squeeze time to see this movie. Yes, it is a bit late, but it is worthy seeing.

Actually, I bought my wife and my 4 years old son to this movie and my son seems to enjoy this one much more than Happy Feet 2. However, my wife just thought this movie is so so. I asked her why, she said this movie is not as good as Toy Story! Oh, dear! how could she compares this one to the classic!? Anyway, going back to this movie....

Comparing to Shrek series, this movie is relatively straight forward. It doesn't have much sarcastic humor or plenty of references to other kiddy stories. Basically, the whole movies has 3 main characters: Puss, Kitty Softpaws, and Humpty Dumpty (the Egg). The human characters are kinda forgettable. It does have some funny moments here and there, and the actions are very good. However, the story is just a bit..... weak. It would be a much better movie if it can further strengthen the love between Puss and Imelda - his adopted mom, his days in the orphanage, and all that. Having said that, the relationship between Kitty and Puss, and the friendship/betrayal between Puss and the Egg are well written. To my surprise, I really don't have much to say about this movie. I just feel this movie is decent, worth-seeing, but not great....

Bose MIE2i

2012-01-16T14:20:00.003+08:00

Just got this pair of headphone via DHL over the weekend. Still trying to 'warm them up' by more usage. Comparing to my existing in-ear Ultimate Ear Mi 200vi, so far I found the Bose one is more comfortable wearing it. However, I'm not sure if I should try to larger or smaller plastic tip to give me better fitting, the downside is that I think the filtering is not that good versus the UE one. Thus, I need to turn up the volume a bit more on the go. Anyway, I hope this one is a good buy for the longer run, since the purchase is more an impulse rather than a calculated one. Cuz, I don't usually buy this kind of stuff unless the existing one is broken, and my UE is working fine so far. Anyway, my previous testing at Bose store was a good experience and sales on Apple Store doesn't come often, that just drive me to make this purchase out of the blue....

The catch for me is that I lately listen to podcast much more. However, this Bose purchase somehow drives me to listen to music more as a good headset should be used to listen to music of different genres. Anyway, I hope this piece of purhcase would give me more audio enjoyment for times to come.....

Real-time broadcast vs. On-demand

2012-01-13T12:08:00.002+08:00

I’ve not been an active radio listener for many years, particularly after I discover podcast about 5 years ago when I first bought my iPod Classic. Many years ago, when TV first became popular, it was said that TV would kill radio. Of course, that didn’t happen.

For me, podcast basically replace what 95% what radio can offer. I know there are still many people listening to radio, old habit lives. However, I think that with the popularity of internet and smartphones, the traditional way of media consumption is being changed which actually applies to both radio and TV. The change is permanent and there is no turning back. That’s why I’m very susceptible of some announcements in the last few years about some rich folks investing in digital audio broadcast, additional TV channels, etc. Those are lateral development of traditional media. The quality of sound would be better and there would be more choices in terms of content. Those things are fine. However, I hope their media development plans would consider the factor that I wanna talk about here: ‘real-time broadcast’ vs. ‘on-demand’ content. If they don’t, they better going back to do some brain-storming and go back to their drawing board.

Traditional media dictates what is being broadcast at what time. I don’t care you watch the shows on old CRT TV or new OLED screen TV or on iPad/smartphones, the channels are different, but what you see is the ‘live’ stuff that the media company is broadcasting. That’s fine for important live events, such as breaking news, sport games, stock market programs, etc., i.e. anything that’s time critical. However, for the rest of stuff that’s not time critical, I don’t think the new generation of viewers and those, including me, riding on the tech enhancement train, would still be willing to abide the broadcasting companies’ fixed schedule to access those non-time critical programs. In other words, we all want ‘on-demand’ contents; we want to watch what we want when we want it. Such concept has actually been well-known for decades. Just think about LD, CD, DVD, video tapes, etc, all these are recorded media for our consumption at our convenience. Now, things are just being changed to digital form without any physical media. Namely, that would be files for download or via live streaming. That’s what podcast and video/audio archive can offer.

Since my data plan for my iPhone is not unlimited, and there are still spots in the city that connection may not be good, I still like to use Wi-Fi to download files that I wanna listen beforehand and enjoy them at the time that I want. Also, harddisk is not expensive; I still like keeping my personal archive of stuff that I really like for my future access. I would say that 95% of my time with my iPhone with earpiece on is for listening podcast. Actually, I’m quite surprise about that as I always consider myself a music lover. I do have tons of music stored at home as well as in my iPhone, but podcast becomes my favorite pastime currently over music.

My podcasts library includes a few different genres: news, news critics, tech news, paranormal stuffs, comedy, talk shows, etc. I usually listen to those time critical one, i.e. news-related podcast first, then move on to the rest. Also, I prefer to listen to them on my iPhone rather than using iTunes at home. Cuz, I find the X2 feature (i.e. playing content at double speed) surprisingly useful for podcast consumption. Some people would worry that it may sound funny or the words would be said too fast to be heard clearly. Indeed, that’s not true at all. X2 is not X4, the voice of speakers are totally listenable without any issue. The best part is that I can finish listening the podcast in half the time that I suppose to spend. For instance, for a program of 90 minutes long, after skipping about 10 minutes of commercials by sliding the program bar and using X2, I can finish the whole program in about 40 minutes. That’s very efficient. I still have a backlog of programs pending to be consumed on my iPhone, also, the continuous finding of new programs and new episodes of existing favor programs keep my backlog growing day by day, that’s why they eclipsed my music listening time in recent months.

Anyway, going back the on-demand nature of audio/video archive, I think what the traditional media companies have to do for sure in order to stay relevant in these days and future would be:

Making sure you have an archive of your old programs if you don’t have one. Better be in iTunes Store or else.

Making sure you have an app in iTunes and Android Marketplace to access your programs. Cuz, I don’t think your content would be widely distributed if they can only be access via some specific standalone purpose device, e.g. TV, satellite radio, digital radio, etc. They are doomed to fail in terms of cost and hassle.
Be interactive with your audiences by using Facebook, chatroom and forum.
Designing your programs in a way that fit the new way of consumption. E.g. truncate them in tranches for easier digestion, more intact content on episode basis, etc.

As this new form of media content consumption trend is here to stay and it is very likely to replace the old format, I think media company better sit tight and prepare if they still wanna be in the game in coming years.

Life Lesson

2012-01-12T15:12:00.003+08:00

The following are by no mean all that I wanna say about this topic. I'm sure I will have reprise of that in future. But for now, here we go. Sons, I hope you can pick up something here that would benefit you somehow.

Don’t expect return when we are able to help someone.

Don’t forget the kindness that we receive from the one who helped us.

Just because we are able to do certain thing doesn’t mean we are defaulted and be responsible to do that thing.

We should keep an opened mind to learn whenever we can.

Knowledge is only one of few things that can’t be taken away from us.

The world doesn’t owe us anything. The world will still function with or without us. So, don’t exaggerate our importance to the rest.

Just because we can do something, doesn’t mean that we should do it.

Purely good or evil people are very rare in our society. Most of the people are no different from us. It is our tendency to be with people behaving nicely. So, be nice to people if we want to make friends.

We can’t please everybody, particularly if we know a lot of people. We should be true to ourselves, try not to do things that we will regret later. So, if we can do things that please ourselves as well as those close to us, most of the time would be good enough.

Lying is a difficult act. You need to have very good memory and logical sense. Sweet white lie once in a while is fine. But, being an honest person is more honorable and admirable than being a skillful liar. Rather than continuing telling new lies to cover your previous lies, it is better to try harder to get things right in the first place.

Once a person is found out to be a liar, it is extremely difficult for him/her to be trusted by others. One of the foundation of personal reputation is creditability, we don’t make friend with a person that we don’t trust.

The most admired persons throughout history are those that did great things to others, either through passing knowledge or inventions.

Don’t be fool by a person’s appearance. A person with beautiful attractive appearance could be result of plastic surgeries, makeup, or lucky combination of genes from his/her parents. There is no doubt that appearance would be helpful in social activities or opening to various opportunities. However, there is always other ways that would work as well. The most important thing is that most of those beautiful people in the world are control by someone who are not physically attractive at all. So, don’t lose hope for being less attractive.

Personality takes time to be constructed. It is easy to set goal to tell ourselves to be an XXX person, but it would take a time and effort to achieve that.

Sony NEX-5N and iPhone 4S

2012-01-10T11:09:00.002+08:00

These are the two new ‘toys’ in my household in the past month. I got the camera after chatting with my colleague at work who has a NEX-5 himself. After just talking for about a day, I made the decision of getting that camera in the following 2 days. Originally, I didn’t have any intention to buy a new camera, cuz my Canon has been working fine for my household. However, being a very attentive dad myself, I’ve been playing with my younger son everyday and see him growing up in front of my eyes. As he gets older, he began to express himself more and looks really cute as he loves to smile. I didn’t wanna miss the good moments of his development. Also, thinking back in the days with my older son, the best pics of him were actually filmed by a friend of mine who used a DSLR. Thus, I wanna to improve the quality of bb pics and also to get a new toy myself. I hopped into a store and got the camera. I was a bit desuaded by the sales that the Sony camera was made in Thailand, in contrast to another popular one, the Panasonic GF3 which was made in Japan. However, I further spoke to my colleague and tried the GF3 myself. I finally settled with the Sony one. GF3 is nice, but it is a bit too ‘plastic’, no wonder I found out afterwards that that camera is actually marketed towards girls. Anyway, I’ve been taken my new camera with my sons few times. The quality of the pictures is indeed much better. I’m not that big a camera person myself, but I would still hope I can find time to play with this toy and able to really use more of its functions, so as not to waste the money that I spent on this purchase (US$900 or HK$6,990). The good thing is that it is a kit set with 2 lens, an extra battery, cleaning set, and a bag. So, all I did was getting a filter to protect the lens. That’s all. It is not cheap, but with the quality, function and all that being taken into consideration, it was a good buy.

iPhone 4S is actually belonged to my wife. I’m still fine with my 3GS. As my wife felt that her 3G is too slow and can’t view the viewcams at home clear and fast enough. We went to her telecom service provider to get a 16GB white 4S last week. There’s no surprise for this phone as I’ve known about what I need and interested in this phone for months. However, the really cool thing for me is to play Siri first hand. It is really a cool feature, as I’ve believed all along, we are only scratching the surface of this killer feature at this stage. I’m sure we will see much more with this feature with more languages being supported and SDK being released to developers in the coming years. The only shortcoming of Siri is the natural shortcoming of spoken words itself. Namely, it strives and dies with your language/spoken skills, and whether you want to say certain things out loud or not. I don’t know how others view it. Sometimes, we do wanna keep our words private. For example, when I’m in an elevator with strangers, I don’t wanna use Siri to call someone by yelling the person’s name. There are things that I just don’t wanna say out loud in public. Anyway, I still quite enjoy Siri and think this function is here to stay. It will not replace text input, but just as a nice complimentary function or option for us to interact with tech gadgets.

Well, that’s about it. Oh…just one more thing, I’ve order a pair of Bose earpiece on Apple Store. Can’t wait to get a hand on them, will review that in future for sure.

9 thoughts to my sons

2012-01-09T15:03:00.001+08:00

I read the following article and like the content a lot. Just wanna share with anyone can read Chinese. If you can't, please feel free to Google translate it. Though it may not be 100% correct, I think you will get the points more or less.

梁繼璋的信

Posted on 2012/01/09

「你可以要求自己守信，但不能要求別人守信，你可以要求自己對人好，但不能期待人家對你好。你怎樣對人，並不代表人家就會怎樣對你，看不透這一點，只會徒添不必要的煩惱。」

名DJ梁繼璋寫了一封給兒子的信，包含了九件他要兒子好好記住的事，我十分喜歡。細看之下，我發現那九件事當中，可以找出一個共通點，基於這個共通點，我稍為改寫了一些地方，換了一些次序，給我的兒子和女兒。

1. 除了我和你媽媽，沒有人有義務要對你好，若有人對你不好，不要感到意外，你要靠自己克服。

2. 除了我和你媽媽，沒有人有義務要對你好，那些對你好的人，除了珍惜，也請多防備，因為每個人做每件事，總有一個原因，對你好，未必一定是真心，不必太快將對方看作真朋友，你要靠自己搞清楚。

3. 你可以要求自己守信，但不能要求別人守信，你可以要求自己對人好，但不能期待人家對你好。你怎樣對人，並不代表人家就會怎樣對你，看不透這一點，只會徒添不必要的煩惱。說到底，還是要靠你自己。

4. 生命短暫，愈早珍惜，享受的日子也愈長。享受的意思，不是說任意妄為，而是找尋自己真正熱愛的事情，做自己真心喜歡的事情。那是什麼，要靠你自己找尋答案。

5. 我不會要求你供養我下半輩子，同樣地我也不會供養你的下半輩子，當你長大到可以獨立的時候，我的責任已經完結。以後，你要坐巴士還是Benz，吃魚翅還是粉絲，都要你自己負責。

6. 人要發達，還是要努力工作才可以，世上並無免費午餐，而保持努力工作的秘訣，是做一份你真心最喜歡的工作。同樣地，要靠你自己找答案。

7. 沒有人是不可代替，沒有東西是必須擁有。只要，在爭取的過程中，盡全力去做便可以無悔。看透這一點，將來你身邊的人不再要你，或許失去了世間上最愛的一切時，也應該明白，這並不是甚麼大不了的事，因為你已對得住自己。

8. 雖然，很多有成就的人士都沒有受過很多教育，但並不等如不用功讀書，就一定可以成功。你學到的知識，就是你擁有的武器。人，可以白手興家，但不可以手無寸鐵，那是真正屬於你自己的籌碼。

9. 親人只有一次的緣份，無論這輩子我和你會相處多久，也請好好珍惜共聚的時光，下輩子，無論愛與不愛，都不會再見。

[YouTube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRnAxnbCUoY]

Nostalgia...

2011-12-29T10:07:00.002+08:00

I don't think it's because I'm getting old or what, I've grown to appreciate old music while I'm still open to listening to new stuff. Cuz, the contrast of the new versus the old is a way to deepen my appreciation of how the old affects the new. Also, music is like wine, the good old stuffs shows their staying power by the test of time. The following is by no a mean a top 10 in any order or anything, I would just say they are easily many people's and my favorites as well. They were tasted good back then, they are tasted good now, and I'm pretty sure they will still be tasted good for years/decades to come, as long as there is still music!

Frank Sinatra - My Way
I didn't listen to 'the Big Blue Eyes' until I was told by a female friend of mine more than a decade ago that, if you wanna have a romantic evening with a female guest, you can do that with a bottle of wine, candle light setting, and Frank Sinatra's music in the background. Then, I dig into a beat about this legendary singer, I got to say that, she is right!

Barbra Streisand - The Way We Were
I'm not a fan of her, but you gotta admit that this song is very good. I think I heard this song long times ago when I was really young, but didn't really get that in my head till Leslie Cheung sang that in his farewell concert back in 1989. Since then, I've linked this song with the concept of growing up and time passes.

Dusty Springfield - Look of Love
There are many version of this song. I learn this song from Diana Khrall. However, I've been seeing Dusty Springfield's name popping up here and there in some all time favorite list. After I listen to Dusty's version, I gotta say that I like that antique kind of sound quality in this song that those more polished one with modern recording technology. Just like old wine.

Louis Armstrong - What a wonderful world

This song is just timeless! When I was really young, I always thought good singers should have a clear, relatively high-pitched voice, like those 3 Tenors. However, since I opened my ears more, I listen to more kind of music, that changed my mind. Louis Armstrong's voice is old and rough, but man, how powerful and warm it is. This song is a prime example of how a great voice capture your mind with every words. I always think this song is a 'song of hope'. It is a very uplifting song to tell us that our problem is nothing, things will take care of themselves. Look, the world is beautiful, we just gotta look around.

Judy Garland - Over The Rainbow
This song, similar to the 'What a wonderful world' above, has been a favorite in singing contest. I didn't care too much about the original movie. But the original version of the song by Judy Garland is another story. I also regard this song as another 'song of hope', but this one has a bit more child's hymn kinda feel to it. Anyway, I love this song, so does my 4 years old son.

Nat King Cole – Unforgettable
I first got to know this song was already the hi-tech synthesized duet version of Nat King Cole and his daughter Natalie Cole. It was a nice duet in augmented reality. But, after digging in Youtube, I like the solo version by Nat much more. He is by no mean handsome, but with the great smile when he sang this song, how can you not like him and melted by his voice with lyrics?

Eagles - Hotel California
This song is one of the newest in this list. There are so many stories about this songs that I'm not gonna cite them here. You can google them if you want to. For me, I just love the guitar outro of this song and the feel of 70s in this song.

John Lennon – Imagine
Well, I like the lyrics of this song, but to me the best part is the piano sound which is so hypnotic. This song is regarded as 'song of peace', being a peace-loving person, this song can be a national anthem for any peaceful nation.

The Beatles - Yesterday
Beatles have so many good songs, it's hard to pick one. I can easily pick 'Let it Be' as another favorite. However, I think Yesterday sounds not only good, but only on a more personal way of expressing the passage of time and the missing of the good old days. The kind of young innocence that Paul sang is just priceless.

Elvis Presley - Love Me Tender
Same as Beatles, the King has so many good songs as well. However, I don't know why, whenever I think of his love songs, it will either be 'Always on my mind' or this one. Perhaps, the tenderness of this song that make it a bit stand out. I don't really like Elvis's image that much, but I've to say that his voice is magical.

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

2011-12-28T11:23:00.003+08:00

Over the Christmas holidays, I was able to squeeze few hours to go to see ‘Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol’ (aka. “MI4”). It is the fourth movie of Tom Cruise’s Ethan Hunt MI franchise. This time, it is directed by Brad Bird, the director from Pixar who made the Incredibles.

I saw all four movies of the MI franchise, I didn’t like the first one for the trailer was giving out too much of the movie, even the ending was shown. Also, MI is supposed to be a team movie, but Ethan Hunt’s team died too early in the movie. The sequel which was directed by John Woo was bad. I love John’s movies and actually there are few good scenes in MI2. However, Tom Cruise was too much of himself in that movie and I think John let him to do so to an extent that John lost his control in the movie to make it great. MI3 directed by JJ Adram was the best in the series from my standpoint. First of all, there was a team to be around Ethan Hunt and the script was tight to get audience excited. If you don’t care much about Ethan Hunt, at least you would care about his wife. Also, Philip Hoffman as the villain was a wonderful choice. Now, after few years when Tom Cruise’s career took nosedive, here comes MI4.

I honestly quite enjoy this movie, surprisingly the series of this franchise is actually getting better and better. Tom Cruise looks old but still very convincing in performing his role in the movie. He has a team of 4 and they all have their own shinning moments. The script is old fashion, but the actions and pace of the movie are good enough to make up for the lacking part. There is simply no dull moment in the movie for audiences to space out and look at their watches. I think, perhaps it is because it is directed by Brad, there are many funny moments in this movie, much more than the past 3 combined. I think that’s a good distinction from not only the past movies but other similar franchise like Jason Bourne or James Bond. Also, the sceneries in Dubai, India and Moscow as well as the hi-tech gadgets are all being used very well without creating any unnecessary distraction.

As an average movie audience without any particular expectation going into the movie, I would say that it is highly recommendable as a typical Hollywood popcorn flick.

In Time and Margin Call

2011-12-20T18:23:00.002+08:00

I saw In Time few weeks back. The premise of the movie is about sometimes in the future when time is our currency. Everyone can only live up to 25 years old and people either stay the youth look by working hard in order to stay alive or just die. It is a relatively low budget sci-fi movie which is something that I actually like more than those Star Wars type of movies that with lots of CG and explosion. In Time can be classified as a ‘thinking-man’ sci-fi that reminds me of other similar movie like ‘Gattaca’ which is quite similar in genre.

In Time is full of your actors as they have to be able to play the roles at the age of 25. I don’t really like Justin Timberlake, but he has a fine or I should say ‘fit’ performance as the leading role in the movie. Amanda Seyfield as the main actress in the movie is kinda wooden in performance. I can’t recall any of her look being stunning or memorable. The whole movie is more about Justin and Amanda going heist from being pursued by authority. The only few scenes that left some kinds of imprint in my mind are:

The ‘bank account in terms of time’ on everyone’s forearm to tell how long life is left
The scene when Olivia Wilde (as Justin’s mom!) and Justin runs towards each other as Olivia’s clock is winding down and she died in his son’s arm with seconds late. That’s kinda cheesy but touching.
The bank account of the rich man (Amanda’s father) in the vault was a time device that worth an ‘eon’.
The rich man introduced 3 chicks who are all young and hot as his mom, his wife and his daughter.
Another rich man gave his ‘time’ of more than 100 years to Justin and committed suicide as he found life is just too long and meaningless for living that long

I would say this movie is bad, but it can be much better for sure. Nonetheless, I have to say that using the concept of time as currency is definitely the most intriguing part of the movie that I like very much.

I saw Margin Call last night. It is a low budget movie that reportedly filmed in 17 days. There is actually not much to be seen in the movie. The premise is an office in Wall Street. So, most of the scenes in the movies you will see desks, chairs, Bloomberg terminals, conference room, elevator, and restroom with few outdoor scenes in a bar, in a car, street in a suburb, and the entrance and the roof of the office building. That’s about it. Also, there is no fighting, killing, kissing, love scenes, explosion, cops, guns, any kind of comedy or horror in this movie. So, what is good about this movie? There are two: acting and story.

The cast of this movie is superb! Jeremy Iron played the top boss of the ibank as a smiling wolf. Kevin Spacey played as a sympatric head of traders. Stanley Tucci played a senior risk analyst with dignity. The others like Zachary Quinto, Demi Moore, Paul Bettany and Simon Baker all played their part well. The lesson of the movie is basically all about everybody tries to save their own ass before the others. I think the pace of the movie is tight in spite of the lack of actions. Just watching the time lapse throughout the movie and see how actors interacted with each other is just entertaining. I strongly recommend this movie.

Samsung's flexible, see-through screen technology

2011-12-19T15:44:00.003+08:00

Earlier this month, I saw this on the news:

It is Samsung Flexible AMOLED concept being used as an e-reader, a camera, a video chat system, and an interpreter that being reported in news earlier this month. Certainly, the clip make the technology really amazing and I'm sure some people would jump on buying the first products that gonna use this technology. To tell you the truth, I'm amazing by this technology too. However, it took me less than a minute to think of a whole bunch of questions and concern about the 'practicality' of this technology on the proposed usage as it is widely reported in news stories - on tablet or smartphone. It got me to recite one of the memorable line in the movie Jurassic Park that I remember all these years: 'Just because you can do it, doesn't mean that you should!'

There are two aspects about this technology that I wanna talk about: Transparency and flexibility.

It has been the development trend of consumer tech products in the past decades that products are getting more powerful, lighter, smaller and stay affordable. However, the progress has been slowed down by many factors, one thing is the cost of producing certain parts of the product which would make certain good products unprofitable in the market, thus they aren't being produced. Another key issue that has been dragging the advancement of consumer tech product is the battery issue. That's why Apple has been amazing in the evolution of its products that they became powerful but were still able to stay the same length of battery life if not longer. I think battery technology is certainly lacked behind the development of the rest of other aspects of tech products. Going back to this new technology, you can make the screen as thin as light and as transparent all you want. What about the battery? We don't know how much energy this display will consume, even if it is 50% or more energy efficient, where do you put the battery with the transparent display? At the edge of the screen? Cuz, if the display is thin, transparent and flexible, but the other 'things' including the battery aren't, what is the point of make such ugly hybrid product? I mean...like roll the display around a solid rod of battery with chipset and other stuff like camera lens, unroll it when we use it. Is that the concept? I just can't imagine that being very consumer-friendly and cool-looking!

In addition, the flexibility of this display will not be much useful if the other parts are not flexible, again the battery, chipset, lens, sensor, etc. We consumer can accept things getting small and light, but still need a lot of education on accepting tech products being flexible, particularly on the durability part. We would think that bending such product will damage it. We have been told long enough of not bending our credit card, sim card, SD card, or other cards that using NPC technology. How would we be convinced to fold our new mobile phone or tablet even it is shown to be ok to do so? It will take time.

Secondly, about the transparency of the screen. It looks like a good concept, but not for phone or tablet! Why? Because we took our phone and tablet on the go mostly. We don't just put them on the table with a white background when we use it. Namely, we will always able to see other color in the background while we are using the transparent display. Can you imagine how 'messy' and 'eye-hurting' to look at things on the screen and behind the screen as the same time? I'm not talking about augmented reality which could be useful. But, while we are reading a book, playing a game, looking at pictures, etc. We don't wanna see other 'visual noise'! Thus, I would think that such new transparent display technology would be more practical to be on glasses or helmet screens or windshield in cars as 'supplementary' tool to provide information 90% of the time, rather than taking over the need of transparency of the screen. For instances, this new display technology can help us using augmented reality, as we can see some supporting information through our glasses, like seeing the prices of houses, profile of a person walking towards you, etc. Otherwise, the transparent property of this display is not much useful. Why I mentioned 90% of the time? The only 10% time that I think this technology will be great to be used on helmet or windshield is when this is combined with camera to provide an alternative view to help us understanding our surrounding when we are visually blocked somehow, like in fog, darkness, or else. If our car has infrared camera on, then we can see through the fog or darkness by displaying objects on the new display when we are driving or flying, that would be very helpful!

Thirdly, the only thing that this new display technology that I think is relatively practical is the thinness of the display. It means that I can be mounted on a thinner body to reduce the thinness of the phone or tablet overall. Since the body itself is not flexible, the display alone being flexible is no-use. In fact, there is only so thin our phone and tablet should be, particularly our phone. It is too uncomfortable to hold a phone as thin as a credit card. For example, we worry that we may drop it and fall into the crack on a sidewalk or in a pool of dirt water, or the product may overheat or something. Most of us do feel that we need 'something' to hold on to. So, I guess there is only so thin that a mobile phone that we 'should' make. As a side-track issue, the issue of earphone is also a concern for now. If the jack of earphone is thicker than the phone itself, it would be quite awkward! Though wireless headset exists, it is still not as good as the wired one in terms of sound quality, battery, and comfort issue, etc. On the tablet side, I guess that it is more practical to accept thinner model, even if it is as thin as credit card, that should be fine, because of the way that we hold our tablet.

Well, that's my brief take on this technology. I'm sure there are other ways to use this display technology more efficiently than on mobile phone and tablet, it will be up to the genius and the market to decide. However, I really doubt that we will see such products in use on phone or tablet in 2012 as some reports suggested, cuz other issues that I mentioned above woulds till take a lot of works to do before the product become financially feasible to make. Let's wait and see.

My way to see the world – words for my sons

2011-12-15T14:45:00.001+08:00

Dear Sons,

I don’t know if what I’m about to write to you both would still make any sense by the time you both are old enough to read and understand what I’m about to say. You dad (out of a sudden and for no particular reason today) would like to share with you boys his view of the world. I don’t know what will happen tomorrow, let alone years or decades from now. So, as of the time that you both are reading this post, the world will have definitely been changed for better or worse.

In various channels, like school or through mass media, we have been told that all human beings are supposed to be created equal and have free will to pursue our way of life. At least, that’s what they are told where we live in a relatively free, rich, and educated society. However, is that really true? Are we really equal and have our free will to do what we want? Some of us who think like sheeps would say yes. They would say that we can choose to have chicken for dinner in an eatery in a shopping mall that we choose to go, and bring along the mobile phone to play the game or read an ebook that we choose at the time that I want. Who is gonna stop us? Or, they would say that they can take time off to fly to a country of their choice to go sight-seeing and shop what they can or even can’t afford. Or, they can exercise their law given right to vote for the candidate to become the leader of their government. Who is gonna stop them?

Yes, it seems that we have freedom to do a lot of things and feel that we are entitled to them. Is that really true? Well… it is sort of true for people who are ‘narrowed’ minded. Why would I say that? It is because they are just too focused on their ‘own’ and doesn’t see things from a more macro-higher-up point of view. There is nothing wrong with them. They are just too ‘busy’ to mind their own businesses. They don’t care much about the world unless they feel that they are affected personally. For example, they would care about the earthquake, tsunami, and radiation leak combo that happened this year in Japan because they were thinking to travel to Japan, or they are sushi lover, etc. They just don’t care much else. The internet and technology do bring us closer to see what’s going on in the world, but the information overload has ‘clouded’ most people’s mind as they are being over-informed and misinform at the same time. The result is just as bad as those old days when the lack of information that made people ignorant of the world. The situation from my point of view is surprisingly the same – people are just disoriented and can’t see the world clearly.

I think that I’m fortunate enough to be able to exercise my ‘limited’ freedom to read and think in my spare time all these years to develop a relatively independent mind to form my own view on how things are running in the world. I’m not saying I’m unique or any superior or smarter than others. There are certainly other people who are sharing similar view as mine, though they are in small number. I’ve to emphazie that I can’t prove my view is the truth, but I just wanna share how I see the world as an alternative to the so-called ‘mainstream’. That’s how I see the world…

As of this year, there are 7 billions people living in about 200 countries in the world. However, the life and fate of the 7 billions may well be controlled by 7,000 or merely 700 people. The exact figure is unknown, my point is that the world is ruled by a very small number of people. I’m not gonna throw terms or teach you what politics is all about. Things should be looked from in terms of a spectrum, i.e. there are numerous degrees of grey between black and white. However, to make things a bit easy to understand, in terms of political model, there are the extremes of dictatorship and total free democracy, and anything in between. Many countries in the world are run by dictators. The smaller countries would be run by military dictators that get power through civil war or military coup to overthrow popular civil elected rulers. Those dictators will either keep their absolute power within their family or few trusted ones around them. For them, they will do ‘anything’ to stay in power as long as they can, a life term would be preferable, and create their own dynasty if possible. For some bigger countries where their political systems are not democratic, a big dominant party usually rules the country. Opponents are either allowed to form smaller parties or in the form of different factions within the big party. Regardless, the leaders of the ruling party would do whatever they can to say in power while they are in office, and would still try to run the show from behind after they left office. Namely, they try to be the ‘king-maker’ before they left office and would run the show behind the curtain after their official term is over. It is because they often try to do things that are either or both immoral and illegal that against the interest of the mass. That’s why they want to make sure their own self-interests would be protected after they left office. Anyhow, they always put to their own self-interest above the people.

Another end of the spectrum is democracy which suppose are for the people and the one who wins the most votes will be the leader of the country on fixed term with powers within pre-set boundaries. That sounds very ideal. However, to tell you the truth, as long as they are capitalist countries, the ultimate determine factor in victory and failure in election is money. Who control money, control the results. That’s why elected leaders of all ranks have to answer to their constituency (i.e. their voters) superficially, but in fact they have to kiss the invisible hands (i.e. their financial backers) that lift them up to their posts. Yes, voters can financially support their candidates, but running elections are expensive, and most voters are neither rich nor really willing to donate. Thus, the financial backers have their hands in the election. Candidates need money and the backers have money. Certainly, remember that there is no free lunch in the world. Those financial backers will ask for favor in return if the candidates are elected. So, it all comes down to when the interests of the financial backers are not in line or simply contradict to that of the voters in majority. Guess which side will the elected leaders tilt towards to? That’s why democracy is ideal in theory but it also has its dark side.

Who are those financial backers? They have many names, but they key to become financial backers is that they have to be rich. The richer they are, the more powerful they are. In reality, they are mega-rich, rich enough to run the world! You see, there are all types of countries, big and small, poor or rich, etc. However, one thing in common is that they all need money to function, so money rules! They need money to grow to become prosperous. They need money to feed their people. They need to maintain their national defense. They need money to provide services to their people. They need money to go to war if necessary. They also need money to recover from war or natural disasters. So, no money, no country!

Who have the most money? Banks are the ‘mothers’ of capitalism. They feed all companies and industries with capital to function properly. The bigger the banks, the more powerful they are. Each country (most of them) has its central bank which controls the fiscal policy and liquidity in the economy. However, the funny thing is that many of those central banks (I’m talking about the major economies) are owned by a ‘fuzzy’ list of stockholders, many of whom are actually the mega-multinational banks. Thus, they are actually the most powerful entities in the world, given big economies affect the smaller ones, not vice versa. Well, who own those mega-multinational banks? That’s a billion if not trillion dollar question. There are various conspiracy theories about who are the real owners of those banks, like some century old private banks owned by some century old families or Royalties. I’m not go into that cuz they are still partially subject to speculation and can’t prove if those conspiracies are correct without thorough investigation. However, at least up to the point of mega-multinational banks, you can tell at least how powerful those banks are as they are in control of the world that we are living in.

The world economies are already globalized these days. Isolated entities are hard to compete without forming linkage/connection/cross-ownership among themselves. So, what makes those mentioned mega-multinational banks that powerful are because they have formed closely grids of financial relationships with other big oil companies, military subcontractors, pharmaceutical companies, food producers, mass media companies and industrial conglomerates. Altogether, they basically control the lives of billions!

Therefore, my advice to you boys is that don’t just take face value of stories being reported when you boys are reading news through the traditional media. It is always worth to peel the skin of stories and take a deep look of the connected interests of entities behind if you don’t just wanna be fed with ideas superficially. That’s what intelligent and curious mind should do. Certainly, I can’t tell you exactly what difference does it make on ‘practical level’ for knowing the truth behind or simply take things at face value. Nevertheless, I always don’t believe that we should always just follow the ‘herd’ without thinking if it makes sense or not. Our intelligence is too valuable to be wasted!

That's what I wanna tell you both today!

Love,

Dad

My 13 predictions for 2012

2011-12-07T16:07:00.003+08:00

2011 is about to end. Usually, two things happen at this time of the year: review and forecast. Today, I’m gonna do the latter part.

I’m no prophet, but have long been fascinated about the concept of time. I remember that I made some predictions before, haven’t got time to dig them out today to see I was on the mark or not. Nevertheless, I still wanna make some predictions for next year. There is no proof for my predictions, just based on my ‘hunch’ or ‘gut feeling’ or whatever that I’m gonna listed out below each of my prediction below. Just for the hack of it. They are not in any order…

1. Syria will have regime change
Just another domino to fall given what happened in Libya and what the Syrian regime has done so far.

2. All NATO countries will pull their ambassadors out from Tehran
I think Britain is just a start

3. No war with Iran
I know the war drums are banging, but I think Obama is busy with re-election, and Israel has not yet ready.

4. A major earthquake of 8 or above will take place in N.America
I don’t want that to happen personally, but it is 2012 we are talking about…

5. Significant ‘Alien’ related event will take place
I don’t know what exactly it will be, perhaps something like an UFO will appear on top of a major city. Just a feeling related to 2012…

6. Titanic 3D is gonna make over US$300M in box office in N.Amer. alone
I mentioned this in one of my previous post, just wanna list it here again. I think the movie is a great movie when it was shown back in 1997. People will still flock to see it again for nostalgic reason and it will be a new experience for teens who were toddlers back then. In addition, Leo will become the sexiest man of the year.

7. The Dark Knight Rise will be the biggest movie of the year in box-office
A very safe bet, better than the Amazing Spiderman and Avengers.

8. George Clooney and Michelle William will respectively win the Best Actor and Actress in Academy Award
I’ve not seen the movie “Descendent’, but based on the historic records of the Academy voters, I think it is his turn (at least ahead of Brad Pitt). For Michelle William, I just feel that it is her time.

9. Apple will NOT release the so-called ‘iTV’
Not until 2013

10. 2012 is not the end of the world
Just another silly hype when we look back after Dec 21, 2012. However, I think a significant event will happen in 2012 that has long lasting effects to human beings. That’s why I made the Alien prediction above.

11. Window 8 and Window tablet will be duds
Most PC users won’t feel the need to upgrade given the cost and insignificant enhancement in functions. Window tablet is just too late to the game.

12. Deaths of 3 global celebrities: Thai King, Henry Kissinger, the Pope Benedict XVI
Not being mean or anything, but this kind of thing happen every year, just see http://www.deathlist.net/

13. Winners of election around the world
The U.S. – Barack Hussein Obama
He doesn’t do well in first term, but his Republicans opponents are just pathetic (except Ron Paul who will not be elected)
Taiwan - Ma Ying-jeou
He deserves it.
Hong Kong – Henry Tang
He doesn’t deserve it, but shit happens.
Russia - Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
No other bigger dog in the race
France - Nicolas Sarkozy
Sleazy bastard prevails in mud fight

The Truths about Cats and Dogs

2011-12-06T17:04:00.001+08:00

I came across the following in Yahoo! today and just made me wanna evaluate myself a bit. Surprisingly, I do agree with most (but not all) of the findings below.

Dog People vs. Cat People: The Surprising Differences

By Reader's Digest Magazine

Hunch.com recently polled more than 200,000 pet owners to find out if they were dog people or cat people. The site then crossed those responses with lifestyle surveys and arrived at the following conclusions. Anything sound familiar?

Dog people: 15% more likely to be extroverts

Cat people: 11% more likely to be introverts

Dog people: 36% more likely to use a pop song as a ringtone

Cat people: 14% more likely to cling to friends at a party

Dog people: 67% more likely to call animal control if they happen upon stray kittens

Cat people: 21% more likely to try to rescue stray kittens

Dog people: 11% more likely to say they'd support cloning, but only for animals or pets

Cat people: 17% more likely to have completed a graduate degree

Dog people: 18% more likely to consider Paul McCartney their favorite Beatle

Cat people: 25% more likely to consider George Harrison their favorite Beatle

Dog people: 9% more likely to think of zoos as happy place

Cat people: 10% more likely to send messages on Twitter

Dog people: 30% more likely to enjoy slapstick humor and impressions

Cat people: 21% more likely to enjoy ironic humor and puns

Both dog and cat people:

- Talk to animals of all kinds

- Are equally likely to have a four-year degree

- Dislike animal-print clothing

Famous Wrongful Predictions

2011-11-21T11:26:00.003+08:00

Happened to see the following in reader feedback to a tech story about HP, Dell and some PC makers thought the tablet craze has already peaked and they may pull out of the tablet PC market next year and simple hand that to Apple and Amazon. I did a little research and find that actually are coming from. Anyway, just wanna share here, cuz some of them are out right funny looking back....

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
-- Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
-- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year."
-- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957

"But what ... is it good for?"
-- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968,commenting on the microchip.

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
-- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977

"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us."
-- Western Union internal memo, 1876.

"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
-- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.

"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible."
-- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)

"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face not Gary Cooper."
-- Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With The Wind."

"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make."
-- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields'Cookies.

"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out."
-- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
-- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.

"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this."
-- Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads.

"So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't got through college yet.'"
-- Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and HP interested in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer.

"Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily in high schools."
-- 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary rocket work.

"You want to have consistent and uniform muscle development across all of your muscles? It can't be done. It's just a fact of life. You just have to accept inconsistent muscle development as an unalterable condition of weight training."
-- Response to Arthur Jones, who solved the "unsolvable" problem by inventing Nautilus.

"Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy."
-- Drillers who Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859.

"Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau."
-- Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University, 1929.

"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value."
-- Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre.

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
-- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction".
-- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872

"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon".
-- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873.

"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
-- Bill Gates, 1981

"$100 million dollars is way too much to pay for Microsoft."
-- IBM, 1982

"Who the h_ll wants to hear actors talk?"
-- H.M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927.

I found some more on my own, particularly words from Steve Ballmer, ha ha....

"Let's take phones first. Right now, we're selling millions and millions and millions of phones a year. Apple is selling zero phones a year....500 dollars? Fully subsidized? With a plan? I said that is the most expensive phone in the world. And it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard. Which makes it not a very good email machine.... In six months, they'll have the most expensive phone by far ever in the marketplace..
-- Steve Ballmer's First Take On The iPhone, January 2007

“You don’t need to be a computer scientist to use a Windows phone, but I think you do to use an Android phone.”
-- When asked about the Windows Phone competition in 2011, Steve Ballmer said.

My most anticipated movies in 2012

2011-11-19T21:01:00.007+08:00

Well, it is almost end of the year, as a movie fan, I would really wanna see these movies next year if I can.

Not in any order, here I go...

1. Avengers
Finally S.H.I.E.L.D. are coming together after careful planning by Marvel. We all know that Iron Man is gonna still the movie, hopefully most characters can be somehow balanced in the script and performance. Anyway, it is gonna be a hit without doubt.

2. Dark Knight Rises
I think this is gonna be the movie of the year. Great cast and Christ Nolan, can't go wrong!

3. Amazing Spiderman
I think the action is gonna be good and I've been fan of Spider-man all along, that's why I wanna see it. just don't like the idea of remake for this movie, there is nothing wrong with Tobey Macquire's version...

4. Expendables 2
Nostagia all over again with bigger parts from Arnold and Bruce. Stupid script as expected, but it is a guilty pleasure anyway.

5. Prometheus
Ridley Scott does Aliens origin, nough said.

6. Dark Shadow
Tim Burton + Johnny Depp + Vampire -> Sweet!

7. Total Recall
Just very curious of how they spend US$200M on this unnecessary remake with Colin as the lead. Hopefully, all the hi-tech gadgets in the movie and action would make up for low expectation.

8. Snow White and the Huntsman
It is gonna be a hit, very interested to see Snow White in action.

9. Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
Abraham as Buffy, just interesting!

10. MIB III
Don't expect much from the actors, just wanna see actions and aliens. That's all.

Just one more....
Titanic 3D
Just make a prediction ahead: this movie is gonna make US$300M plus in N.America alone.

A 'matured' sleeper

2011-11-14T11:38:00.003+08:00

Everybody sleeps, period! Sleeping is an essential behavior for our physical body to rest, to let our internal organs to do the 'dirty works' under a relative quiet and undisturbed condition, for our wounds to heal, to let our active mind to relax, and for memory to sink into our subconscious.

There are tons of books being written about sleeping, such as those about insomnia or sleeping disorder, dreams, REM, etc. What I'm talking about here is nothing that scientific or eerie, but 2 things that affect many people. I don't know if the subject of this post makes any sense to anyone, but I think I consider myself being lucky to be able to claim myself as a 'matured' sleeper from the aspect of not being exhibit the following 2 behaviors that many adults I know still can't get over with.

Basically, those 2 behaviors are quite similar, they are about not getting up when we suppose to.

The first thing is about waking up by the urge to pee. It happens when we consume too much liquid in the few hours before going to sleep. If we don't pee 'enough' before bedtime to go below certain threshold which is different from person to person, we will be due to be awaken by our body in the middle of the night with an urge to pee. For me, I would just get up and go to the bathroom regardless. Then, come back to bed and sleep. It takes just a minute or less, basically it doesn't affect my overall sleep. Certainly, it would be better if I don't feel the urge at all and can sleep through the whole night before waking up in the morning. Nevertheless, it feels very natural to me to just get up and go to pee. There is no struggle or second thought about this.

However, it doesn't work that way for many people. They have many reasons not to get up. For example, it is too cold outside their warm nest in bed. They would be worry to not able to go back to sleep once they got out of bed. As such, the most common and the dumbest decision that they make is to stay in bed and trying to 'ride' it out. Basically, they try to use their 'will' to suppress their urge to pee, and hopefully they will succeed at the end and can go back to sleep again without any issue till the morning. Of course, the issue that I'm talking about here is wet-bed or insomnia. I think that is nothing but wishful thinking. Unless we are waking up by a nightmare or something, if we are waking up by the urge to pee, it means that our body is telling us that peeing is more important than sleeping. Simply trying to use our will to fight against the natural calling of our body is stupid. I've no doubt that our will will win in the way that we will not pee in bed, but using our will itself is simply against the mechanic of sleeping in which our conscious mind is not being use. The longer we use our will to fight, the more awake we may become, also there may be more to pee. As such, we would just drag on our awakening time and lose time for sleeping. Usually, it would take no time for us to go back to sleep as soon as our will surrender and get our ass to the bathroom. For knowing of such, what is the point of fighting in the first place?

The second condition is waking up by alarm clock. Well, unlike the above, that's being waking up unnaturally. Does it justify for not getting up? I think not!

We set alarm for a reason. Unless the alarm is a 'false' alarm, we set the alarm to wake ourselves up at a certain time because we need to do 'XXX', may be going to school, going to work, going to do whatever. That is usually something important. For not getting up will usually come with a 'series' of 'big' consequences. Sometimes, it will ruin our day, or even ruin our life in the worst case scenario. So, what people do is to procrastinate their getting up action for one or few more alarms, like another 5 or 10 or 15, 20 minutes. If those people know themselves well enough, they may set their alarm 5, 10, 15, or 20 minutes early than they suppose to get up. That would be fine. However, some of them just don't and fooling themselves by telling themselves 'give me x more minutes!' They should be smart enough to know that those x more minutes are not gonna make them feel any better or make any difference. Theoretically speaking, I think that we would wake up naturally when our body is fully 'recharged'. However, if we need to get up before that happen for some reasons, we just have to get up since we basically can't tell how much longer we would need to sleep in order to reach that natural wake-up stage. Why bet with those x more minutes? Cuz, experience should tell us that what would happen next. I know know about others, I would just get up in my case and would drink coffee, chew gums or whatever later, and go to bed earlier next time for the sake of not allowing those extra x more minutes to ruin my day.

Well, that's just some thoughts about sleeping that I wanna blog about. That's all.

My top 10 desert-island Cantonese songs

2011-11-08T08:21:00.004+08:00

Not exactly in any order, these are my all-time top 10...

陳慧嫻 - 戀戀風塵

關淑怡 - 人生可有知己

譚詠麟- 幻影

張國榮 - 追

夏韶聲 - 結他低泣時

梅艷芳 - 似水流年

Beyond - 海闊天空

張學友- 李香蘭

葉德嫻 - 明星

林子祥 - 似夢迷離

My Dream Livelihood

2011-11-02T16:19:00.002+08:00

Everybody should have a dream (at least one), if not, what is the point of living? I’ve read a story or a life lesson of someone long time ago. I forgot who said it and the exact words being used, but the meaning is that “the worse thing it can be done to a person is to take way his ability to dream, i.e. make he/she feels hopeless…as such he/she would have no motivation to even wake up in the morning, and he/she basically becomes a living corpse!” Thus, just like Dr. Martin Luther King, I’ve a dream too, just not as big or noble as his. However, my dream is almost unachievable, perhaps that’s the difference between a ‘dream’ and a ‘goal’. Actually, what I’m talking about below is a dream livelihood that I would love to have. That would compose of a bunch of dreams or goals. Anyway, I would say that if I can have them all at the same point of my life and be able to maintain them for a while, that would be fantastic!

What I think would make up of my perfect dream livelihood are as follow:

Healthy body – it is extremely critical to have a healthy body in order to enjoy life. I don’t need to have the best abs or the fittest body on earth, just an overall healthy body that can function properly. By the way, I’m ok with the natural aging.

Comfortable wealth – Well, what makes me comfortable? I don’t have a number and I’m not outrageous greedy. So, multi-billions are not what I mean here. What I would consider to be comfortable wealthy is that I wouldn’t need to work involuntary to make a living for myself and my love ones for the rest of my life. Certainly, with more money, I can do bigger things or helping more people, but that would be no cap in that case. So, that’s not what I’m talking about here.

Owning a place with personal space – That would tie to wealth, so as few things below. However, I just wanna specify the conditions or things for easy understanding. A nice living place is important. I wouldn’t specify how big that needs to be. Cuz, I’m not shopaholic myself. I don’t need a lot of space to store collections of stuffs. Just a functional living space that I can relax at home, properly install my gadgets (talk about that later) and store some childhood things, that would be enough. The second key part is about ‘personal’ space. Certainly, the more spacious my home is, the more personal space that I should have, cuz I wouldn’t run into others while I want to do my things and others are doing theirs. I think I just wanna specify here is that I should have a shaft, or a corner, or a room that I can do my own things quietly without any disturb or interference by others. That’s what I want.

Healthy foods – I’m not a food critic or fanatic. What I want from foods is nutrients. Certainly, tasty and good looking dishes would be welcomed. For me healthy foods are typically fresh and natural. I don’t like possessed foods. So, those fancy color foods in bags with tons of mumbo-jumbo ingredients on labels are not for me. I don’t particularly care for exotic foods with expensive ingredients. What matter is that they are fresh and clean, i.e. are organic grown and free of generic-alternation. In terms of style or cuisine, I’m basically open to try pretty much anything. My personal preference is large vegetarian portion than meat.

Gadgets – These are the keys that help me get through the days. I learn, am informed and entertained by interacting with them. My gadgets include HDTV, iMac, PC, iPhone, iPad, sound system and all their peripheral auxiliaries. Basically, I would be able to access books, news, music, movies, videos, games, information, telecommunication, etc. through my gadgets anytime anywhere.

Comfortable clothes – For me, the basic function of clothes are keeping me covered and warm. Texture of materials should be both functional and comfortable. Cutting must be fit for purpose. That’s all.

Transportation – I’m not a car fanatic. Driving is fun in the right places and at the right time. I hate spending time in traffic in general. Thus, as long as I can access to easy, safe more-or-less comfortable and speedy transportation means conveniently, that would be enough.

Quality Family time – I’m fine to live by myself to do my own things, but also enjoy spending time with my family. However, the problem is that they are largely mutually exclusive. Thus, getting the right balance is the key and it is hard to achieve. So, it is a dream to be able to have both. The best way would be able to have time of my own undisturbed in my shaft and my family members can take care of their own, and share fun time together rather than troubles.

Travel – Being able to go anywhere anytime is a dream. I like travel, not that I have to travel very frequent. It is still nice to go to place in person to see things. Personally, I like take exotic trips rather than shopping sprees or staying in non-distinguishable resorts.

Voluntary works – There is only so much I can do on my own. Besides spending time on hobbies, it would be nice to do voluntary works every now and then.

I don’t know if my dream livelihood is too ambitious or not. However, reviewing my current condition, that would be largely unachievable when my kids are still so young. Nevertheless, I will keep my dream open and hopefully it will partially come true someday.

7 Billions

2011-10-28T21:26:00.001+08:00

Over this weekend, the 7 billionth person is supposed to born. Perhaps this magic number has already been passed as we all know that population count is still an ‘art’ rather than actual science. The point is that without our day-to-day awareness, human population is still keep on rising. For regular people like us, life just goes on. Being more responsible to ourselves, though we can’t stop others to have babies, we can still mostly control our own. That’s largely out of practicality as we only have limited resources. Being a responsible parent, besides the endless love and care that we can give to our children, we do need to feed, dress, and offer material goods/services to bring them up properly. In the competitive world today with so many people, particularly in urban places that we are living in, everybody is talking about getting our kids a better head start then the others, regardless of our kids’ natural ability or interests. However, what I wanna talk about more this time is actually coming from a macro point of view about human population explosion, what things may/will happen or for God sake already underway that would have dramatic impact on our and our kids’ future.

In terms of science or realistic social-economic impacts on how 7 billion people would do to our world, tons of information is available in the net, such as http://www.7billionactions.org . I would rather let the experts to do the talking. Instead, I would like to look at this human population explosion from conspiracy point of view which is less being covered in the press.

Challenging all you can, I believe that our world of 7 billion people is actually being controlled by a small group of rich and powerful people, perhaps by 7,000 or even 700. The point is that they have control over the most important resources that the rest of us are depending on, i.e. land, money, energy, foods, etc. We are basically their ‘slaves’ as long as we want to maintain our current standard of living or simply our way of life. Why? Because we are living in the system and environment that those people impose on us, i.e. capitalism and globalization. They set the rules that we need to play by. It is very hard to get out and live the life of social outcasts: I’ve never tried, but can easily imagine. For most others in our society, they wouldn’t even imagine or even try, cuz they just don’t even know there is other way. I don’t need to name names of our ‘owners’, you can find them easily on the net. Some people may be naïve enough to think that democracy forbid such concentration of power. However, I believe that democracy is simply a scheme with pleasant face value to fool the mass. Democracy can only be run peacefully and continuously with support by wealth. In other words, those who control wealth, do control democracy. So, you may ask what they all have to do with 7 billion people?

I don’t know exactly how many people our earth can support. But, I know the two following things:

- Humans, though physically are more or less the same, besides appearance and the minority with irregularities, we are all different from our birth till death. Why? Our ‘trans-life’ karma determines where we born, who our parents are, our level of intelligence, etc in this materialistic world. If you don’t believe in karma, you can’t deny the fact that we are all different in those aspects. As such, what we receive and exposed to since our births along with our growing experience are all different. As such, the material resources that we can access to would be unequal as well.

- Greed is part of human nature. We always want more. Yes, we can be educated to want less, but given the experience of having or not having things, many of us are gratify with having more. As the world’s resources are limited and they just can’t be shared equally, the poor are unhappy with what they have and the riches would not be happy to lose what they own. Inequity is just a fact.

Just imagine if you are in the ‘owner’ group for a minute. Yes, your peers would have their own personalities and views. However, since they have common interests and power, individuals may not be able to sway the majority thinking within the group, for the fear of being out casted and even ‘eliminated’. For such group of powerful owners, it is very natural for them to collaborate in order to maintain their powers by using the tools of the current system such as rules, laws, military and security forces, companies, trades, etc. Nevertheless, I can’t help but thinking that they would be very tempted to do things to make a ‘better’ world not just for themselves but for their offspring and successors as well. As such, I wouldn’t be surprise that the group will think that keeping human population in check would be one of their most important goals for the future.

So, what things can be done to ‘keep human population in check’? The definition is scary simple: slowing the growth or reducing it, or both!

Superficially, as our human population is in fact growing, it is diplomatically to claim in the public that slowing the growth is the goal. To playing along with that, the expected methods would be contraception, better education to women in the third world where population growths are concentrated, and more economic development along with acceleration of urbanization would the keys. Cuz, it is believed that more educated urban people are usually working too hard to breed.

However, since 7 billion is most likely being viewed as too many. I wouldn’t be surprise our owners would aim to reduce human population indeed. Theoretically, in order to reduce the overall human population when the base number is already big and ‘naturally’ there are more births than deaths, there needs ways to (i) ‘suppress’ the growth and (ii) ‘artificially’ causing more deaths.

In order to achieve (i), besides the superficial methods that are mentioned above, there are conspiracies are secretly being done to us and our children. For examples, genetic alternated foods are being used to somehow sterilize the mass. Most city folks don’t farm and depends on prepared foods. Small farmers are being squeezed, casted out, or controlled by big agricultural conglomerates who would use generic alternated seeds. Also, most livestock are also owned by big companies which control what they feed and inject in the bodies of animals that we eat. Meanwhile, many of us are educated and advised by authorities to take health-precaution shots for various virus or sickness. Would one of the long term side effects of chemicals in those shots be sterilization? You may say the government bodies and scientists are supposed to monitor the foods and drugs that we take. Well, not if they are controlled by our owners….

For (ii), it would be even scarier. How to reduce human population, aka increasing deaths? That can be done by many means. Wars, statistically and historically proved to be an ‘effective’ way to reduce population. Since most of us believe that aggression is part of our nature, as long as our leaders (if they are dictators of some sorts) go haywire, wars with other countries will happen, then massive deaths become very ‘natural’. In fact, wars have been with humans of all races throughout our known history. Peace actually is a rare phenominen of human beings. How sad is this? So, I believe that wars have been and will continue be used as a ‘depopulation’ tool by our owners. If you believe that wars can’t be and haven’t been controlled, think again! Most wars require resources, i.e. financial supports, so who controls money control wars. Go figure!

Besides wars, genocides also cause massive deaths. For example, the genocide between Hutu and Tutsis in Rwanda in last decade lasted only for few months, but hundreds of thousands of people died within weeks. People were killed by primitive tools, like axes and knifes. Someone may question how could that be controlled behind by owners? Well, with due respect to fellow human beings, I don’t mean to belittle anyone. I don’t care if they are Hutu, Tutsis or what. Just imagine, if ‘rules’ and resources are ‘somehow’ withdrawn from the ‘game’, and the people were remained with little to live on, with some ‘proper’ incitements, all hell will break loose to grab what’re left. No need to say more.

Human spirits can be very strong, but our bodies are actually very fragile! Massive death can also be caused by many other things, like ‘natural’ disasters (earthquake, tsunamis in area with large population), famines (in Ireland, China, East Africa, etc in recent history), and diseases (Black Death in 14th century Europe, Spanish Flu in early 20th century, AIDS, Ebola, etc). These phenomenons are well-known among the masses. Though they are horrible, comparing to wars and genocides, they would be relatively ‘acceptable’ by most human beings. It is because their occurrences are viewed as ‘natural’, so we can blame God, our Original Sin or even ourselves somehow, without knowing that those phenomenons could be initiated and controlled by our owners. For conspiracy non-believers, they only see those phenomenons as natural. For the minority of the masses, conspiracy believers, there are respective conspiracies to each phenomenon, such as weather control weapons, lab-created virus with specific targets in mind, etc. We certainly still have freedom to choose what to believe.

Anyway, just some random thoughts about overpopulation….

War's Remote-control Future

2011-10-25T14:10:00.002+08:00

I came across an article about the current/future U.S. military technology that is quite fascinating. Just wanna share with you all if interested ->

War's Remote-control Future
Unmanned drone attacks and shape-shifting robots

by Anna Mulrine

Global Research, October 23, 2011
Christian Science Monitor

The Pentagon already includes unmanned drone attacks in its arsenal. Next up: housefly-sized surveillance craft, shape-changing 'chemical robots,' and tracking agents sprayed from the sky. What does it mean to have soldiers so far removed from the battlefield?

Pakistanis hold up a burning mock drone aircraft during a May rally against drone attacks in Peshawar.
In 2009, the Brookings Institution estimated that unmanned drone attacks were killing about 10 civilians
for every 1 insurgent in Pakistan. (K. Pervez/Reuters)

In the shadow of a heavily fortified enemy building, US commanders call in a chemical robot, or what looks like a blob. They give it a simple instruction: Penetrate a crack in the building and find out what's inside. Like an ice sculpture or the liquid metal assassin in "Terminator 2," the device changes shape, slips through the opening, then reassumes its original form to look around. It uses sensors woven into its fabric to sample the area for biological agents. If needed, it can seep into the cracks of a bomb to defuse it.

Soldiers hoping to eavesdrop on an enemy release a series of tiny, unmanned aircraft the size and shape of houseflies to hover in a room unnoticed, relaying invaluable video footage.

A fleet of drones roams a mountain pass, spraying a fine mist along a known terrorist transit route – the US military's version of "CSI: Al Qaeda." Days later, when troops capture suspects hundreds of miles away, they test them for traces of the "taggant" to discover whether they have traversed the trail and may, in fact, be prosecuted as insurgents.

IN PICTURES: War by remote control

Welcome to the battlefield of the future. Malleable robots. Insect-size air forces. Chemical tracers spritzed from the sky. It's the stuff of science fiction.

But these are among the myriad futuristic warfighting creations currently being developed at universities across the country with funds from the US military. And the future, in many cases, may not be too far off.

Engineering students at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., for instance, are now experimenting with chemical taggants on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) like the ones being used in Afghanistan. Sure, the shape-changing chemical robot that slips through cracks may be more Ray Bradbury than battlefield-ready. But the Pentagon, in its perpetual quest to find the next weapon or soldier-saving device – and with scientific assurances that it's possible – is already investing millions to develop it.

"We're not about 20 years, or 10 years, or even five years away – a lot of this could be out in the field in under two years," says Mitchell Zatkin, former director of programmable matter at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, the Pentagon's premier research office.

The development of a new generation of military robots, including armed drones, may eventually mark one of the biggest revolutions in warfare in generations. Throughout history, from the crossbow to the cannon to the aircraft carrier, one weapon has supplanted another as nations have strived to create increasingly lethal means of allowing armies to project power from afar.

But many of the new emerging technologies promise not only firepower but also the ability to do something else: reduce the number of soldiers needed in war. While few are suggesting armies made up exclusively of automated machines (yet), the increased use of drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan has already reinforced the view among many policymakers and Pentagon planners that the United States can carry out effective military operations by relying largely on UAVs, targeted cruise missile strikes, and a relatively small number of special operations forces.

At the least, many enthusiasts see the new high-tech tools helping to save American lives. At the most, they see them changing the nature of war – how it's fought and how much it might cost – as well as helping America maintain its military preeminence.

Yet the prospect of a military less reliant on soldiers and more on "push button" technologies also raises profound ethical and moral questions. Will drones controlled by pilots thousands of miles away, as many of them are now, reduce war to an antiseptic video game? Will the US be more likely to wage war if doing so does not risk American lives? And what of the oversight role of Congress in a world of more remote-control weapons? Already, when lawmakers on Capitol Hill accused the Obama administration of circumventing their authority in waging war in Libya, White House lawyers argued in essence that an operation can't be considered war if there are no troops on the ground – and, as a result, does not require the permission of Congress.

"If the military continues to reduce the human cost of waging war," says Lt. Col. Edward Barrett, an ethicist at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., "there's a possibility that you're not going to try hard enough to avoid it."

Beneath a new moon, a crew pushes the 2,500-pound Predator drone toward a blacked-out flight line and prepares it for takeoff. The soldiers wheel over a pallet of Hellfire missiles and load them onto the plane's undercarriage. The Predator pilot walks around the aircraft, conducting his preflight check. He then returns to a nearby trailer, sits down at a console with joysticks and monitors, and guides the snub-nosed plane down the runway and into the night air – unmanned and fully armed.

The takeoffs of Predators with metronome regularity here at Kandahar Air Field, in southern Afghanistan, has helped turn this strip of asphalt into what the Pentagon calls the single busiest runway in the world. An aircraft lifts off or lands every two minutes. It's a reminder of how integral drones have become to the war in Afghanistan and the broader war on terror.

Initially, of course, the plan was not to put weapons on Predator drones at all. Like the first military airplanes, they were to be used just for surveillance. As the war in Iraq progressed, however, US service members jury-rigged the drones with weapons. Today, armed Predators and their larger offspring, Reapers, fly over America's battlefields, equipped with both missiles and powerful cameras, becoming the most widely used and, arguably, most important tools in the US arsenal.

Since first being introduced in Iraq and Afghanistan, their numbers have grown from 167 in 2002 to more than 7,000 today. The US Air Force is now recruiting more UAV pilots than traditional ones.

"The demand has just absolutely skyrocketed," says the commander of the Air Force's 451st Operations Group, which runs Predator and Reaper operations in Kandahar.

As their numbers have grown, so has the sophistication with which the military uses them. The earliest drones operated more as independent assets – as aerial eyes that sent back intelligence and dropped their bombs. But today the unmanned aircraft are integrated into almost every operation on the ground, acting as advanced scouts and omniscient surveyors of battle zones. They monitor the precise movements of insurgents and kill enemy leaders. They conduct "virtual lineups," zooming in powerful cameras to help determine whether a suspected insurgent may have carried out a particular attack.

"A lot of the ground commanders won't execute a mission without us," says the Air Force's commander of the 62nd Expeditionary Reconnaissance Squadron in Afghanistan.

Robots, too, have become a far more pervasive presence on America's fields of battle. Remote-control machines that move about on wheels and tracks scour for roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Soldiers in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan carry hand-held drones in backpacks, which they assemble and throw into the air to scope out terrain and check for enemy fighters. In the past 10 years, the Pentagon's use of robots has grown from zero to some 12,000 in war zones today.

Part of the exponential rise in the use of UAVs and robots stems from a confluence of events: improvements in technology and America's prolonged involvement in two simultaneous wars.

There is, too, the prospect of more money for military contractors eyeing a downturn in future defense budgets. Today, the amount of money being spent on research for military robotics surpasses the budget of the National Science Foundation, which, at $6.9 billion a year, funds nearly one-quarter of all federally supported scientific research at the nation's universities.

Military officials also see in the new technologies the possibility of savings in an era of shrinking budgets. Deploying forces overseas can now cost as much as $1 million a year per soldier.

Yet the biggest allure of the new high-tech armaments may be something as old as conflict itself: the desire to reduce the number of casualties on the battlefield and gain a strategic advantage over the enemy. As Lt. Gen. Richard Lynch, a commander in Iraq, observed at a conference on military robotics in Washington earlier this year: "When I look at the 153 soldiers who paid the ultimate sacrifice [under my command], I know that 80 percent of them were put in a situation where we could have placed an unmanned system in the same job."

Drones, in particular, seem the epitome of risk-free warfare for the nation using them – there are, after all, no pilots to shoot down. Moreover, the people who run them are often nowhere near the field of battle. Some 90 percent of the UAV operations over Afghanistan are flown by people in trailers in the deserts of Nevada. In Kandahar, soldiers help the planes take off and land and then hand over controls to the airmen in the US.

"We want to minimize the [human] footprint as much as possible," says the 451st Operations Group commander at the Kandahar airfield, where the effects of being close to the war are clearly visible: The plywood walls of the tactical operations center are lined with framed bits of jagged metal from mortars that have fallen on the airfield over the years.

While the distant control of drones may well protect American lives, it raises questions about what it means to have people so far removed from the field of conflict. "Sometimes you felt like God hurling thunderbolts from afar," says Lt. Col. Matt Martin, who was among the first generation of US soldiers to work with drones to wage war and who has written a book – "Predator: The Remote-Control Air War Over Iraq and Afghanistan: A Pilot's Story."

Martin agrees that the unmanned aircraft no doubt reduce American casualties, but wonders if it makes killing "too easy, too tempting, too much like simulated combat, like the computer game Civilization."

It probably doesn't reassure critics that the flight controls for drones over the years have come to resemble video-game contollers, which the military has done to make them more intuitive for a generation of young soldiers raised on games like Gears of Warand Killzone.

Martin knows what it's like to confront the dark side of war, even as he fought it from afar. During one operation, he was piloting a drone that was tracking an insurgent. Just after he fired one of the aircraft's missiles, two children rode their bicycles into range. They were both killed. "You get good at compartmentalizing," says Martin.

What worries critics is those who are too good at it – and the impact in general of waging war at a distance. Some fret about the mechanics of the decisionmaking process: Who ultimately makes the decision to pull the trigger? And how do you decide whom to put on the hit list – a top Al Qaeda official, yes, but is some petty but persistent insurgent a matter of national security?

As the US increasingly uses drones in its secret campaigns, questions arise about how much to inform America's allies about UAV attacks and whether they alienate local populations more than they help subdue the enemy, which the US has starkly, and almost weekly, confronted with its drone campaign in Pakistan.

From the US military's viewpoint, the drone war has been fantastically successful, helping to kill key Al Qaeda operatives and Taliban insurgents with a minimum of civilian casualties and almost no US troops put at risk.

Some even believe that the ethical oversight of drones is far more rigorous than that of manned aircraft, since at least 150 people – ground crews, engineers, pilots, intelligence analyzers – are typically involved in each UAV mission.

The issue of what's a minimum of civilian losses is, of course, subjective. In 2009, the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, estimated that the US drone war was killing about 10 civilians for every 1 insurgent in Pakistan. That may be far fewer casualties than would be killed with traditional airstrikes. But it is hardly comforting to the Pakistanis.

Moreover, the very practice of taking out enemy leaders or sympathizers could at some point, according to detractors, devolve into an aerial assassination campaign. When the US used a drone strike last month to kill jihadist cleric and American-bornAnwar al-Awlaki in Yemen, President Obama hailed it as a "major blow" to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. But some critics decried the killing of a US citizen with no public scrutiny.

Barrett, who is the director of research at the Naval Academy's Stockdale Center for Ethical Leadership, discusses with his students the prospect of whether UAVs make it easier to wage war if the government doesn't have to worry about a public outcry. "There are not the mass numbers of troops moving around and visible, so it could be easier to circumvent the oversight of Congress and, therefore, legitimate authority," he notes.

Others ask a more simple but practical question: What about the troops who conduct the UAV strikes from the Nevada desert – could they become legitimate targets of America's enemies at, say, a local mall, bringing the war on terror to the suburbs?

Some worry that the US is, in fact, placing too heavy a burden on its UAV troops. Despite warnings that "video-game warfare" might make them callous to killing, new studies suggest that the stress levels drone operators face are higher than those for infantry forces on the ground.

"Having this idea of a 'surgical war' where you can really just pinpoint the bad guys with the least amount of damage to our own force, there's a bit of naiveté in all that," says Maryann Cusinamo Love, an associate professor at Catholic University of Americain Washington, D.C.

She says the powerful cameras on the drones allow pilots to see in "great vivid detail the real-time results of their actions. That is an incredible stress on them."

It is also, she argues, a "ghettoization of the killing function in war." However justified the military mission may be, she says, "You are still giving the most stressful job of war disproportionately to this one subset of people."

Nearly as long as militaries have existed, they have invented arms to keep their soldiers as far away from danger as possible. Some sound ridiculous, others terrifying, but most have raised questions of fairness in warfare.

During World War II, Japanese forces used the jet stream to launch paper "fire balloons" rigged with bombs meant to explode when they drifted over US soil. One such balloon discovered by an American family during a picnic in the Oregon woods resulted in the only deaths in the continental US caused by enemy hostilities in the war.

For their part, US scientists experimented with a form of bio-inspired warfare: a "bat bomb" that they planned to launch in parachute-rigged casings over Japan. They imagined fitting the bodies of tiny bats with incendiary bombs on timers. The theory was that the bats, once dropped, would roost in the eaves and attics of Japan's delicate wooden dwellings, setting off fires. The technology was successfully tested but scrapped when it was deemed too expensive by the Pentagon.

On the Western front, Germany was experimenting with a remote-control tank known as the Goliath. It used technology pioneered by an American who had demonstrated a remote-control boat years earlier at Madison Square Garden in New York City. When he tried to sell his technology to the US military, however, he was met with ridicule.

"He said, 'I've got this technology,' but they started laughing – they thought he was crazy," says Peter Singer, author of "Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century."

With the advent of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, however, technology has once again rendezvoused with military necessity. A company called iRobot in Bedford, Mass., sent a prototype of its PackBot, which soldiers began using to clear caves and bunkers suspected of being mined. When the testing period was over, "The Army unit didn't want to give the test robot back," Mr. Singer notes.

While the use of robots that can detect and defuse explosives is growing exponentially, the next big frontier for America's military R2-D2s may parallel what happened to drones: They may be fitted with weapons – offering new fighting capabilities as well as raising new concerns.

Already, researchers are experimenting with attaching machine guns to robots that can be triggered remotely. Field tests in Iraq for one of the first weaponized robots, dubbed SWORDS, didn't go well.

"There were several instances of noncommanded firing of the system during testing," says Jeffrey Jaczkowski, deputy manager of the US Army's Robotic Systems Joint Project Office.

Though US military officials tend to emphasize that troops must remain "in the loop" as robots or drones are weaponized, there remains a strong push for automation coming from the Pentagon. In 2007, the US Army sent out a request for proposals calling for robots with "fully autonomous engagement without human intervention." In other words, the ability to shoot on their own.

"Let's put it this way," says Lt. Col. David Thompson, project manager of the Army's robotic office. "We've seen the success of unmanned air vehicles that have been armed. This [weaponizing robots] is a natural extension."

At the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Ronald Arkin is researching a stunning premise: whether robots can be created that treat humans on the battlefield better than human soldiers treat each other. He has pored over the first study of US soldiers returning from the Iraq war, a 2006 US Surgeon General's report that asked troops to evaluate their own ethical behavior and that of their comrades.

He was struck by "the incredibly high level of atrocities that are witnessed, committed, or abetted by soldiers." Modern warfare has not lessened the impact on soldiers. It is as stressful as ancient hand-to-hand combat with axes, he argues, because of the sorts of quick decisions that fighting with modern technology requires.

"Human beings have never been designed to operate under the combat conditions of today," he says. "There are many, many problems with the speed with which we are killing right now – and that exacerbates the potential for violation of laws of war."

With Pentagon funding, Dr. Arkin is looking at whether it is possible to build robots that behave more ethically than humans – to not be tempted to shoot someone, for instance, out of fear or revenge.

The key, he says, is that the robot should "first do no harm, rather than 'shoot first, ask questions later.' "

Such technology requires what Arkin calls an "ethical adaptor," which involves following orders. Learning, he explains, is potentially dangerous when it comes to making decisions about whether to kill. "You don't want to hand soldiers a gun and say, 'Figure out what's right and wrong.' You tell them what's right and wrong," he says. "We want to do the same for these robotic systems."

The aim, says Arkin, is not to be perfect, "but if we can achieve this goal of outperforming humans, we have saved lives – and that is the ultimate benchmark of this work."

Other research into armed robots centers not so much on outperforming humans as being able to work with them. In the not-too-distant future, military officials envision soldiers and robots teaming up in the field, with the troops able to communicate with machines the way they would with a human squad team member. Eventually, says Thompson, the robot-soldier relationship could become even more collaborative, with one human soldier leading many armed robots.

After that, the scenarios start to become something more out of the realm of film studios. For instance, retired Navy Capt. Robert Moses, president of iRobot's government and industrial relations division, can envision the day of humanless battlefields.

"I think the first thing to do is to go ahead and have the Army get comfortable with the robot," he says. One day, though, "you could write a scenario where you have an unmanned battle space – a 'Star Wars' approach."

These developments raise questions that ethicists are just beginning to unravel. This includes Peter Asaro, who last year formed the International Committee for Robot Arms Control. He's grappling with conundrums like: What, to a machine, counts as "about to shoot me?" How does a robot make a distinction between a dog, a man, and a child? How does it tell an enemy from a friend?

Such things are not entirely abstract. An automated "sentry robot" now stands guard in the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea, equipped with heat, voice, and motion sensors, as well as a 5 mm machine gun. What if it starts firing, accidentally or otherwise?

Within their own ranks, military officials are asking themselves similar questions. In March, the Navy launched a program at its postgraduate school in Monterey that explores the legal, social, and cultural impacts of unmanned systems. "Are we going to give the ability to a robot for conducting a killing operation based on its own software and sensors?" asks retired Navy Capt. Jeffrey Kline, who is directing the new effort. "That rightly causes a lot of red flags."

In part, military officials feel they have to develop these new systems to stay ahead of America's enemies, many of whom will be creating their own versions of automated armies. Yet that could lead to what some consider a 21st-century arms race and encourage others to use the new weapons.

Late last month, federal authorities charged a Massachusetts man with plotting an attack on the US Capitol and the Pentagon using a large, remote-controlled aircraft filled with explosives. Earlier this year, Libyan rebels contacted Aeryon Labs Inc., a Canadian drone manufacturer, about buying a small unmanned helicopter. "Ultimately, I think they found us through Googling. That's how a lot of people find us," says Dave Kroetsch, Aeryon's president. Aeryon officials say they get inquires from militaries all over the world, which is one reason they have decided not to sell weaponized drones.

In the end, the emerging era of remote-control warfare – like evolutions in warfare throughout history – will likely create profound new capabilities as well as profound new problems for the US. The key will be to minimize the one over the other.

"There are many futures that can be created," says Georgia Tech roboticist Arkin. "Hopefully, we can create, I won't say a utopian, but at least not a dystopian one."

Global Research Articles by Anna Mulrine

Metamorphosis

2011-10-24T10:39:00.004+08:00

M.C. Escher is one of my favorite artists of all time. One of his famous works is the ‘Metamorphosis’. I would say that I’ve reached another point of my life that I feel like I need to morph from one stage to next. Well, the change that I’m gonna make is by no mean big. It will be all within myself and won’t have any impact to the others unless I really carry that out effectively.

I don’t know about how others manage their lives. By reading biographies of famous people, they changed their lives mostly the results of some dramatic incidents, like Steve Jobs who got fired by the company that he found, or other cases like dealing with death of a love one, etc. However, I rarely read what made the famous people make incremental changes of their lives. The change that I’m talking about is not like changing from brand toothpaste to brand B. What I mean here is something like point of view changes that lead to change of actions, more or less in the self-improvement area. Of course, most biographies would only pick the significant events to write, it is really hard for a writer as a third party to write this kind of subtle smaller changes that went on inside the head of another person. Purely speculation would be more in the realm of psychology rather than writing biography. On the other hand, for autobiographies, people would usually write what they do and how they do, but less about why they do and particularly rare about what the causes behind the ‘why’. Thus, I don’t really know if my thinking process is any different from the others. I’ve not openly talked about this with anyone, cuz it is rather personal and I doubt people would be interested in how dots are connected in my brain. As such, this is only where I’m gonna talk about it, it starts here and end here.

As the name of my blog has said, which is something that I believe in, Only Change is Forever. The upcoming change is largely internal driven within my brain. Graphically speaking, it is like there is a fuse and there are few chemicals. Somehow, my brain mixed the chemicals to become fire powder, and I’m gonna light them up at the fuse. As this is a ‘controlled’ demolition, so it should bomb the ‘right’ way. With that, what is that fuse? The answer is the feelings of sad, unmotivated, exhausted, suppressed, basically a bowl of negative energy that has overshadowed my life in recent months. Deep down in my mind, I know that if I don’t do something about that, things will crack here and there and shit gonna happen.

Now, what are the chemicals? There are not related by any mean except in my head. These are just few things that happen recently that I happened to ‘receive’ them here and there and connect them somehow.

The first ‘chemical’ is a news story that I read about Steve Jobs’ comment on Android. I’m not gonna drill down that in details as I probably will blog about that separately in later days. The thing that I wanna highlight here is that though he certainly had grudge towards Android, but he reportedly, still gave advice to Larry Page, one of the founders of Google, upon his request about improvement in running Google. Steve told Larry to ask himself what the important things about Google are, and stopped doing those that are not important; otherwise, Google will become another Microsoft. Then, Larry stopped few things that Google was working on and began to focus on the five or six things that he wants Google to really do. What I got from this story is that as resourceful and super-smart as a big company, there is only so much it can do. On its way of development, it would still need to make decision to filter what are important and focus on them in order to be successful down the road. Well, I’m just a person, not a company, but I think it would apply that to me too.

The second chemical is a wedding that I attended recently which gave me a chance to catch up with some old colleagues. Nothing dramatic happened there, just some informal but candid conversation about the latest status of some folks that I know. Some of them are obviously pretty well off, at least doing quite well superficially. While others are fine but I would say that I ‘may’ be better than them in certain aspects of life. I didn’t really feel particularly proud of or bad for myself. I just reminded me that there are options. We can remain unchanged to certain extents while the world is changing around us. However, that may lead us to change involuntary later since the external factors are much powerful than us. On the other hand, we can make relatively controllable voluntary change in spite of being in a steady environment. Namely, we change before being forced to change. There is no right or wrong for either one, either way we will just have to bear the consequences. The bottom line is that I need to realize that there is always more than one way while I’m on my way.

The third chemical is a ‘semi-insomnia’ night that I had recently. I usually sleep well. Insomnia doesn’t happen to me more than few nights a year. In that night, I was doing self-reflection again. Somehow, I remember a story that may be I read long times ago, and maybe ‘partially’ made up by myself. It is about a Japanese Imperial army that had been left behind in a jungle in Philippines many years after the end of WWII. He didn’t know his country had surrendered, so he had remained faithful to his duty all these years. The perhaps ‘make-up’ part is that he found out the end of war from an encounter of an old lady who was washing her clothes at the bank of a river. He was trying to threat her somehow, and the old lady didn’t feel threaten, and just told him to just give up and stop doing what he had been doing. Somehow in mind, I emphasized that solider. Just like being struck by a lightening, I can imagine or visualize I were him. While looking at the sunset, with my dry lips, fatigued body, I disarm myself, and drop down on my knee. I feel exhausted and abandoned. Then, I just tell myself that ‘that’s it, it’s time to go.’

The result of mixing those chemicals in my mind is that I’m gonna reshuffle my priorities and then reallocate my limited resources, i.e. time, money, and energy, accordingly. Cuz, in the past few months (may be longer); I had allocated my attention and time on things that I found interesting but not important. As a result, I began to see cracks here and there. Though there may not be very noticeable by others (or they know it but just not telling me), I think it’s time to do something about them.

Of course, I still need to safeguard my privacy for what exactly I’m gonna do. I’m not gonna list them out in details here. What I would say is that, I just need to look at myself in the mirror and asking who I am to the people around me. The next step is to see what I can do better in those roles. That’s what I’m gonna do.

Hopefully, the ‘bomb’ will explode as planned, not on my face! i.e. things will work out my way.

Siri

2011-10-14T11:30:00.003+08:00

Last night, I upgraded my iPhone 3GS to iOS5. The enhancements from the previous version is more or less incremental. I would say that I can live without them, but they should improve my user experience as time goes. So far, I found the notification center to be nice and like the enhancement camera/photo functions (using the volume button to take pics, the crop/photo enhancement, and the album organization options). I may not need iCloud, but will give a try later tonight.

For other smaller polishes of functions here and there, I'm not gonna talk about them here as they are quite nicely presented in Apple.com or other great sites like ilounge.com. What I wanna talk about is a function that I don't have the chance to play with but it is certainly gaining buzz in the net as we speak - Siri, a personal secretary function with AI from a company acquired by Apple last year.

As presented in Apple's latest keynote, Siri can answer plain English questions from its iPhone owner in plain English. It should be a very useful tool to visually-impaired people, and people always on the go. So far, I don't think there is any dark side of this app being reported yet. On the contrary, I've started to find many funny responses from pioneer users of Siri who can get a hand on iPhone 4S in advance. Check this, this and this sites out. Simply based on my imagination, I would say that Siri will be viewed by some 'loners' as their virtual companion to talk to. Cuz, what loners need are attention and someone to talk to. Siri can say 'No' to questioner, but it has to answer that. Thus, I can imagine a loner would talk to Siri all the time in spite of rejections from Siri, the loner would still love it, at least his/her questions come with responses. Besides loners, most regular users can't help but would get a laugh with Siri's response.

On the other hand, come to think of it, Siri kinda reminds me of 'Hal', the computer with AI in the movie of '2001: Space Odyssey'. Damn! Steve Jobs is such a genius and wise enough to incorporate some kinds of AI in iPhone. I guess he must be smiling in Heaven if he knows what users will respond to Siri and be creative with this app down the road.

I'm sure this app will be viewed as a killer app for iPhone very soon and will be continuously enhanced. The potential of Siri is limitless. Just imagine, a robber with GPS turn on on his iPhone, while chasing by cops, he asked his Siri, 'Where should I go so that the cop can't find me?'. I doubt the current version of Siri can really help the robber. However, imagine the future Siri gives the robber a map and tells him where to go. Then, the cops ask the question 'Where would Siri tell the guy that I'm chasing to go while trying to loose us on the track?' Would the cop's Siri tell him where would the robber's Siri instruct?? That would be a quite interest scenario.

Also, would users be able to 'personalize' their own Siri? I think Apple may 'pretend' to let users to do that, but actually Siri is a master of its own. I'm not saying Siri will become the 'Skynet' in Terminators or the 'Machine' in Matrix, but I can't help but visualizing the relationship between users and Siri will some day make a switch from 'Masters to Servant' to 'Servants to Master'. Why I am saying that is because we are all getting lazy to do things ourselves, and becoming more dependent on machines/AI. Currently, we are going from searching the weather info from a weather app to asking Siri what the weather is. What would be next? Someday, we may be toying by the machine and become a slave of it. It is certainly a possibility.

Anyway, that's just some thoughts about this amazing app from Apple. Whether what I said will come true or not down the road, we will see.....

Rant from a Google insider

2011-10-13T14:10:00.002+08:00

Browsing in the net has been my hobby. I always can find something to learn or at least something to know while doing that, somewhat like women go window shopping and end up grabbing a bunch of stuff home. In contrast, at least I don't need to spend a dime to buy junks that block valuable space. Anyway, I came across an article in PCmag.com and then somehow got to a post in Google+. It is actually a rant from a programmer who used to work in Amazon and then now working in Google. He basically wrote an excellent if the not one of the best thoughtful and insightful rant about Google's culture against its fellow competitors (Amazon, MS, Apple, Facebook). It is a bit techie with some description that may not be well understood by all readers. This is the link to the article.

As I'm not sure if the post will stay for access for long. I'm just gonna copy and paste it below for anyone interested. Actually, the readers' comment on the post in the link above are actually as interesting to read as the post itself. Check this out.

***UPDATE***

This post was intended to be shared privately and was accidentally made public. Thanks to +Steve Yegge for allowing us to keep it out there. It's the sort of writing people do when they think nobody is watching: honest, clear, and frank.

The world would be a better place if more people wrote this sort of internal memoranda, and even better if they were allowed to write it for the outside world.

Hopefully Steve will not experience any negative repercussions from Google about this. On the contrary, he deserves a promotion.

***UPDATE #2***

This post has received a lot of attention. For anyone here who arrived from The Greater Internet - I stand ready to remove this post if asked. As I mentioned before, I was given permission to keep it up.

Google's openness to allow us to keep this message posted on its own social network is, in my opinion, a far greater asset than any SaS platform. In the end, a company's greatest asset is its culture, and here, Google is one of the strongest companies on the planet.
Steve Yegge's profile photoSteve Yegge originally shared this post:

Stevey's Google Platforms Rant

I was at Amazon for about six and a half years, and now I've been at Google for that long. One thing that struck me immediately about the two companies -- an impression that has been reinforced almost daily -- is that Amazon does everything wrong, and Google does everything right. Sure, it's a sweeping generalization, but a surprisingly accurate one. It's pretty crazy. There are probably a hundred or even two hundred different ways you can compare the two companies, and Google is superior in all but three of them, if I recall correctly. I actually did a spreadsheet at one point but Legal wouldn't let me show it to anyone, even though recruiting loved it.

I mean, just to give you a very brief taste: Amazon's recruiting process is fundamentally flawed by having teams hire for themselves, so their hiring bar is incredibly inconsistent across teams, despite various efforts they've made to level it out. And their operations are a mess; they don't really have SREs and they make engineers pretty much do everything, which leaves almost no time for coding - though again this varies by group, so it's luck of the draw. They don't give a single shit about charity or helping the needy or community contributions or anything like that. Never comes up there, except maybe to laugh about it. Their facilities are dirt-smeared cube farms without a dime spent on decor or common meeting areas. Their pay and benefits suck, although much less so lately due to local competition from Google and Facebook. But they don't have any of our perks or extras -- they just try to match the offer-letter numbers, and that's the end of it. Their code base is a disaster, with no engineering standards whatsoever except what individual teams choose to put in place.

To be fair, they do have a nice versioned-library system that we really ought to emulate, and a nice publish-subscribe system that we also have no equivalent for. But for the most part they just have a bunch of crappy tools that read and write state machine information into relational databases. We wouldn't take most of it even if it were free.

I think the pubsub system and their library-shelf system were two out of the grand total of three things Amazon does better than google.

I guess you could make an argument that their bias for launching early and iterating like mad is also something they do well, but you can argue it either way. They prioritize launching early over everything else, including retention and engineering discipline and a bunch of other stuff that turns out to matter in the long run. So even though it's given them some competitive advantages in the marketplace, it's created enough other problems to make it something less than a slam-dunk.

But there's one thing they do really really well that pretty much makes up for ALL of their political, philosophical and technical screw-ups.

Jeff Bezos is an infamous micro-manager. He micro-manages every single pixel of Amazon's retail site. He hired Larry Tesler, Apple's Chief Scientist and probably the very most famous and respected human-computer interaction expert in the entire world, and then ignored every goddamn thing Larry said for three years until Larry finally -- wisely -- left the company. Larry would do these big usability studies and demonstrate beyond any shred of doubt that nobody can understand that frigging website, but Bezos just couldn't let go of those pixels, all those millions of semantics-packed pixels on the landing page. They were like millions of his own precious children. So they're all still there, and Larry is not.

Micro-managing isn't that third thing that Amazon does better than us, by the way. I mean, yeah, they micro-manage really well, but I wouldn't list it as a strength or anything. I'm just trying to set the context here, to help you understand what happened. We're talking about a guy who in all seriousness has said on many public occasions that people should be paying him to work at Amazon. He hands out little yellow stickies with his name on them, reminding people "who runs the company" when they disagree with him. The guy is a regular... well, Steve Jobs, I guess. Except without the fashion or design sense. Bezos is super smart; don't get me wrong. He just makes ordinary control freaks look like stoned hippies.

So one day Jeff Bezos issued a mandate. He's doing that all the time, of course, and people scramble like ants being pounded with a rubber mallet whenever it happens. But on one occasion -- back around 2002 I think, plus or minus a year -- he issued a mandate that was so out there, so huge and eye-bulgingly ponderous, that it made all of his other mandates look like unsolicited peer bonuses.

His Big Mandate went something along these lines:

1) All teams will henceforth expose their data and functionality through service interfaces.

2) Teams must communicate with each other through these interfaces.

3) There will be no other form of interprocess communication allowed: no direct linking, no direct reads of another team's data store, no shared-memory model, no back-doors whatsoever. The only communication allowed is via service interface calls over the network.

4) It doesn't matter what technology they use. HTTP, Corba, Pubsub, custom protocols -- doesn't matter. Bezos doesn't care.

5) All service interfaces, without exception, must be designed from the ground up to be externalizable. That is to say, the team must plan and design to be able to expose the interface to developers in the outside world. No exceptions.

6) Anyone who doesn't do this will be fired.

7) Thank you; have a nice day!

Ha, ha! You 150-odd ex-Amazon folks here will of course realize immediately that #7 was a little joke I threw in, because Bezos most definitely does not give a shit about your day.

#6, however, was quite real, so people went to work. Bezos assigned a couple of Chief Bulldogs to oversee the effort and ensure forward progress, headed up by Uber-Chief Bear Bulldog Rick Dalzell. Rick is an ex-Armgy Ranger, West Point Academy graduate, ex-boxer, ex-Chief Torturer slash CIO at Wal*Mart, and is a big genial scary man who used the word "hardened interface" a lot. Rick was a walking, talking hardened interface himself, so needless to say, everyone made LOTS of forward progress and made sure Rick knew about it.

Over the next couple of years, Amazon transformed internally into a service-oriented architecture. They learned a tremendous amount while effecting this transformation. There was lots of existing documentation and lore about SOAs, but at Amazon's vast scale it was about as useful as telling Indiana Jones to look both ways before crossing the street. Amazon's dev staff made a lot of discoveries along the way. A teeny tiny sampling of these discoveries included:

- pager escalation gets way harder, because a ticket might bounce through 20 service calls before the real owner is identified. If each bounce goes through a team with a 15-minute response time, it can be hours before the right team finally finds out, unless you build a lot of scaffolding and metrics and reporting.

- every single one of your peer teams suddenly becomes a potential DOS attacker. Nobody can make any real forward progress until very serious quotas and throttling are put in place in every single service.

- monitoring and QA are the same thing. You'd never think so until you try doing a big SOA. But when your service says "oh yes, I'm fine", it may well be the case that the only thing still functioning in the server is the little component that knows how to say "I'm fine, roger roger, over and out" in a cheery droid voice. In order to tell whether the service is actually responding, you have to make individual calls. The problem continues recursively until your monitoring is doing comprehensive semantics checking of your entire range of services and data, at which point it's indistinguishable from automated QA. So they're a continuum.

- if you have hundreds of services, and your code MUST communicate with other groups' code via these services, then you won't be able to find any of them without a service-discovery mechanism. And you can't have that without a service registration mechanism, which itself is another service. So Amazon has a universal service registry where you can find out reflectively (programmatically) about every service, what its APIs are, and also whether it is currently up, and where.

- debugging problems with someone else's code gets a LOT harder, and is basically impossible unless there is a universal standard way to run every service in a debuggable sandbox.

That's just a very small sample. There are dozens, maybe hundreds of individual learnings like these that Amazon had to discover organically. There were a lot of wacky ones around externalizing services, but not as many as you might think. Organizing into services taught teams not to trust each other in most of the same ways they're not supposed to trust external developers.

This effort was still underway when I left to join Google in mid-2005, but it was pretty far advanced. From the time Bezos issued his edict through the time I left, Amazon had transformed culturally into a company that thinks about everything in a services-first fashion. It is now fundamental to how they approach all designs, including internal designs for stuff that might never see the light of day externally.

At this point they don't even do it out of fear of being fired. I mean, they're still afraid of that; it's pretty much part of daily life there, working for the Dread Pirate Bezos and all. But they do services because they've come to understand that it's the Right Thing. There are without question pros and cons to the SOA approach, and some of the cons are pretty long. But overall it's the right thing because SOA-driven design enables Platforms.

That's what Bezos was up to with his edict, of course. He didn't (and doesn't) care even a tiny bit about the well-being of the teams, nor about what technologies they use, nor in fact any detail whatsoever about how they go about their business unless they happen to be screwing up. But Bezos realized long before the vast majority of Amazonians that Amazon needs to be a platform.

You wouldn't really think that an online bookstore needs to be an extensible, programmable platform. Would you?

Well, the first big thing Bezos realized is that the infrastructure they'd built for selling and shipping books and sundry could be transformed an excellent repurposable computing platform. So now they have the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud, and the Amazon Elastic MapReduce, and the Amazon Relational Database Service, and a whole passel' o' other services browsable at aws.amazon.com. These services host the backends for some pretty successful companies, reddit being my personal favorite of the bunch.

The other big realization he had was that he can't always build the right thing. I think Larry Tesler might have struck some kind of chord in Bezos when he said his mom couldn't use the goddamn website. It's not even super clear whose mom he was talking about, and doesn't really matter, because nobody's mom can use the goddamn website. In fact I myself find the website disturbingly daunting, and I worked there for over half a decade. I've just learned to kinda defocus my eyes and concentrate on the million or so pixels near the center of the page above the fold.

I'm not really sure how Bezos came to this realization -- the insight that he can't build one product and have it be right for everyone. But it doesn't matter, because he gets it. There's actually a formal name for this phenomenon. It's called Accessibility, and it's the most important thing in the computing world.

The. Most. Important. Thing.

If you're sorta thinking, "huh? You mean like, blind and deaf people Accessibility?" then you're not alone, because I've come to understand that there are lots and LOTS of people just like you: people for whom this idea does not have the right Accessibility, so it hasn't been able to get through to you yet. It's not your fault for not understanding, any more than it would be your fault for being blind or deaf or motion-restricted or living with any other disability. When software -- or idea-ware for that matter -- fails to be accessible to anyone for any reason, it is the fault of the software or of the messaging of the idea. It is an Accessibility failure.

Like anything else big and important in life, Accessibility has an evil twin who, jilted by the unbalanced affection displayed by their parents in their youth, has grown into an equally powerful Arch-Nemesis (yes, there's more than one nemesis to accessibility) named Security. And boy howdy are the two ever at odds.

But I'll argue that Accessibility is actually more important than Security because dialing Accessibility to zero means you have no product at all, whereas dialing Security to zero can still get you a reasonably successful product such as the Playstation Network.

So yeah. In case you hadn't noticed, I could actually write a book on this topic. A fat one, filled with amusing anecdotes about ants and rubber mallets at companies I've worked at. But I will never get this little rant published, and you'll never get it read, unless I start to wrap up.

That one last thing that Google doesn't do well is Platforms. We don't understand platforms. We don't "get" platforms. Some of you do, but you are the minority. This has become painfully clear to me over the past six years. I was kind of hoping that competitive pressure from Microsoft and Amazon and more recently Facebook would make us wake up collectively and start doing universal services. Not in some sort of ad-hoc, half-assed way, but in more or less the same way Amazon did it: all at once, for real, no cheating, and treating it as our top priority from now on.

But no. No, it's like our tenth or eleventh priority. Or fifteenth, I don't know. It's pretty low. There are a few teams who treat the idea very seriously, but most teams either don't think about it all, ever, or only a small percentage of them think about it in a very small way.

It's a big stretch even to get most teams to offer a stubby service to get programmatic access to their data and computations. Most of them think they're building products. And a stubby service is a pretty pathetic service. Go back and look at that partial list of learnings from Amazon, and tell me which ones Stubby gives you out of the box. As far as I'm concerned, it's none of them. Stubby's great, but it's like parts when you need a car.

A product is useless without a platform, or more precisely and accurately, a platform-less product will always be replaced by an equivalent platform-ized product.

Google+ is a prime example of our complete failure to understand platforms from the very highest levels of executive leadership (hi Larry, Sergey, Eric, Vic, howdy howdy) down to the very lowest leaf workers (hey yo). We all don't get it. The Golden Rule of platforms is that you Eat Your Own Dogfood. The Google+ platform is a pathetic afterthought. We had no API at all at launch, and last I checked, we had one measly API call. One of the team members marched in and told me about it when they launched, and I asked: "So is it the Stalker API?" She got all glum and said "Yeah." I mean, I was joking, but no... the only API call we offer is to get someone's stream. So I guess the joke was on me.

Microsoft has known about the Dogfood rule for at least twenty years. It's been part of their culture for a whole generation now. You don't eat People Food and give your developers Dog Food. Doing that is simply robbing your long-term platform value for short-term successes. Platforms are all about long-term thinking.

Google+ is a knee-jerk reaction, a study in short-term thinking, predicated on the incorrect notion that Facebook is successful because they built a great product. But that's not why they are successful. Facebook is successful because they built an entire constellation of products by allowing other people to do the work. So Facebook is different for everyone. Some people spend all their time on Mafia Wars. Some spend all their time on Farmville. There are hundreds or maybe thousands of different high-quality time sinks available, so there's something there for everyone.

Our Google+ team took a look at the aftermarket and said: "Gosh, it looks like we need some games. Let's go contract someone to, um, write some games for us." Do you begin to see how incredibly wrong that thinking is now? The problem is that we are trying to predict what people want and deliver it for them.

You can't do that. Not really. Not reliably. There have been precious few people in the world, over the entire history of computing, who have been able to do it reliably. Steve Jobs was one of them. We don't have a Steve Jobs here. I'm sorry, but we don't.

Larry Tesler may have convinced Bezos that he was no Steve Jobs, but Bezos realized that he didn't need to be a Steve Jobs in order to provide everyone with the right products: interfaces and workflows that they liked and felt at ease with. He just needed to enable third-party developers to do it, and it would happen automatically.

I apologize to those (many) of you for whom all this stuff I'm saying is incredibly obvious, because yeah. It's incredibly frigging obvious. Except we're not doing it. We don't get Platforms, and we don't get Accessibility. The two are basically the same thing, because platforms solve accessibility. A platform is accessibility.

So yeah, Microsoft gets it. And you know as well as I do how surprising that is, because they don't "get" much of anything, really. But they understand platforms as a purely accidental outgrowth of having started life in the business of providing platforms. So they have thirty-plus years of learning in this space. And if you go to msdn.com, and spend some time browsing, and you've never seen it before, prepare to be amazed. Because it's staggeringly huge. They have thousands, and thousands, and THOUSANDS of API calls. They have a HUGE platform. Too big in fact, because they can't design for squat, but at least they're doing it.

Amazon gets it. Amazon's AWS (aws.amazon.com) is incredible. Just go look at it. Click around. It's embarrassing. We don't have any of that stuff.

Apple gets it, obviously. They've made some fundamentally non-open choices, particularly around their mobile platform. But they understand accessibility and they understand the power of third-party development and they eat their dogfood. And you know what? They make pretty good dogfood. Their APIs are a hell of a lot cleaner than Microsoft's, and have been since time immemorial.

Facebook gets it. That's what really worries me. That's what got me off my lazy butt to write this thing. I hate blogging. I hate... plussing, or whatever it's called when you do a massive rant in Google+ even though it's a terrible venue for it but you do it anyway because in the end you really do want Google to be successful. And I do! I mean, Facebook wants me there, and it'd be pretty easy to just go. But Google is home, so I'm insisting that we have this little family intervention, uncomfortable as it might be.

After you've marveled at the platform offerings of Microsoft and Amazon, and Facebook I guess (I didn't look because I didn't want to get too depressed), head over to developers.google.com and browse a little. Pretty big difference, eh? It's like what your fifth-grade nephew might mock up if he were doing an assignment to demonstrate what a big powerful platform company might be building if all they had, resource-wise, was one fifth grader.

Please don't get me wrong here -- I know for a fact that the dev-rel team has had to FIGHT to get even this much available externally. They're kicking ass as far as I'm concerned, because they DO get platforms, and they are struggling heroically to try to create one in an environment that is at best platform-apathetic, and at worst often openly hostile to the idea.

I'm just frankly describing what developers.google.com looks like to an outsider. It looks childish. Where's the Maps APIs in there for Christ's sake? Some of the things in there are labs projects. And the APIs for everything I clicked were... they were paltry. They were obviously dog food. Not even good organic stuff. Compared to our internal APIs it's all snouts and horse hooves.

And also don't get me wrong about Google+. They're far from the only offenders. This is a cultural thing. What we have going on internally is basically a war, with the underdog minority Platformers fighting a more or less losing battle against the Mighty Funded Confident Producters.

Any teams that have successfully internalized the notion that they should be externally programmable platforms from the ground up are underdogs -- Maps and Docs come to mind, and I know GMail is making overtures in that direction. But it's hard for them to get funding for it because it's not part of our culture. Maestro's funding is a feeble thing compared to the gargantuan Microsoft Office programming platform: it's a fluffy rabbit versus a T-Rex. The Docs team knows they'll never be competitive with Office until they can match its scripting facilities, but they're not getting any resource love. I mean, I assume they're not, given that Apps Script only works in Spreadsheet right now, and it doesn't even have keyboard shortcuts as part of its API. That team looks pretty unloved to me.

Ironically enough, Wave was a great platform, may they rest in peace. But making something a platform is not going to make you an instant success. A platform needs a killer app. Facebook -- that is, the stock service they offer with walls and friends and such -- is the killer app for the Facebook Platform. And it is a very serious mistake to conclude that the Facebook App could have been anywhere near as successful without the Facebook Platform.

You know how people are always saying Google is arrogant? I'm a Googler, so I get as irritated as you do when people say that. We're not arrogant, by and large. We're, like, 99% Arrogance-Free. I did start this post -- if you'll reach back into distant memory -- by describing Google as "doing everything right". We do mean well, and for the most part when people say we're arrogant it's because we didn't hire them, or they're unhappy with our policies, or something along those lines. They're inferring arrogance because it makes them feel better.

But when we take the stance that we know how to design the perfect product for everyone, and believe you me, I hear that a lot, then we're being fools. You can attribute it to arrogance, or naivete, or whatever -- it doesn't matter in the end, because it's foolishness. There IS no perfect product for everyone.

And so we wind up with a browser that doesn't let you set the default font size. Talk about an affront to Accessibility. I mean, as I get older I'm actually going blind. For real. I've been nearsighted all my life, and once you hit 40 years old you stop being able to see things up close. So font selection becomes this life-or-death thing: it can lock you out of the product completely. But the Chrome team is flat-out arrogant here: they want to build a zero-configuration product, and they're quite brazen about it, and Fuck You if you're blind or deaf or whatever. Hit Ctrl-+ on every single page visit for the rest of your life.

It's not just them. It's everyone. The problem is that we're a Product Company through and through. We built a successful product with broad appeal -- our search, that is -- and that wild success has biased us.

Amazon was a product company too, so it took an out-of-band force to make Bezos understand the need for a platform. That force was their evaporating margins; he was cornered and had to think of a way out. But all he had was a bunch of engineers and all these computers... if only they could be monetized somehow... you can see how he arrived at AWS, in hindsight.

Microsoft started out as a platform, so they've just had lots of practice at it.

Facebook, though: they worry me. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure they started off as a Product and they rode that success pretty far. So I'm not sure exactly how they made the transition to a platform. It was a relatively long time ago, since they had to be a platform before (now very old) things like Mafia Wars could come along.

Maybe they just looked at us and asked: "How can we beat Google? What are they missing?"

The problem we face is pretty huge, because it will take a dramatic cultural change in order for us to start catching up. We don't do internal service-oriented platforms, and we just as equally don't do external ones. This means that the "not getting it" is endemic across the company: the PMs don't get it, the engineers don't get it, the product teams don't get it, nobody gets it. Even if individuals do, even if YOU do, it doesn't matter one bit unless we're treating it as an all-hands-on-deck emergency. We can't keep launching products and pretending we'll turn them into magical beautiful extensible platforms later. We've tried that and it's not working.

The Golden Rule of Platforms, "Eat Your Own Dogfood", can be rephrased as "Start with a Platform, and Then Use it for Everything." You can't just bolt it on later. Certainly not easily at any rate -- ask anyone who worked on platformizing MS Office. Or anyone who worked on platformizing Amazon. If you delay it, it'll be ten times as much work as just doing it correctly up front. You can't cheat. You can't have secret back doors for internal apps to get special priority access, not for ANY reason. You need to solve the hard problems up front.

I'm not saying it's too late for us, but the longer we wait, the closer we get to being Too Late.

I honestly don't know how to wrap this up. I've said pretty much everything I came here to say today. This post has been six years in the making. I'm sorry if I wasn't gentle enough, or if I misrepresented some product or team or person, or if we're actually doing LOTS of platform stuff and it just so happens that I and everyone I ever talk to has just never heard about it. I'm sorry.

But we've gotta start doing this right.

Time Travel

2011-10-11T18:44:00.002+08:00

The recent news reported that scientists have claimed the discovery of sub-atomic particles apparently traveling faster than light. As such, Einstein’s special theory of relativity is being challenged. That also leads to some people rethinking about the possibility of time travel where the basic premise of which was travelling faster than light. Of course, it is still just talks for the moment as everything about time travel is very much way beyond what current level of science can do. Anyway, I’ve long been fascinated of the whole idea of time travel since I was a kid. Though I’m relatively more matured and rational these days, I still love to read anything about time travel every now and then. For those who are interested, just Google it or searches it on Youtube, there are a lot of materials that are entertaining as well as educational about this topic.

I’m no expert in talking about the scientific side of time travel, so those terms like wormhole, parallel universe, etc are totally beyond me. However, having reading or watching materials that related to time travel myself, I do have some thoughts about this topic myself that I guess nobody would care, but I just wanna talk about them here anyway.

The basic idea is that if time travel is possible and I am given the opportunity to do so, what I would think next?

I guess that the following would be questions that I would ask:

- Is the time travel process itself safe? I.e. would there be any health consequence, such as exposure to radiation or rapid aging?

- How long would it take to travel? Is that proportional to how far back the time that I wanna go? Cuz, let’s say if it take a month to travel back a year of time, I may not wanna go.

- How accurate is the time and destination of the process? Any ‘undo’ button?

- How to determine if the destination is safe in physical sense? Cuz that would basically determine the risk of travel. E.g. if the current place of destination is on land, but it was actually in the middle of ocean back then, I may sink into the ocean once I got there.

- Would I be able to come back? That’s the key question. If the answer is no, then, forget it.

- Given if I can come back, at what point I should/can come back to? Let’s say I begin my trip on Jan 1, 1pm. Should I come back on Jan 1, 1:01pm? Let’s say if I go back to the past and stay there for 24 hours, if I come back at the mentioned time, theoretically, I should age for 1 extra day which is not much. However, if I stay in the past for a longer period of time, then I may be much older suddenly when I come back to current time. That would be an issue.

- Also, can time travel allow me to go to future? Or just in the past?

- Can I bring something from the past to present or bring something from the present back to the past?

Actually, come to think of the above, particularly the last question, it is a very important one. I don’t know about the others, for me, the greatest attraction of time travel is to have a first person view of some historical events and the world in the past. My greatest concern, beside my own safety, is whether my presence in the past would have any butterfly effect to the world that would change history. Then, you may ask what could change history? I guess bringing something from the present or vice versa would do. Just imagine what would happen if I left a handgun 1000 years ago, or left an iPhone for Da Vinci to find. I think that I have the ability to suppress my temptation to bring something from the past to present as souvenirs. However, bring something from present to the past would be hard not to do, especially for keeping my safety sake. Yes, I can bring whatever I brought to the past back with me, but that can’t be for sure. The only way to make sure I will not leave anything in the past is not to bring anything. But, that would be a very tough decision to make, unless it is like in the ‘Terminator’ movie that only our naked body can travel through time and I can’t bring anything with me. But that would be too risky for me and also gives me the great concern on exactly by what mean I would use to travel through time. Is it a machine like a time capsule? Or else. Cuz, if such device exists, I can use it to travel back in time alright, but how can I find it in or carry that with me to the past which allow me to use it to come back? That’s a paradox itself.

Certainly, what I mentioned above are based on certain logical rationale. Actually, if there is such thing as time travel, I would rather be able to do that with my ‘soul’, rather than together with my physical body. Yes, it would be tempting to not just see and hear (assuming our soul can do them given that we don’t have the physical eyes and ears), but also touch and taste something in the past as well. For example, I would like to breathe the air, and taste the food and drink the water in the pre-industrialized world. However, for the sake of not putting my safety at risk, I wouldn’t mind to skip them. Cuz, how would I guarantee my personal safety in the past? The people there in the past may not be nice and naïve as we think, they could capture me out of fear or curiosity, and God knows what they would do to me next. As such, rather than having the chance of being just a passive observer of events, I would become a prisoner or victim myself due to my presence. That would certainly be a ‘no-no’ outcome I would try my best to stay away from. Thus, I think the best way, or I would say my preferred way to time travel must be doing that with my soul only. So, I can see what I wanna see without creating any karma for being in the past events.

Well, if all the concerns that I mentioned above can be properly addressed, then here it comes the exciting part of what I really wanna see in the past. There are some many things that I wanna see for myself that I doubt I would have time to see them all given that I am still a mortal being for God sake. Even if just my soul travels, my body would still age, and even if my body can be frozen somehow to stay young, the current world with people that I know will sail on without me. I guess I don’t wanna miss them. So, I’ve picked the following ten events, not ranked by any means that I wanna see if my soul can do time travel.

Jesus was taken up into the heaven 40 days after his resurrection – I really wanna see this, perhaps the most important historical and religious figure in last two millenniums. He did so many miracles, but for give and take, I would choose to see his ‘really’ final act on earth.
Roswell UFO crash – enough controversies as a result of this incident, I gotta see this myself for the craft, bodies, and all the other stuffs first hand on site.
Last stone being put on top of Giza the Pyramid – I think witnessing how the last stone was being installed should answer how pyramids were built.
A few hours tour on Atlantis – just wanna see how advance this mythical continent was.
A tour of the tombs of first emperor of China and Genghis Khan – just wanna see if what were written in history books were true or not.
See T-rex and other dinosaurs for real – enough said.
See Da Vinci drawing Mona Lisa – to see the most intelligent person known to modern civilization to draw the most recognized painting of all time.
See the Apollo moon-landing in 1969 – just wanna see if it is the greatest hoax or achievement of modern history.
Attend the whole Bilderberg meeting or Bohemian Grove meeting in 2011 – just wanna hear the richest and most powerful to discuss the latest on how they will run our world.
See my granddad who I’ve never seen myself, and my parents when they were young – gotta take the chance for something personal.

Would you wanna see something else?

My thought on Apple and Steve Jobs

2011-10-06T16:30:00.002+08:00

Every time with the passing of a global icon, there expect numerous tributes to commemorate the life and success of that individual. The last time was Michael Jackson, and now it is Steve Jobs. It is a bit unfair to MJ by comparison, but Steve Jobs certainly has a much broaden scope of impact to the world. He basically died when his legacy and achievement are both at the peak. I’m not gonna go into the details of his life in details as the media is gonna covered them in depth in days to come. What I’m trying to blog here is about something more personal about my view of Steve Jobs and my history with Apple products so far. Well, it’s not extraordinary, just a recollection, that’s all.

My first contact with Apple’s product is Apple II when I was a kid. An older neighbor who lived upstairs of mine had an Apple II. I didn’t know what a computer was till that time. I saw a monitor that looked like a TV and a flat box with keystrokes that looked like a typewriter. I saw the word ‘Apple’ on it and saw some primitive game being displayed on the screen. That’s all I remembered. Then, the second time, actually the first time I used an Apple product were the Macs in the computer lab in my freshman year in college. All of us were using MS-DOS, WordPerfect and Lotus 123 for school works. But, there were Macs in the lab with something called a ‘mouse’ for navigation that looked so petite and unique, I didn’t use them extensively, but remembered using the Mac to make cover page of my term paper. That’s when I first realized the beauty of having different fonts for selection. However, as MS ruled the world and Apple’s products were very expensive back then, I didn’t come in contact with any Apple products for few years until about a year after iMac was released. At first, my first acquaintance of an all-in-one desktop was just impressive. Now, it might sound dumb, but nobody actually had seen any PC that is colorful. The semi-transparent dark green back, the curves of the iMac itself and the mouse just made PC, a dull boring product, looks pretty. I didn’t own an iMac, but just came to play with it briefly in a friend’s home. Since then, I started to pay attention to Apple’s products through the press, particularly Steve Jobs’ keynotes. I still remember the hula-hoop that he used to show the wireless iBook laptop….

The first Apple product that I owned was the iPod Video, believes to be the version 5 of iPod. Being a music lover, I had 2 other MP3 players before (an Aiwa and an iRiver), both of them were merely ok but not great. The huge size of hard disk of the iPod Classic was big (30GB) compared with the others, just time-saving in managing my music library back then was certainly enough to convince me taking this gadget every time I’m out. I really enjoyed clicking the wheel and looking at the pictures of albums with easy selection. Since then, Apple’s product has been with me everyday and become a part of my daily life.

Not to mention, at the start of becoming a user of iTunes, moving from Window Media Player, I couldn’t tell how much better iTunes is over WMP or others like the RealPlayer. However, since I loved my iPod, I had to buy into the developing Apple ecosystem. I actually didn’t enjoy it that much until much later on when podcasts and apps were available.

Meanwhile, being an Apple product user myself, I just getting more and more interest in the product news about this company. Then, with the announcement of iPhone in 2007, I immediately knew that it would be the next phone that I would buy. Before that announcement, I was trying to figure out what phone would fit my needs in the sea of phones with various functionalities, i.e. those Nokias! The closest one that I thought I would get was a Smartphone from Dodpod (I guess that company was folded and sold to HTC or something), but that phone was wicked expensive and as large as a ‘soap’. I didn’t wanna carry a soap in my pocket all the time. But, the iPhone just solved my problem. It wasn’t about the App store at that time, cuz it wasn’t available right at the start, but the slim size, the multiple functionalities, the simplicity of home button and the multi-touch! Just amazing! Well, I think I’m a relatively ‘rational’ Apple fan. In spite of my admiration of the iPhone, I didn’t get the it until 3GS was available, when my Samsung phone was indeed broken and 3G on iPhone became faster enough to meet my expectation. In fact, I got my wife an iPhone 3G for almost a year and let her to use it while I was an active ‘part-time’ user. Just to got a feel of the product before I got one myself. Finally, I was able to say goodbye to the days when I had to carry a phone and an iPod. Since then, I can tell you that I’ve been a happy person because of what has come along with the iPhone. The Apps helps me to organize and entertains me. Especially with the expansion of my family and the duties that come with it, I became more and more relied on my iPhone on both work and entertainment, as it is the only gadget that is convenient for me to use on the go.

Besides being a music lover, iTunes’s podcast and iTunesU brought a whole new world to me to quench my thirst of knowledge. I’m not a smart man, would be a lie to you if I’ve become an expert of anything after learning from iTunes. But, the discovery of podcasts on iTunes really gave me a lot of infotainment that it still can’t be found elsewhere in terms of scope and easiness in access. I listen to podcast on my iPhone everyday, even more than music. Cuz, I see music as a form of entertainment that can be timeless. I could listen to a song recorded in the 70s today and still enjoy it. So, I’m sure I would be still happy listen to a song recorded today in 10 or 20 years later. But, podcasts to a greater extent have a time factor. So, it would be fine to listen to a ghost story few weeks later, but it would be kinda worthless to listen to a tech news podcasts just few days old. As such, I really thank Apple to make such library of podcasts so easy to access.

Being a follower of Apple, besides the limited support I can show through product purchases, following of the news of the company and Steve Jobs has become my hobby somehow. The more I read about Steve Jobs, the more I find this person fascinating. By all means, he is neither a saint nor perfect. But, that’s the beauty of getting to know a successful being that he is a human after all. He has faults, he failed before. But, what is more important is that we can learn so much from this person through his ups as well as downs. See how insanely driven he is to be perfect and how he doesn’t compromise on status quo to produce products that most professionals will be happy with. Selfishly speaking, we would love to see him being healthy to live much longer than mere 56 years. From now on, we can only think ‘what Steve might do if he is still running Apple’ in all future product releases or when the company is facing problem. However, pulling back and looking from above a bit, his body of works in last 25 years have already shown us the ‘Steve’s ways’. For those who are smart enough, they have a way to follow. He has already achieved so much: Mac, iTunes, iPod, iPhone, and iPad. Able to make just one of them would already leave that person a mark in tech history, but doing them all (yes I know he didn’t do all by himself, but he is an undisputed leader of their development) just put Steve Jobs up in company with only few in an exclusive class in human history of development. Given his ongoing struggle with his health in last few years, he has done more than possible for us as a tech and business leader. He basically changed the life of hundreds of million of people for God sake! I think that his legacy is likely to remain in effect to us and our next generation or two.

What really strike me the most is actually what he said in 2005. Steve Jobs gave the commencement address to the graduating students at Stanford. He told them the secret that defined him in every action, every decision, every creation of his tragically unfinished life:

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

Since he is neither an educator nor a politician, he didn’t make many public speeches or give interviews. What we know from him, besides from his works themselves, are just sound bites here and there. So, that speech at Stanford, given his in illness while dealing with the uprising of Apple, the combination of those experiences gave us a surprising insight of this man’s mind through that speech. I guess that speech though it is short and brief, it is significant and valuable enough to be used in life education for students of all sorts.

At the end, once again, I just wanna say ‘Thanks Steve for everything you have done, may you rest in peace!’

Goodbye Steve!

2011-10-06T08:46:00.004+08:00

Nothing more to say at the moment, except:

Thank you!
Goodbye!
May you R.I.P.!
Well done!

Occupy Wall Street

2011-10-04T12:12:00.000+08:00

The world we are living in is getting stranger everyday. The prime example these days is the so-called ‘Occupying Wall Street’ movement that is taking place in NYC and is being spread to other major cities in the world.

So far, this movement is peaceful by large. Yes, some 700 folks were arrested by NYPD last weekend, but they were released without much issue right after. And, through Youtube and minor TV coverage which I will talk about later on, the gathering near Wall Street looks more like a street fair with some art elements rather than anything like the Jasmine revolution throughout the Middle East or the riot in London last month. I’m no hustler of violence that wanna see blood and destructions all over even for a right cause, but I can’t help but wonder what is the point of this protest?

First of all, the protest doesn’t have a laser-like focus. It largely is about protesting the unequal distribution of wealth, greed of Wall Street, and unemployment, with some other minor issues here and there. With such scope of issues, that clouded up the opposite side of the protest. Who they are protesting against? If they are going after politicians, fine, they should go to D.C., but if they are protesting Wall Street, then it is just wrong for the protesters.

Wall Street is a place. There are many firms there, if they are targeting CEOs of certain companies, they should protest outside certain buildings and wait for the big sharks to come and go with their Vertu on hand, and throw cream pie on their faces. But, it seems like the protesters are just not happy with their current economic status and don’t know who exactly they should blame. They might just think that big financial companies, banks, fund houses, etc are all evil that have contributed to their demise. So, they just go to where they work and scream loud enough for them to be heard. And, hopefully, those big sharks will hear them with their conscience and start trading more humanely. Is that a joke or what?

Those protesters, based on what I saw on screens, are relatively young and educated people. I do admire their passion for change for good cause in most cases. However, some of them should at least know that the problem they are facing today can’t be solved by the way they have chosen. Protesting on Wall Street is not gonna change anything, but a waste of their youth. Wall Street is ruthless, it is all about profit. It is the engine that is driving the U.S. if not the world’s financials. Many people working there are no different from the rest, they just work hard to make as much as they can under heavy pressure. The genius that create crazy financial products with computer models that even rocket scientists can’t comprehend are not the bad guys either. The CEOs are greedy, but they are supported and protected by the whole capitalist system. Well, who govern the system, it is D.C. the stupid! It is the back-rubbing relationship between the interest groups and politicians, and the revolving doors among the personnel involved that get us this financial mess!

The U.S. bi-partisan political system is rotten to its core. Without a ‘peaceful, practical, reset’ button in sight, the only way is to fix it. Bad economy is a political issue indeed. Wall Street which is deemed to be evil by protesters doesn’t really do evil things only if laws allow them to. Thus, it is time for protesters to wake up, pack up, and be educated or informed of how the system works. Unless, they see the blueprint and ‘fine print’ of how things are linked up to function, i.e. the karma, all their passion and effort will go in peril.

What I mentioned about how little the mainstream media is covering the Wall Street protest, it just reinforce the conspiracy of the world is being controlled by few thousands elites who own and run the major corporations across industries globally. I’m not gonna list their names as it would be a whole different can of worms we are talking about, but you know what I mean if you are a curious person who know how to Google.

Well, I just hope the protestors will do what I described above, and end their fiasco peacefully soon. I will not wanna see these good people got hurt by any means if the whole thing gets drag on as they plan.

Kindles

2011-10-01T21:05:00.003+08:00

Two days ago, the bald CEO of Amazon, Jeff Bezos, introduced to the world the most credible challenger to iPad today - the Kindle Fire, a 7" highly customized Android tablet that only sells for US$199. I think Amazon is basically using Kindle Fire as the Trojan horse to attack the doldrums Android market. It's gonna make a splash that HP, RIM, Samsung and Sony so far failed to do. The reason is, as I've repeatedly mentioned before, tablet war is basically a war of ecosystem. None of the above players have it, except Amazon.

I read a news critic's view of the release of Kindle Fire that I agree very much. He said that Apple and Amazon are basically taking opposite approach. Apple is building killer hardware that are sold at premium to access its very good services: music, movies, apps. Amazon is building an okay hardware that are sold below cost to seduce its customers to spend heavy in its killer online retail store. He viewed that both companies are not in direct competition in that sense. But, that's not I would agree, cuz they basically are digging the same tunnel, just starting from opposite ends. They are due to crash! but, I would say that the real armor from Amazon is the 9 or 10" tablet that they are gonna release next year. We will see....

Upon the announcement of the Kindles, actually what caught my eyes is the 3G Kindle touch! 'almost' bought one myself, just pull back in the last minute somehow... However, I do find this gadget so tempting to own. Well, why? First, the price of just $159. Second, the access to library books. Third, the free 3G worldwide without contract. Fourth, the new feature of X-ray that prompt users to Wikipedia and dictionary for words. Fifth, the audit book feature. Sixth, the weight and dimension. The only downside to me is that it is not E-ink color which should be available technically, but not economically to Amazon at such price. Otherwise, I would just get that. Seriously, I would not be tempted by Kindle Fire that much, as to me, it is still a first generation consumer prototype from Amazon. Well, I'm no rush to get any of this as I don't have an actual 'need' to have it for the time being, but I can't lie about being tempted by such attractive offering from Amazon.

Anyway, the tech world is just so excited recently. Just stay tune to the iPhone 5 release on Oct 4 and the upcoming releases of Nexus Prime and Window phone upgrade then. A new round of battles have begun....

iPhone 5 preview

2011-09-26T16:20:00.003+08:00

Well, I don't trust all rumors or so-called leaks about Apple's products, but given the imminent release of iPhone 5, I think this one is quick believable. Apple is very secured about its products. However, in view of the iPhone 4 being left in a bar incident that happened last year, I'm not so sure anymore. Hey, when your products are so intensively watched and covered by the world media these days, anything is possible. Take a look of it for yourself->

Steve Jobs evolution

2011-09-21T18:37:00.002+08:00

My tech predictions related to Microsoft and Amazon

2011-09-15T17:54:00.001+08:00

Being a follower of tech news, I just think this year so far has been fascinating. So many things happened that are regarded as milestones in the tech landscape. The latest firing of Yahoo’s CEO is just a footnote of the long term struggle of this once-internet giant. The most prominent news gotta be the resignation of Steve Jobs from Apple as CEO. Come in close second is Google’s purchase of Motorola Mobility which is a watershed moment for Android future development. The ‘infant death’ of WebOS under HP is another one.

Based on what have happened so far and what I’ve read, I would like to make some comments on few items. Yes, most of them are not ‘new’, as they could be found on the net somewhere. I just happen to agree with those views, that’s why I’m raising them here. Usually, this kind of review and prediction takes place at year end, but I just can’t help but sharing them today. Maybe or maybe not, I will have a revised one by then. Anyway, here I go:

Window 8 will be release 4Q 2012 and it will be less successful than Window 7

MS hasn’t announced the release date, but I guess they will push it as late as possible. It’s because there are still so much works need to be done to launch this product which I will consider as a make-or-break product for MS. MS tries to cover both PC and tablet market with one OS. This is something that I guess both Google and Apple will do ‘partially’ down the road. So, in future looking back, MS is actually ahead of the curve. Would that be a success? I would say No, at least not at the level of W7.

My rationale is that MS is trying to do too much too soon. What is happening in the marketplace right now is competition of tech ‘ecosystems’. MS does have enough pieces to try to build one of their own, don’t get me wrong about that. But, the problem is that their pieces are quite varied in term of quality, and MS has not been proved to succeed in such integration in the past 10 years. As I said, MS tries to make W8 to cover both PC and tablet, both of which still have their uniqueness that respective OS still make sense. PC (desktop and laptop) is more suitable for information creation. With the success of iPad, Apple finally hit the sweet spot of creating a device (the concept of tablet is in fact decade old and promoted by MS) that fit for information consumption. Such clear distinction of hardware functionality is a milestone in consumer tech I think. Though PC can do both information creation and consumption, and has been doing so for a long time. iPad gives consumers a better option and they love it so far. When I say consumers here, I mean both for business and retail users.

When I said Apple and Google will try to merge the tablet OS and PC OS partially down the road, I think there are already signs for their happening. E.g. Apple’s App store concept once proved to be successful under iOS, it is now on Lion OSX, the incorporation of multitouch on Macbooks and iMac by means of touchpad, more gestures are added in the Lion OSX, even the look and feel of UI on Mac has shown similarity to iOS. For Google, the sign is not too obvious, but I believe that it is quite natural that Google will give up its development of ChromeOS and incorporate the essence of that product into future versions of Andriod down the road. However, my point is that both Apple and Google are not using one OS to cover both PC and tablet at this moment is because the timing is just not right.

Mobility in information consumption and the power to support content creativity are competing in contrast for hardware to fully support both. There are just so much to be concerned with: weight of device, battery life, cooling of device, chip structure, 4G connectivity, Cloud vs harddrive development, costs and prices, etc. I think both Apple and Google still can’t find the ‘sweetspot’ to sort out the matrix of components above that could optimize user experience. As such, I doubt MS is able to do that with W8!?

I think the overall review of W8 will be that. Though it tries to cover both tablet and PC market, consumers will find it to be short-changed on both ends. PC side would fair better, given that it is the strength of MS. People will simply turn off the tablet UI and stick with the familiar Window UI when they are using that on PC, but they will hate the ribbon for the start. The upside is that W8 is rumored to run faster on current PCs that run W7. The downside is that, either retail consumers or businesses will jump on the W8 bandwagon when they have just spent money moving on W7 which they are so far satisfied with the performance (unlike the Vista). Particularly for the corporations which are usually much slower in adoption of technology advancement than retail users. With budget constraints in the current economy, I doubt they will open the wallet to ask for upgrade if W7 is doing fine. The biggest potential gains are from the current users of XP. But, if they need to be convinced to pay extra to adopt a more radically changed W8 rather than W7. It’s gonna be a tough sell by MS.

On the tablet side, MS would need ‘magic’ to find some hardware maker to make attractive hardware that run W8 to compete with Android and iPads. They will need to make it not on par, but much better than the existing tablets on the market in order to convince consumers to jump ship to the W8 land. That would be very tough, given the headstart of iPad and Android tablets and their vast apps. My guess is that consumers will still most likely stick with their iPad2 or 3 then. I just can’t see the first Gen MS W8 tablet to be polished enough to compete with 3^rd Gen iPad, or 2^nd Gen Andriod 3.X. That’s my take on W8 so far.

iPad’s greatest competitor will be released later this year – the Amazon Tablet.

As I said, the current competition in the techland is on ‘ecosystem’. Tablet is mere the device to access the ecosystem. That’s why only competing on tech spec will not win, just see RIM’s Playbook, Motorola’s Xoom, and Samsung Galaxy, though the latter one is doing ok, but still…with Google’s purchase of Motorola Mobility, I don’t think Google will be close to Samsung more than Motorola down the road. Thus, a rebirth of Xoom could be coming. However, more imminent threat to iPad is the Amazon Tablet, because of the strength of Amazon’s online stores with the tens of millions of consumers in their database (including me). This is simply a gold mine that is gonna be explored. Amazon is gonna bundle its tablet’s functions to its online stores so close that consumers will be able to complete a transaction in just few clicks after logging in. Amazon is already working on its online store front to format it in a way that it will be optimized for the scale of tablets. I’m sure Amazon will sell the tablet below cost just for the sake of getting the device on as many consumers’ hands and as quick possible, just looking at the consumers‘ reaction to the fire sale of HP’s tablet, you get the point. As such, Amazon Tablet with a heavily customized Android version will be the second most popular tablet in 2012. I predict the sales ratio of iPad vs. Amazon Tablet in 2012 will be 5:2, given the supply is available.

Amazon will buy WebOS

There is rumor that HP will sell WebOS, and a list of potential buyers included Samsung, Sony, HTC, even Apple and Google. It is said that HTC has the highest chance among that group, but I would add Amazon to that list and to be close second most likely buyer. My point is that WebOS actually fit Amazon more than any other because Amazon has a different business model. Unlike the other potential buyers, I really doubt Amazon will step in making its own mobile phone. Its presence in iOS and Android are enough on phone space. However, having its own tablet with customized UI should fit more to its business model. For Amazon, a tablet is similar to a TV remote control, it is a just a tool for consumers to access its online store. Kindle is proven to be a successful tablet with narrowed functionality. So, Amazon has the experience to channel its own device to vast customers. What they want to do is to expand the product scope that their consumers to access. A tablet is a natural choice. With Google’s purchase of Motorola Mobility, although Amazon can still use Android for their tablets, they would certainly think about having their own OS down the road. If WebOS is available, why spending to develop their own? Other potential buyers need to deal with both phone and tablet, perhaps hedging the risk by adopting W8, on top of them, more patent-related lawsuits back and forth against Apple, and undercut their profits of using Android by paying patent fee to MS. There are just too many hassles to be deal with. I think it would be wise for Amazon just to get the functionality proven WebOS once for all and go with it. Amazon just needs to move fast to get the deal done before HTC snatches WebOS. However, given HTC is a Taiwanese company and Amazon is native in the States, I would say the latter should have a higher chance to get a deal from HP than HTC.

That’s my two cents on tech predictions.

Ten years after, we still remember...

2011-09-11T11:19:00.001+08:00

To all lost souls on 9-11-2001, R.I.P.

2012 and beyond

2011-09-05T16:24:00.002+08:00

The sense of end times has been building up in the last few years given the approaching of 2012. Unless you are living under a rock, you might have heard that there is a saying that Dec, 21, 2012 will be the end of the world. Of course, if you read a little bit more about the background of this claim, it is coming from some scholars who study Mayan history and discover that the Mayans for unknown reason stopped their calendar on that date. Given the advance knowledge of the Mayan culture, someone interprets that mean Mayan foretold the end time is on that date.

As always, there are people in this world dissatisfy with their lives and felt powerless to make any change. So, they are prone to worship figures or god(s) to seek the comfort and guidance that they need. I’m not saying all religious people are like that, but being attracted to the ‘unknown’ has been part of our human nature throughout our known history. Thus, we have fortune-teller of all sorts, cuz we believe that if we know ahead what’s gonna happen, we have greater power to control our own destiny. However, if we are told that something so bad that we are more or less hopeless to make any change is gonna happen, then many people’s thoughts will go haywire, and that’s what 2012 is doing to them right now.

I don’t know much about religions, my impression is that many religions do have the concept of ‘the end of the world’ somehow incorporated in their texts. Maybe it is part of their stories, if they cover how the world starts, and then it is natural to say something about how the world will end. I guess that’s more or less about the cyclical nature of things, the karma, or to give people a sense of direction or fear, so they will behave. However, what I heard from Christians, though not word for word, Jesus did say something like, whoever claims to be able to tell you the exact time of the end of the world, he/she lies. Regardless you are Christian or not, I guess it makes sense, so interpreting that the end of the world will be on Dec 21, 2012, to me, is purely BS!

Does it mean that I’m optimistic about the future at all? The hell no! I’m not happy with our future. I just think that our world is a mess and it’s gonna be messier for sure. I don’t look at things one at a time in isolation. I simply look at things across the world in a time spectrum and form such opinion. Cuz, I believe the saying that our future is caused by our present which is the effect of our past, i.e. the karma. Human nature has not progressed much in the last hundreds of years. People are still too selfish and narrow-minded to think just for their ethnic group or religion. Globalization and technology helps, but they are double-edged swords as well. So, what happens hundreds of years ago will continue to take place now and future, until we are enlightened!

Just look around at what are happening right now, I don’t see myself an exact conspiracy-believer, but based on what I read in the news of all sorts, I can’t help thinking that many things are just taking place in isolation….

- The U.S. is going bankrupt; a hegemonic superpower with the best technology and strongest military is a dangerous combination. Will the U.S. exercises its military power to ‘jump start its economy’ like what happen before?

- The economy of the developed world is in bad shape. The U.S. is going down, the Japanese one is a zombie, Europe is in a rotten basket, though there is a bright spot in Germany, but it can’t save the rest. Asia ex-Japan is doing great, but they are mostly small and export-oriented. I still have doubt of Chinese economy, the biggest in the region. I just think that there are just lots of roaches underneath the carpet. Many figures are just fakes. China’s future can’t be viewed through the economic lens only; it is just a big country with big population. The environment damage and exhaustion with the massive social change just can’t be ignored. The development of this country will not be a smooth ride; the worst scenario would be the economic free fall with political fallout and social unrest. I just don’t think China is really as stable and strong as it looks simply so much uncertainty.

- Freedom in our world is diminishing rather than expanding. The U.S. is moving in the direction of a police state bit by bit. The Europe is turning right, and the rest of the world is getting more chaotic and unsafe. Don’t be fool by the Jasmine revolution. Libya will become another Iraq or Afghan or even worse. Who know what’s next? Syria, Iran, etc?

- The ‘discovery’ of new deadly virus that cause health panic over the world is getting more prominent in recent years, with globalization, they just spread easier and faster. I just think that the big one(s) are just coming. They will certainly kill more people, but some people will somehow be immune.

- Besides diseases, more people will die because of wars, arm conflicts, natural disasters, man-made famine, etc. It is because we just have too many people, so whenever those incidents happen, more people will be affected and result in higher casualty. Even regular folk on the street would understand and accept that, what would you think those in power would attempt to do with human population explosion? Resources are being controlled by those who won’t let go their power, as such, large population are going for the limited resources. As such, there cause inflation, social unrest, arm conflicts, property destruction and wars. I’m not just talking about oil; I’m also talking about land, water, and foods, which are more fundamental to our survival. With income inequality is getting worse in many developed countries, money become worthless, what would you thing people would do to feed themselves and their families?

All of these are happening and we should be worried. Talking about how we should deal with them, those would be book-long stories…

Going back to talk about 2012, I believe that ‘things’ will happen, maybe something ‘big’ that will affect many people in the world. However, I strong believe that the world with our existing human civilizations will remain to go through Dec 21, 2012, which will just be another day as any day before and after. When we look back, that date is just another Y2K as we know today.

The Truth is out there

2011-08-29T13:51:00.002+08:00

Well, it is the famous quote from the nostalgic hit show ‘the X-files’. This is not what I’m wanna talk about here, but rather I wanna talk about what I approach in digesting what we heard and read in the mass media. I’m not gonna preach here, rather I would say that I wanna share my view about this topic and maybe my sons would be able to know more how their old man thinks if they choose to read this in future.

Information Overload

Before printing was invented, people can only record well-organized data in writing. Though people back then had more time and less distraction in life to concentrate in writing, what they chose to write were largely the most valuable knowledge that they would like to pass on to others, such as religious texts or history. I doubt we could find a written newspaper back then. News was distributed by words of mouth. Naturally, they could be distorted or were lost easily. Remember the game of passing a message in a chain of people? i.e. message was easily twisted via passing along simply through 3 to 4 people. With the development of printing, not only records can be kept better, they can be spread to a much wider audience in the original form as written by the author. With the advancement of technology along with easier and cheaper access to the technical tools, information in the form of text, audio, visual or even video can now be distributed electronically by anybody in real time to everybody all over the world by few clicks of buttons. Such exponential growth of information, even the most skillful experts who live on information full time find it hard to sort information out, let alone regular folks like us who are mostly part-time casual consumers of information. We just have limited time to consume information that is not related to bread-wining. Somewhat like snacks, there is only so much that we can eat everyday.

Information Digestion

Along with analogy above, there are reasons why snacks industry is successful. Snacks are prepared for cheaper, easier access and quicker consumption with controlled quality under certain standardization of production process. Information access is getting similar treatment these days, news broadcasts are subject to rating, newspapers and magazines are subjected to sales, even news sites are subject to hits and ads. With the commercialization of news, it makes sense to ‘news-processors’ to prepare their raw-materials with favors and by their ‘culinary’ skills to make them into consumable sizes. Newscasts have limited in length, news articles are similarly customized with edited content. Journalists are not allowed to report exactly what they see, as media companies have their own commercial, legal and political agendas to comply with. Thus, what news stories are reported, when they are reported, and how they are reported is all ‘processed’. Since many people know that ‘processed foods’ are not healthy and are seeking for ‘organic foods’, why would we be fine with ‘processed information’?

Thank God for internet, at least there are endless distribution channels for individuals to voice out their opinions as well as people who know the truth to tell the world about it. Still, the mass majority of people would still stick to the familiar channels which happened to be the well-managed, most funded and most recognized as their primary source of news. I don’t blame them, there are indeed reasons why all these happen the way they are.

Things are connected

The corporate ‘information processors’ prepared the information in digestible chunks for mass consumption. As such, most people would learn the happening of selected news in sound bites, or through sensational subject titles and carefully selected images. Those selected news meet and are, assumed by the mass media, what most people want and are happy with. Unfortunately, the ‘most people’ includes many young and influential people who are supposed to have critical mind and intelligent to make decisions that would affect our world for current and future. I find it just sad that those people have been ‘stoned’ by such ‘processed info’ for so long that, they just can’t or are uncomfortable to wake up and think. I would say that most of the information and news that we get from the mass media these days are intentionally manipulated to a point that information are made to be perceived as disjointed. Thus, many people cannot see how many events are indeed connected. Even if suspicions of connectivity are raised, it is just hard to see how things are connected. I think that as the mass media are getting more powerful through consolidation in the industry and their growing wealth and power, it is just an intensive and constant tough fight for the truth to come out in the rough sea of information.

Conspiracy has value

Internet is a double-edged sword. It allows truth to come out and be spread, but it allows false information to do the same as well. As such, powerful information brokers have changed their strategy in information manipulation in view of the power of internet. In the pre-internet stage, they basically control the access of information by owning the outlets. Nowadays, they seek to be the ‘loudest’ and most visible one on the internet and meanwhile by creating some ‘shadow characters’ on the internet to discredit those who bring out the truth. In fact, many stories (to be honest, some of them may be actually the truth) which are not reported in mass main-stream media or deviated from the ‘acceptable’ reported stories, are discredited as ‘conspiracies’. Those who raise ‘conspiracies’ are being described as some kinds of introvert ‘wacko’ that are chasing their own shadows. In spite of the fact that, many of those so-called ‘wacko’ or ‘people with offbeat characters’ who are also happened to be scholars and experts of different well-respected institutions. Cuz, conspiracies are not just a weird thoughts, they are usually supported by a matrix of facts or evidence though some of them might be circumstantial. Rather than being raised for discussion and further investigation, conspiracies are being suppressed, discredited and being making fun off by the so-called mainstream. I just don’t think that is right.

Trust no one

Despite saying what I’ve said so far, I don’t mean that all conspiracies are true. However, I just don’t feel comfortable that many people are being manipulated by what they are told. I don’t think we should believe the mass media, nor the conspirators themselves unconditionally. We should exercise our intelligence to expose ourselves to a wider spectrum of information, and try to analyze them to understand how things are connected (aka the karma behind issues) and form our own opinions, rather that being passive accept what we should think. That’s why I would say for young people, with their relatively ample of time, lighter burden of responsibility, and more open-minded in acceptance of ideas, they should be encouraged to learn how to seek out a wider spectrum of news, to digest them against what are being told in the mainstream media, to then analyze them critically to form their own opinion of issues that are happening in our world. I think that has been the way that we have achieved in scientific advancement. In which, nothing is accepted without proof, suspicions are always investigated. Such methodology should be applied in seeking truth in non-scientific information as well.

What really matters

I always believe that human’s spiritual advancement is always lagged behind the developments of most other things such as technology, finances, and political systems. It is part of human nature that people do tell lies, powerful ones are control freaks, and most people put their own self-interests over the others. As such, we should look after our own, don’t just blindly accept what are being told and develop a critical mind to seek out the truth. That’s the only way we can improve ourselves. Without doing that, any perceivable advancement is simply building on mirage, that won’t last. Just use our God-given mind to think critically. Otherwise, we might just be a humanoid with a mind of a sheep, happily cruising our life in herds, what a waste!

Steve Jobs - Resignation

2011-08-26T17:16:00.002+08:00

“To the Apple Board of Directors and the Apple Community:

I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.

I hereby resign as CEO of Apple. I would like to serve, if the Board sees fit, as Chairman of the Board, director and Apple employee.

As far as my successor goes, I strongly recommend that we execute our succession plan and name Tim Cook as CEO of Apple.

I believe Apple’s brightest and most innovative days are ahead of it. And I look forward to watching and contributing to its success in a new role.

I have made some of the best friends of my life at Apple, and I thank you all for the many years of being able to work alongside you. Steve”

Echoed from the words above, thousands of news stories about the resignation of Steven P. Jobs as the CEO of Apple Corp have been popping up on the net in the last 2 days. His legacy in the industry, his place in history, his impact on the company and the effect of his departure from the active management of the company have been talked to depth all over the press.

As a fan and user of Apple products, I wanna add my 2 cents to this news story. I wouldn’t be able to draft as well-written and cohesive as other writers. Instead, I’m just gonna put some headers with random pieces of thought as follow. Some of them may be found similar to what some other bloggers/writers had already said since we may share the same/similar view of certain topics, but you will definitely find something more unique that I come up on my own.

Reason for his resignation
Almost everybody believes that it is due to his health. Certainly, I wish him will get well by all means. However, I think that his health is certainly deteriorating. To me, he seems to be a fighter who fights till the end, definitely not a quitter. He just chooses to leave Apple after he has won in business and focus on his other ‘fight’- to live a healthy life.

Timing of his resignation
On his personally basis, he may just wanna spend more time to take care of his health and with his family. He certainly would like to stay healthy enough to see more Apple products being release and particularly the new Apple headquarter compass that he has been passionate about to be built on his watch. I don’t think he is on death bed yet, I hope not. But, for being as elusive as he is, nothing can/should be ruled out. He may unfortunately reach the final stage of his life. Connected in my thought that, it may be the reason why he might have instruct the earlier publish of his first and only authorized autobiography in coming November rather than next year. Reportedly, he chooses not to read the book before release, so he may just wanna read that before he’s gone. Just my share of conspiracy!

For Apple wise, I think his timing of departure just coincide the best time of the company financial and operational wise. It has become the largest or second largest corporation in the States in terms of capitals and with 76 billions of cash. Its products are selling like hot cakes with next versions on the verge of release. Usual fanfare is expected. I think he just left behind a very strong company for his successors to take on without an ounce of regret and did that on his own term unlike last time.

Steve Jobs related news reports in future
The press will continue to talk about him. If he thinks that he is healthy enough, I think he will give one or two exclusive interviews to 60 minutes or his trusted reporters in coming period. We may still read news on something that he alleged have said here and there. But, if his health is really bad, the next big story would be the report of his death. Something like…

On DD/MM/201X, Apple’s CEO Tim Cook, SVP Jonny Ive, etc visited Steve Jobs at his residence in Cupertino for the final farewell of Steve Jobs, the ex-CEO, Chairman and finder of Apple Corp, who passed away last night at the age of 5X. The cause of his death is XXX. Steve Jobs was….. Reportedly, his best friend Steve Woz, cofounder of Apple, his sister Mona Simpson, his wife, Laurene Powell, and his hildren XXX were on his bedside at the time of his death……His funeral is scheduled to be on DD/MM/201X at….

…..Hundreds of Apple fans left flowers at entrances of Apple stores all over the world to commemorate the death of Apple founder Steve Jobs…..Thousand of fans also left messages at Apple’s corporate website, and many fans also setup pages on Facebook for people to leave messages to this tech giant…….

What Steve has left behind
I agree that Apple will be fine in next 2 to 3 years as relatively well defined plan for product/services development should already be in pipeline. iPhone 5, 6, 7, iPad 3, 4, 5 will be released as predicted. iTunes, iOS, Mac OS, Macs, etc will continue to develop incrementally. The issues that people will be talking about are the micro and ultra-macro things that Apple does. The former would be the final touch of the next versions of products., like whether the back of iPad or iPhone to be ceramic, plastic or metal, be flat, curved or whatever, whether the new patented screws would be in star-shaped or hexagonal, etc. People will say something like ‘Would Steve approve this?’, ‘Do they get Steve’s blessing to be released? ‘

What matter to most people would be ultra-macro level direction that Apple will follow in future, i.e. the next phase of strategic development that company will pursue. Given Apple’s business, under Steve’s management, had dramatically evolved more than once in terms of shifting focus in product lines. What will be next under Tim Cook? I think some general directions must have already been made like some analysts (aka fortune tellers) have said. Apple will make Apple TV - the real TV set. Apple will merge Mac OS and iOS down the road. Apple will drop optic disc support altogether, etc. However, what more Apple will do? or most importantly ,what they can but won’t do? I think that’s a bit philosophical rather than operational.

Thus, I think that the most important thing that Steve has left behind to Apple is the ‘philosophy’ that he might have preached, but definitely shown in practice day in and day out when Apple was under his watch. I’m talking about Steve would complain how sweet the mango juice is in Apple’s cafeteria, but more like how Steve perceive the relationship between Apple and people (including customers, staff, vendors, suppliers, the press, the fans and non-fans) in terms of technology. I’m sure scholars in various top management school of business will write papers if not books to death about Steve’s management. I also read that Steve himself does pass some philosophical management materials to his senior staff in house to bring them in Apple’s culture. So from now on, I guess it shouldn’t be a question like ‘what would Steve do?’ being asked internally in Apple when there is problem. Rather, it would more be up to the senior staff to determine on whether they would like to carry on the way Steve do things, or they would strike on their own which may deviate from the existing core of Apple’s culture preached by Steve. I think that as long as Steve’s DNA can remain in Apple’s future strategy.

Apple will still be Apple.

般若波羅蜜多心經 Prajnaparamitahrdayasutra

2011-08-24T17:33:00.002+08:00

般若波羅蜜多心經

（梵文Prajnaparamitahrdayasutra, 屬於《大品般若經》中600卷中的一節）

唐三藏法師玄奘譯

觀自在菩薩，行深般若波羅蜜多時，照見五蘊皆空，度一切苦厄。
舍利子，色不異空，空不異色，色即是空，空即是色。受想行識，亦復如是。舍利子，是諸法空相，不生不滅，不垢不淨，不增不減，是故空中無色，無受想行識，無眼耳鼻舌身意，無色身想味觸法，無眼界，乃至無意識界，無無明，亦無無明盡，乃至無老死，亦無老死盡。
無苦集滅道，無智亦無得，以無所得故。菩提薩陀，依般若波羅蜜多故，心無掛礙。
無掛礙故，無有恐怖，遠離顛倒夢想，究竟涅槃。
三世諸佛，依般若波羅蜜多故，得阿褥多羅三藐三菩提。
故知般若波羅蜜多，是大神咒，是大明咒，是無上咒，是無等等咒。能除一切苦，真實不虛。
故說般若波羅蜜多咒。即說咒曰：揭諦揭諦，波羅揭諦，波羅僧揭諦，菩提薩婆訶。

“般若”即智慧、心靈。 “波羅”是過渡到達彼岸（目的地）。 “密”即終極，“多”指萬法、萬種、萬有、萬物。佛家語“心”（梵語hrdaya ），指心靈，亦含有精要、精髓等意。心即心靈、大智慧、宇宙之心。 “經”通“徑”，路徑、通道。

《般若波羅蜜多心經》全名意義為：“以大智慧回歸宇宙自然終極之心靈途徑”。

《心經》全經只有五十句（唐玄奘譯本），267字。
《般若波羅蜜多心經》詞寡義深，概括了《大品般若》的義理精要。本經係將內容龐大之般若經濃縮，成為表現'般若皆空'精神之簡潔經典。全經舉出五蘊、三科、十二因緣、四諦等法以總述諸法皆空之理。讀此經可以了解般若經類的基本精神。
佛家認為，此經概括了佛陀四十九年說法集三藏十二部經論的精華，闡述了佛家對天地宇宙實相的終極論義。

《心經》極短，奧義無窮。集義會通，字面而已。釋則為執，靈當默誦。

1.觀自在——菩薩
1）觀照自心，大修士！

2.行深般若波羅蜜多時：
2）以智慧求解脫多時：

3.照見五蘊皆空，
（色、受、想、行、識）
3）徹悟一切感知、意志、追求、慾念都是空幻。

4.度一切苦厄。
4）於是而超越一切苦厄

5.舍利子。
5）昇華而成為“舍利子”。

6.色不異空，
6）明白現象世界與空幻無不同，

7.空不異色，
7）空幻與現象無不同。

8.色即是空，
8）現象就是空幻，

9.空即是色。
9）空幻就是現象。

10.受想行識，
10）一切感受、意想、行為、知識，

11.亦復如是，
11）莫不如是。

12.舍利子。
12）如同彩色舍利子。

中
13.是諸法空相，
13）存在之本體是空幻表象。

14.不生不滅，
14）本體不產生也不消滅

15.不垢不淨，
15）不污染也不干淨。

16.不增不減。
16）不增加也不減少。

17.是故空中無色，
17）所以本原真空無現象

18.無受想行識，
18)不存在感受、念想、行為、意識

19.無眼耳鼻舌身意，
（此謂“六根”）
19) 不存在眼所見、耳所聞、鼻所嗅、身所感、意所念

20.無色、聲、香、味、觸、法。
（此謂“六塵”）
20)不存在現象、聲音、味道、感觸、本體

21.無眼界，
21)不存在眼睛所見世界

22.乃至無意識界。
22)也不存在心靈所意想世界

23.無無明，亦無無明盡，
23)無見光明也無見黑暗

24.乃至無老死，亦無老死盡。
24) 無見生命、衰老、死滅也不見不會衰老、死滅者
[無無明，是無明的否定。無無明-盡，又是無無明的否定。
兩次否定成為一次肯定。 ]

25.無苦、集、滅、道，
（此謂“四締”。）
25)出離痛苦、聚散、死滅、言語。

26.無智亦無得（呆）。
26)無智慧也無愚蠢。

27.以無所得（待），
27)由於不希求所得

28.故，菩提薩埵，
28)所以修行者啊！

29.依般若波羅蜜多，
29)要依照智慧尋求到達彼岸；

30.故心無罣礙。
30)所以，要在內心排除牽掛障礙——

31.無罣礙，
31)只因內心無牽掛障礙——

32.故，無有恐怖，
32)所以，沒有恐怖的事情，

33.遠離顛倒夢想，
33)遠離顛三倒四的夢想，

34.究竟涅磐，
34)達到終極解脫圓滿的境界。

35.三世諸佛。
35)擺脫過去、現在與未來

36.依般若波羅蜜多，
36）依靠智慧度向彼岸

37.故得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。
37）於是得到超越無上大智慧。

下
38.故知般若波羅蜜多，
38）所以，理解智慧而通達人生的彼岸。

39.是大神咒，
39）就得到大神通的祝詞！

40.是大明咒，
40）就得到大光明的祝詞！

41.是無上咒，
41）就得到高無上的祝詞！

42.是無等等咒，
42）就得到普遍無限的祝詞！

43.能除一切苦，
43）從而消除一切苦難，

44.真實不虛。
44）達到真實不妄之境。

45.故說般若波羅蜜多咒，
45）所以念誦以智慧超度於彼岸的祝詞

46.即說咒曰：
46）就誦讀以下的祝詞：

47.揭諦，揭諦！
47）去吧！去吧！

48.波羅揭諦，
48）超越吧，去吧！

49.波羅僧揭諦，
49）去找到智慧，寧靜，超越一切界限
（“透過心量廣大的通達智慧，找到超越世俗萬苦的根本途徑！”）

50.菩提——薩婆訶！
50）醒覺自我，醒覺他人！

【觀自在菩薩】，又稱作“觀世音菩薩”，梵文則為Avalokiteshvara。
觀自在三字是雙關語；其顯意是指觀世音菩薩名；其密意是指在入定時要觀——自在。
觀自在菩薩，“觀”，“觀照”、“審視”。
觀，接受，世音（宇宙信息），自在（自然與自由）。
自在，大自由的。
“菩薩”是bodhisattvaa“菩薩摩訶薩”的音譯，本意為“覺有情”、“導眾生”的大士。 “摩訶”，意為“大”。 “薩”為“薩埵”的略音，意為“有情”或“眾生”。摩訶薩指引導救度極多眾生，使之得度脫生死。

大乘佛教認為菩薩可以有在家與出家兩種。菩薩有兩種身：一為生死肉身，一為去法性恆生身。
三賢位之菩薩，若未證法性，仍有惑業，受三界生死為前者；證得無生法忍性，捨離三界生死肉身，得不生不死為去法性恆生者。
觀自在菩薩，合起來說，就是能觀照自心，不為世間或出世間的萬物所動，心中常能住寂，又能慧天憫人，以大覺有情為己任。

Question about Window 8

2011-08-18T12:00:00.002+08:00

After Microsoft flunked with Vista, it has regained consumers' confidence with Window 7. For being a W7 user myself, upgraded from Window XP, I'm happy with the performance of W7 myself. Though I, every now and then, have been tempted by Mac OSX, I'm still staying in the MS ship for the time being.

Reading news reports, W7's adoption is viewed as one of the few successful stories that MS can boost these days. Though many companies are still sticking with the decade old XP (mine is one of them :( ), I think many corporate IT would jump on the W7 ship in near future, since W7 is quite stable and not too much deviated from XP in terms of UI.

Now, it comes to recent news of Window 8 which is supposed to be released in 2012. It all started with the fact that MS doesn't want to roll out Window Mobile 7 on tablets. Instead, MS proclaimed that W8 would be the solution. Many people wonder how the hell W8 (without much details, but it was assumed to be big) can be clammed into a tablet to compete with the instant- on iPad running on iOS. I think that's still pending to be seen... I've read some news stories today which reported more details about the features of W8 which would include some gesture interface or kinect type interface. I think that make sense from product evolution perspective. However, I will wonder if W8 will face much higher hurdle in corporate adoption of such ambitious enhancements.

W8 would not be cheap, even if it is on par with W7, why would not companies choose W7 which is a proven system. Also, it seems like, in order to fully enjoy the enhanced features in W8, you will need hardware enhancements, such as touchpad-mouses or tablet. I don't know if companies are ready to indulge in such corporate expenses given the current economic environment. So, there is so much uncertainty in the W8 roll out. Of course, most people will stay put till they see it. For me, I doubt I will update to W8 given my desktop is about 1 year old and my previous one lasted for over 7 years. Considering the halo effect of iPad and iPhone, many Window users have already moved to Mac and never look back. I think W8 is really enemy is Mac and time. Would MS be able to retain those about the defectors (and potential one, me included) on time? That's interesting to be seen.

Google's Motorola Mobility Acquisition and how Apple spends it cash

2011-08-17T17:20:00.002+08:00

Google’s US$12.5B purchase of Motorola Mobility is the most eye-catching tech news in the last few days. I’ve read many articles on the web about what this purchase means to various parties, how that would affect the mobile phone industry and all that. I think that’s quite an interesting topic. Regarding what are being said on the street, basically, these are what I read and can remember so far:

The reason of the purchase

- Google is deeply involved in patent war with Apple and Microsoft. As patent has become a key arsenal in this war, with Google’s recent loss in the Nortel patent bid against Apple and MS. Google has to turn to other sources. Motorola is the pioneer in mobile technology with a war-chest of patents. So, it became Google’s target naturally.

- In spite of the surge of Android adoption in the market, Google still felt that it has been short-changed in competition with Apple which has a vertical integration of the whole smartphone industry components. Thus, acquiring a hardware (handset) manufacturer makes sense to Google. Now, Google can directly compete with Apple from end to end. In addition, Google may be able to enjoy both the advantages of having open sourced Android to various smartphone manufacturers as well as having its own, versus Apple which goes alone.

Speculated Effects on the industry:

- Microsoft may be happy that many Motorola’s competitors like LG, Samsung, HTC will devote more resources to ‘hedge the bet’ on Android alone, by producing Window Mobile 7 Phones.

- Motorola’s competitors will still stick with Android for now, but would either push Window 7 phones as MS wishes, or do something on their own. E.g. Samsung is pushing Bada which is a customized Android that would give a different user experience to its users.

- Google will have problem integrating Motorola’s 19,000 staff in house, given its experience of being a search company without prior experience in manufacturing, a lot of things have to learn and can happen.

- Microsoft may be driven to purchase Nokia outright. Also, other manufacturers may become targets themselves, particularly those with many patents, such as RIM.

- RIM is doomed, given the current consolidation and alliances in the smartphone industry. Will it become another Palm?

- Google will also gain on the TV front, given Motorola’s prominent status in TV set top boxes. So, Apple TV would be under pressure somehow.

Etc.

Well, I think those speculations are, by no mean that, have certain validity. What I would want to say is that this acquisition wouldn’t have much impact on Apple, at least, not from the strategy planning of its development. $12.5 B is not a small amount though Google has a lot of cash on hand. I don’t think that would push Apple to make its own giant acquisition deal to top Google’s. I do admire Android and really like Chrome myself. I do use many Google services, such as youTube, Blogger, Document, Gmail, Earth, etc. I also like Google search much more than Bing. However, I still don’t see Google’s current development strategy on par with Apple’s.

Apple’s current development strategy is all about providing the best user ‘experience’ as possible. Apple is doing it my creating its own ecosystem, tries to control every components down to a key stroke or nuts and bolts. It owns its software, the IOS, and MacOS. They are protected and controlled totally in house. It designs its products. From the material being used, the chip, the form factor, the color, even is tempting to create its own type of screws in upcoming products. They just want its product to be not just working, but also cool to own and fun to use. Then, it creates its own stores. The physical ones are with top notch interior design with lots of glasses, black and white benches that display products for customers to play with and its friendly experienced staff can really help users on the spot. Then, it has virtual stores of iTunes/App stores, and Mac App Stores, which have been very effective distribution channels. iTunes is top music store in the world. It collection of podcasts and courses on iTunes U are unparallel. The App stores set the trend in the industry and its sister spin-off of Mac App Stores also strike the core of users. Apple has a line of products that are highly distinguishable from its competitors and it can charge premiums. Also, Apple has the mystic power of its iconic leader Steve Jobs, the aura of Apple being a brand used by cool people like artists and musicians for decades on top of the top advertising dollars it spends, the brand of Apple has still been able to stay cool so far in spite of its widely adoptions by many regular Johns and Janes is simply amazing! I couldn’t think of any other company could generate that amount of buzz for its upcoming products or even some ‘unicorn’ products that never exists. That kind of rumors, reports, speculations in the media are free ads that Apple doesn’t pay a dime for, certainly invite envy from most companies. iPhone 5 and iPad 3 are what people are talking about. Apple chooses not to release a lot of products, that makes it easier to control its quality and keeps customers’ focus, rather than releasing so many similar products with forgettable names. That’s why, to me, I still see Google is playing the catch-up role, though it is much better than MS which is still a bit clueless and chaotic. I would wish Google can march its own alternative development from Apple but as good as Apple.

While Google spending a fortune on this acquisition, that reminds me of an article that I want to share with readers. The title of the article has been changed as times goes by. It is about how Apple spends its cash. Since its cash amount has kept on growing, the latest title is that…

“What would be a good use of Apple's $76.2+ billion in cash?”

This is what he (Anon User) said:

Apple actually uses its cash hoard in a very interesting way to maintain a decisive advantage over its rivals:

When new component technologies (touchscreens, chips, LED displays) first come out, they are very expensive to produce, and building a factory that can produce them in mass quantities is even more expensive. Oftentimes, the upfront capital expenditure can be so huge and the margins are small enough (and shrink over time as the component is rapidly commoditized) that the companies who would build these factories cannot raise sufficient investment capital to cover the costs.

What Apple does is use its cash hoard to pay for the construction cost (or a significant fraction of it) of the factory in exchange for exclusive rights to the output production of the factory for a set period of time (maybe 6 - 36 months), and then for a discounted rate afterwards. This yields two advantages:

Apple has access to new component technology months or years before its rivals. This allows it to release groundbreaking products that are actually impossible to duplicate. Remember how for up to a year or so after the introduction of the iPhone, none of the would-be iPhone clones could even get a capacitive touchscreen to work as well as the iPhone's? It wasn't just the software - Apple simply has access to new components earlier, before anyone else in the world can gain access to it in mass quantities to make a consumer device. One extraordinary example of this is the aluminum machining technology used to make Apple's laptops - this remains a trade secret that Apple continues to have exclusive access to and allows them to make laptops with (for now) unsurpassed strength and lightness.

Eventually its competitors catch up in component production technology, but by then Apple has their arrangement in place whereby it can source those parts at a lower cost due to the discounted rate they have negotiated with the (now) most-experienced and skilled provider of those parts - who has probably also brought his production costs down too. This discount is also potentially subsidized by its competitors buying those same parts from that provider - the part is now commoditized so the factory is allowed to produce them for all buyers, but Apple gets special pricing.

Apple is not just crushing its rivals through superiority in design, Steve Jobs's deep experience in hardware mass production (early Apple, NeXT) has been brought to bear in creating an unrivaled exclusive supply chain of advanced technology literally years ahead of anyone else on the planet. If it feels like new Apple products appear futuristic, it is because Apple really is sending back technology from the future.

Once those technologies (or more accurately, their mass production techniques) become sufficiently commoditized, Apple is then able to compete effectively on cost and undercut rivals. It's a myth that Apple only makes premium products - it makes them all right, but that is because they are literally more advanced than anything else (i.e. the price premium is not just for design), and once the product line is no longer premium, they are produced more cheaply than competitor equivalents, yielding higher margins, more cash, which results in more ability to continue the cycle.

Some readers comments on this article with some insightful views as well, such as this one from Alston Ho:

By not buying the plants out outright but instead assisting the plants, Apple shifts the operations and management to the people who understand that new component the best as well as that component's suppliers as well as the labor force and political locality. The company can then focus on its strategy of designing the new products rather than designing the new products and all the new components that go inside of it. By doing so Apple gains these additional benefits as well:

1) Company focuses on its core competency and out-tasks the periphery.

2) Company deploys less capital and has less capital at stake than fully buying it outright, allowing them to accumulate more cash and generating more ROIC.

3) Company gains additional teeth in the way their suppliers operate, reducing this element of uncertainty.

4) Technology and its rapid pace of innovation has an element of creative formation and destruction. Apple has to be able to design and incorporate and source and integrate a component into their products, then subsequently/simultaneously moving away from it onto something new.

I think the author of the top article has a very in-depth view on Apple’s development strategy. I also find his view make a lot of sense and actually ties to reality.

From Wikipedia, you can see what kind of enterprise does Apple buy?

For example:

1997 Next (programming services). Value: $404 million

1997 Power Computing (cloned computers). $100 million

1999 Xemplar Education (software). $5 million

1999 Raycer Graphics (graphic chips). $15 million

2000 NetSelector (Internet software). Value: NA

2001 Astarte (DVD authoring software). Value: NA

2001 bluebuzz (Internet service provider). Value: NA

2001 Source Technologies (graphics software). Value: NA

2001 PowerSchool (online info systems services). $62 million

2002 Nothing Real (special effects software). $15 million

2002 Zayante (software). $13 million

2002 Silicon Grail Corp-Chalice (digital effects software). Value: NA

2002 Emagic (music production software). $30 million

2002 Propel Software (software). Value: NA

2005 Fingerworks (gesture recognition). Value: NA

2006 Silicon Color (software). Value: NA

2006 Proximity (software). Value: NA

2008 P.A. Semi (semiconductors). $268 million

2009 Placebase (maps). Value: NA

2009 Lala (music streaming). $17 million

2010 Quattro (mobile advertising). $275 million

2010 Intrinsity (semiconductors). $121 million

2010 Siri (software). Value: NA

2010 Poly9 (Web-based mapping). Value: NA

2011 Share in the Nortel purchase, Value: $2.6 Billion

See? Not a Facebook or Disney among them. And the largest acquisition -- by far -- was the 1997 purchase of NeXT that brought Steve Jobs back to Apple.

Reported by Appleinsider.com on Jan 18, 2011, Apple's chief operations executive Tim Cook revealed that the company had entered into long term component supply contracts worth $3.9 billion over the next two years.

The article said:

Cook noted that the secret deals were a "fantastic" use of the company's cash reserves, which have now grown into a $59.7 billion stockpile.

When asked what components were involved in those long term commitments, Cook answered, "I don't want to give it out, because I view it as a competitive… something I don't want our competition knowing."

Cook references A4, RAM as examples

Cook added, "Let me talk in general. From our point of view on design side, we design components where we believe we can innovate beyond the market. Most recent example, A4 chip. With the A4 chip, we didn't think we had to invest in a fab [chip manufacturing facilities], so we focused on design."

"On the operational side of house," Cook stated, "we've historically entered into agreements with others to supply; largest one was with flash memory suppliers back in 2005 that totaled over a $1 billion, because flash would become increasingly import across product line and industry."

Apple is now the world's largest consumer of memory chips, in large part because it bundled large amounts of flash RAM in its iPods, and subsequently introduced the iPhone with far more memory storage than other smartphones, beginning with 4 to 8GB on the original iPhone at a time when most smartphones shipped with 256 to 512MB of storage.

"We think that was an absolutely fantastic use of Apple's cash," Cook said of the company's decision to pre-purchase a billion dollars of flash RAM, "and we constantly look for more of these. In the past several quarters, we've identified another area and come to recent agreements."

Nearly $4 billion of component strategy

Cook described the deal as "similar to flash agreement, focused in an area that we feel is very strategic," but said he would "prefer not to go into more details about what specific area it's in, but it's the same kind of thinking that led us to those deals."

Cook had earlier discussed the generally favorable pricing environment for components that had reduced the company's costs in the quarter more than expected, and noted that going forward one could "expect a favorable pricing environment for DRAM," while "some prices for raw materials such as key metals are currently increasing due to anticipated strengthening of worldwide economy. Bulk of other commodities from NAND to LCDs to batteries and most others are generally in supply/demand balance."

Components that may be considered strategic enough to warrant a $4 billion advanced commitment may include the rumored very high resolution Retina Display anticipated for iPad 2, or may relate to the custom design technology Cook discussed regarding the A4, such as component supply capacity for the coming A4 replacement, Apple's custom battery designs, or a combination of commodity parts, custom fabrication or Apple's original chip designs, and state of the art components.

So, I guess Apple’s 2011 purchase of Nortel shares is more for the patent war, I don’t think it would be a start of change of its all along strategy, as paraphrasing BusinessWeek's Arik Hesseldahl: "Apple's business philosophy is to acquire small companies that can be easily integrated into existing company projects." The Nortel purchase may just be an exception after all.

Well, we will see…

Updates from my homefront for 1H of Aug 2011

2011-08-16T11:46:00.003+08:00

Just haven't update the blog as often as before, it doesn't mean that I've abandoned this platform for sharing and keeping my thoughts with readers. It is just the fact of life for urban dwellers to struggle time and attention among all types of communication channels. For me, besides Blogger and Facebook, I've started to use Google+ and Weibo lately. I've not been an active user of the latter, but hey, those take time as well.

On the home front, my wife is gonna end her maternity leave this week. Once she goes back to work, it will be different at home front, 'stormy weather' is expected given the past history. What I can is that I just need to up my EQ to deal with it.....

A part-time helper is gonna come few days a week to help out with our housework. My current housemaid is just got her hands full with an infant and a toddler. The home environment is deteriorating, i.e. it is getting messy and dirty. We hope this new pair of hands would help to do some cleaning besides her core tasks of meals preparation. With a new helper, new set of arrangement/logistics are needed, such as give her money for grocery shopping and paying her for her works. As we wanna keep our housemaid's hands off on these items and the part-time helper will work in our working hours, we just need to manage them somehow. Also, I expect my wife will have 'comments' on her performance, expenses, the tastes of meals, etc. Hopefully, things will work out after some initial hiccups.

I've just ordered an very expensive 'toy' for my son - a digital piano that cost me like....2 new iPhones! My wife said she would pay for it. Surely, I'm fine with it, given that she is paying well now. Money is an issue, but the bigger issue to struggle with the limited space at home to fit it. I hope my observation is right that my son does indeed love music and has enough skill to handle it. I don't and won't force him to be a master of it. Since I'm a music lover who don't know how to play any instrument, I still welcome my son to have the chance to learn something that his old man didn't. Hopefully, he will love it and stick to it somehow. Cuz, it is a relatively long term commitment. Even though it is a thought that if he doesn't like it, his younger brother may like it. Still, I still would like my older son to be able to enjoy music at home and hopefully music will become an useful tool for him as a leisure, an escape, a sanctuary, or a way to express himself given that he does have his own 'character' from my observation. The next step is to hire the music tutor to give him private lessons - $$$ again!

In the last few months, with the birth of our young son, money just drained everywhere. Just take a reflection of what large items that cost $$$:
- Wife's doctor visits and delivery at hospital
- Healthy foods and dietary supplements for my wife
- Baby powder/diapers
- New AC
- New kitchen hood
- New bedroom cabinet and bookcase
- Digital Piano
- Home security cameras
etc.

Still, my wife and I are still tempted to update to iPhone 5 in next few months and iPad 3 next year! Come to think of it, the rational/logical side of my mind must be saying: what we are thinking? Given the deteriorating economic environment, i.e. inflation on all fronts - foods, transport, energy, RENT! We should try to save more and improve our investments rather than still thinking about expending more. Well, I don't have an answer to that. Maybe, we just want to live more comfortably, maybe it is because 2012 is coming! Who knows? Anyway, I think I'm a prudent consumer who doesn't make too many impulsive purchases before. I think things would be fine....

Being independent

2011-08-05T15:41:00.001+08:00

I’ve not blogged for a while, just kinda busy both at home and at work. It’s just hard to squeeze time to do things truly for myself these days. I don’t wanna just bullshit in my blog though I’ve all the right to do so. Since I became a parent myself, I don’t think my blog is simply a forum for me to express my thoughts. I would like to share my blog with my kids when they become old enough to read and in case they would like to understand more about their old man. So, I only want to say things here that I wouldn’t regret telling the world, including my kids.

Why am I busy? It is because I’ve responsibilities to fulfill. There comes to my thought about independency, the subject of this blog. I wasn’t growing up with lots of materialistic leisure. Living in a place where most of our neighbors have more or less the same economic status, families did know each others well. We talked to each other face to face, not by Facebook or via web. Inter-personal relationship and skills were much more developed back then than people these days. In that aspect, I don’t know if technological advancement is really a blessing or a curse. Anyway, for families without lots of means, bending together to trade helps and favors became very natural. I’m not talking about things that materialistic i.e. money, but simply sharing simple tools or even services like helping out watching others’ kids, things like that were very common back in those days.

Within the family, siblings did know the virtue of sharing, cause it was not just being polite or diplomatic, but out of necessity in view of shortage of resources. As a result, we learnt how to accommodate of not having certain things at certain time. We learn to be patient, taking turns, cherish the chance of our turn and being responsible for maintain the well-being of things on hand. In cases that we just don’t have what and when we want, we would improvise, coming up with alternatives, or simply practice tolerance.

As a result, all these contribute to our growth and maturing experiences. We might not be able to be financially or materialistically independent, but we have independent mind and composure to deal with ups and downs. We became more responsible to deal with what being put on our plate. We would either automatically start doing ourselves, or seeking others for help. Certainly, not simply push it back or to other people. We just know that if something is put on our lap, it’s ours to deal with.

On the contrary, kids these days just behave irrationally from the point of view of most parents. For me, rather than complaining, I would choose to understand and then take actions. Cuz, whether our kids are angels or monsters, they are largely our own creations. Again, that’s being responsible of our own making. We can’t just blame on the others, like the government, the media, the society or whatnot, without reflecting ourselves on what we have said and done!

For the understanding part, it is our own making. We give our kids more than they need even though we thought that they want/deserve it. Actually, giving them certain things is not really an issue, but the problem is the missing lesson that should be come with those things. For example, giving toys to a kid is fine, but giving too much too often would diminish their values. More importantly is that we should allocate time to play with them. They may be creative enough to learn playing them themselves, but giving them proper guidance and observing how they play are as important as if not more than the toys themselves. That’s the lesson that I’ve been learning right now. I love to buy books for my older son, but there are already enough books at home for his access. What’s lacking is spending time with him to read and to share my understandings of the book content with him. To be honest, sometimes I do use TV/video as babysitting tools. I know that was not the best, but I just couldn’t help it when I’ve other responsibilities to be taken care of. Yes, my kids should always be my top priority, but it is easier to say than done in some occasions. I do feel bad of not spending enough time and attention to them, at least not as much as I want to/can.

There are just so much to teach my kids. I think becoming independent is one of the most important things. I would never like my kids to be relying on others all the time, particularly for things that they should be capable to do on their own. I don’t want them to give themselves excuses of not trying or doing. They should be encouraged to learn, to experience failure and to pick themselves up again, and to practice. Unlike some parents who want their kids to be perfect in certain things by pushing their kids beyond their limits, at which they hate what they are doing, I would rather take a step back to examine what are the needs and what are simply nice to learn. I think it would be ideal if kids will learn something just by encouragement or motivation. Sometimes, a bit of pushing, using carrots and sticks would be needed. On the other hand, for the things that are nice to know, pushing alone should never be used and carrots may not be preferable in the long one. Ultimately, it is up to the kid himself to choose whether he wants to learn, let alone master those skills.

I believe that there are geniuses, but they are rare and I don’t think my kids are. I also believe that practice drives improvement and intensive/long term practices create experts. However, when it comes to become a master of certain skills, a passion has to come from within in order to sustain the long term ups and downs of the journey. It is something that just can’t be forced.

I hope my kids will truly learn the importance and appreciate the advantages of being independent. First of all, the more a person knows the more independent a person becomes. Secondly, you can help people. It is always a nice to help others. Thirdly, you have more control of your life as you do certain thing at the time you want on your on term. Also, if you don’t need to ask for external help which would incur costs, you may not need to return favor simply to get even. Lastly, don’t perceive that knowing how to do something means that you are automatically responsible to do it. Rather, it means that you have a choice to do if you have to.

The above are based on my life experience as well as lesson learned from others. I’m sure it can be subjected to criticism or arguments on certain points. However, as I always believe, you don’t need to blindly accept everything, just take what works for you, and discard those that don’t. That should be good enough.

Amy Winehouse

2011-07-25T11:06:00.003+08:00

Amy Winehouse (1983 – 2011) died on July 23 of unknown cause (pending for autopsy for sure), though it is most likely drug related.

Personally, I don’t know her songs very well, I remember when I had her songs on my iPhone before, I was impressed by her amazing voice like coming from an old soul given that she was (is) in her twenties. I do also remember her song ‘rehab’, what an ironic title for a singer who has long been associated with substance abuse. Artistically, she is definitely gifted with a great voice which is usually associated with a 40 or 50 years old black singer living in Brooklyn or Chicago all her life. On the contrary, it came from a white Jewish girl from the U.K. That makes her more interesting than just music. I’m not gonna dig too much into her background as it can be found in Wiki and elsewhere. Her death to me is just another example of the worst outcome of a cocktail of youth, fame, wealth, artistic talent, drugs, self-discipline, mal-functioned family, and media, another poor soul following the footstep of Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, and the alike.

It was said that ‘The good dies young’. I’m not sure she fits that 100%. But, who has the right to judge? However, I do have an impression that, it has been a curse or whatnot that ‘the more talented and gifted the one is artistically, the more likely he/she is damned in life in other extents’. I mean death, particularly dying young, is not necessary the outcome, that could also include broken marriage, miscarriage, jail time, health issue, childless, bankruptcy, rehab, etc. These have been linked to many successful artists that I can think of. For those who have been fortunate enough of not being linked to any of the above, they are usually not regarded as talented as those who are. I don’t know if that’s karma or else. Perhaps, it is because artistic talent itself is quite different from let’s say intelligence. Other talents, expertise, or skills can be attained by hard works, rote or repetitive exposure. Even for rocket scientist or brain surgeon, astrophysics or human brain structure are science that rules remain the same until is proved otherwise. With enough studying, hard-works and practice, skills can be obtained. However, artistic talents are different. Van Gogh or Picasso may not have the best skills in painting; other skillful workmen can mimic their works to even undistinguishable level. But their works will never be regarded as high as those from the masters. Similarly for music, you practice really well to become a very good musician, skill wise, but you will never play guitar as soulful as Eric Clapton. I think creativity is the key that distinguish an artist to a craftsman. Creativity is something that you either have or not. How artists create their works is definitely not science. They may rely on muse, something they dreamed of, or even referring thing from their subconscious. They just react to the same environment differently than we do, they create things that seem to be out of nothing in view of most regular Joes on the street. I think the tragic experiences that I mentioned above, though they are horrible to go through in life. They do have a positive side effect to artists that creativity are inspired or induced by walking on those horrific paths.

Anyway, I think only Amy Winehouse would know what she had gone through in her life and know how those had affected her personally deep down inside. To us, as music lovers, just wanna wish her can rest in peace and thanks for leaving behind the great works to us to enjoy and future generations to come.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon and The Tree of Life

2011-07-18T18:36:00.002+08:00

It has been a long long time since I was able to see 2 movies on the same day. Over the weekend, I was able to see the captioned movies and these are my thoughts.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon
The third movie of the Transformers franchise is definitely better than the last one (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen). I didn’t blog about that one as I actually watch it few weeks back on my computer. Now, the 3rd one is a 3D one that I quite enjoy on big screen. The first one was certainly a surprise when I first saw it, I was shocked and awed by the fact that the transformation of robots were finally realized marvelously on big screen and I thought the making of Gundam or Macross could finally be possible on big screen! Of course, those were still dreams….Anyway, going back to Transformers…the first one was fresh and new. Being a long time viewer of Michael Bay’s flicks, I don’t expect anything great from him storywise. Also, I wasn’t a follower of the animated original series, so it was definitely fine for me. The second one, well, just too messy and confusing in terms of both story and action scenes. I think he was too ambitious to show as many characters (robots) as possible, so it was just a mess. Anyway, the third one is much better. Let me list out the pluses:

Story – Well, it is not an Oscar material, but it is easy to follow. Jobs is done for brainless viewers like me (respect to this type of movie). Some mindless jokes on Shia, his parents, the Chinese guy are fine.

Characters – John Malkovich is a surprise in the movie, Frances McDormand was fine too.

Actions – much better because slow motions were added, I could see the car-to-robot-to-car transformation finally. Michael Bay obviously listened to what fans had said. Also, the scene of jumpers from plane was just awesome!

The major minus is:
Rosie Huntington-Whiteley – Well, she got a nice body, but that’s about it. When I look at this chick’s acting in this movie, as many critics or viewers had said, we miss Megan Fox badly! This Rosie chick’s acting makes Megan Fox like Meryl Streep! I know what the Rosie’s character is for in this movie, but she is not that pretty comparing with Megan. Rosie reminds me as a younger but uglier version of Cameron Diaz.

Don’t get me wrong this movie has only one minus, I just don’t have much expectation on this flick and surprising get entertained quite much by it. So, I just didn’t pay much attention to other aspects of this movie. So, I gave it a pass. Overall, is that worth viewing? I would say for sure. 3D doesn’t add or take away much to this movie. However, I still have not got any chance to see this on Imax, just can imagine that should be quite an experience.

The Tree of Life
I was so disappointed by the flick. Learned that this movie won the biggest awards in Cannes Festival, also Brad Pitt and Sean Penn are in this flick directed by the mysteric Terrence Malick has only make 5 films through out his decades of career. I thought it must worth seeing it. Critics do love it and viewers do split their views really far apart. Some love it and some hate it. I neither love it nor hate it indeed. I just felt disappointed upon viewing it. Before going to this movie, I was told that I must be very patient for the first half hour or so, as the images in the movies are very confusing and disoriented. Without patience, audiences did walk out of the movie. So, I already prepared my mind to view of such. Basically, I’m fine with those images (Discovery + Nature + National Geographics) and clips with Brad and Sean. My disappointment was mainly due to the end of the movie. I expected the movie should have a tight and explainable ending to tight all the loose ends of various elements over the 2+ hours of images, so that we can ‘realise’ what the movie is all about. At the end, I just saw Sean Penn on the beach with bunch of people including Brad Pitts, his sons and perhaps including his younger self. That’s it. What the Fxxk was that?

I know the movie is about life, how lives related to God? how we are come about and all that? But, what would the movie want us to conclude? At the end, I’ve not freaking idea what the director wants to convey to us. Just want us to think? No thanks!

Brad Pitt did a decent job in the movie. Basically, he is the highlight. Sean Penn was a total waste in it. Only seeing him spoke to his wife once, on the phone once, and just wandering around inside glass buildings, up and down in elevators, and running on the beach/desert. What’s the point? With such script, I think any actor can do that. What a waste! Those young boys that played Brad Pitt’s sons are fine, especially the oldest one. Guess he will have a good career in years to come. The actress who play Brad Pitt’s wife has many scenes in the movie, but her acting is also forgettable. Anyway, I think this movie is certainly a waste of time, especially I’m getting very picky in choosing what to see these days. Just don’t have much time to waste.

Google+ and Quora

2011-07-13T19:03:00.000+08:00

Just too busy lately to squeeze time to blog, not with less than 6 hrs of sleep per night. However, I feel better today and get something to blog about.

I was invited by my colleague to join Google+, the latest and most formidable Facebook competitor so far. Listened to Buzz Out Loud podcast last night, there expect 10M people will have join Google+ by end of this week. Having tried that today, I like to clean look of it, but not yet really doing much about it expect playing with the ‘Circle’ feature which allow me to group friends into categories. As I don’t really depends on Google’s address book, rather Facebook and my iPhone contacts are what I used, which are neither linked to Google+. Setting up contacts will be a key issue. Heard that there are 3^rd parties programs allow Facebook contacts to be transferred to Google+ out there, but security was cited as a concern. I guess I will stay put for that for the time being. So far, I think the problem for Google+ is to have killer feature that persuade Facebook users to jump ship. For me, I’m not jumping ship, simply taking a brief tour to see what Google+ is all about. However, Google+ has not been able to convince me to jump ship. That’s not good for Google, cuz, unlike other apps, social media is a platform that we all take time to maintain, and nobody has the time to maintain more than one. So, I think Google is though excited to have exponential growth of users signing up Google+, they better work their ass off to add killer features quick to convince Facebookees to jump ship. Otherwise, without measuring the real traffic, i.e. staying time on Google+ and update frequency, simply getting big number of Google+ members is simply a hot air balloon – not a real success.

I also signed up as an user of Quora.com. It is a site getting popular in the States, starting from the Valley, as a more serious and engaging tool that rival Ask.com or Yahoo! Answers. So far, I like what I see. If they can allow users to trim the extract of items for what they see on the screen, and a better organization of different topics in the UI, that would be perfect. I think it will be a very good tool for people like me who have high curiosity into things. As a good companion of Wikipedia, it is fun!

iPhone at 4

2011-06-30T09:55:00.001+08:00

Well, iPhone is 4 years old today. Happy Birthday!

Being an owner of an 3GS and husband of a 3G owner, I can’t help thanking how much iPhone has improved my livelihood in the past 2 years or so. Remember few years back, I was already wishing to be a smartphone owner, cuz I want a phone to serve me more than just communication. At that time, the closest product was the smartphone from a company that no longer exists – Dodpot. I was happy with the overall functions that it was able to provide back then. However, it was still lacking in the music department given how much I enjoy my iPod Classic back then. Also, the form factor of the Dodpot phone was too bulky to be carried around. I wouldn’t want to carry a ‘soap’ in my pocket. Furthermore, the price of that phone was staggering. I didn’t end up purchasing that phone and then….iPhone came along.

I remember watching the keynote from Steve Jobs in 2007 and my jaw was dropping when I see the size and the capabilities of iPhone. The multi-touch was simply astonishing! After seeing that, there was no doubt what my next would be and I didn’t care what else was gonna be released. Because of the carrier contract issue, I bought the 3G for my wife before I got my hand on 3GS. Well, I just can’t put the damn thing down since I bought them. The App Store was the key and it just kept the whole user experience refreshing everyday. To be honest, I’ve not fully utilize most of the capabilities of the phone. However, what I’ve been using regularly so far are enough to keep my busy and happy: podcast, music, camera, web-browsing, phone, games, notes taking, etc. Just can’t wait to see what iPhone 5 is gonna bring and it’s about time for me and my wife to upgrade.

P.S. Sorry Android, though I’ve been tempted to find out more from you, I just haven’t got a kick to switch camp yet.

My thoughts on iPhone 5 and more

2011-06-23T17:58:00.001+08:00

Until iPhone 5 is released by Apple, rumors will continue to fly. I’m not gonna go into details of what I think what iPhone 5 is gonna be different from iPhone 4, cuz there are numerous articles in sites that cover that topic. Instead, I wanna share my thought on the release schedule of iPhone 5 and how that fit into those of the rest of Apple products.

The previous versions of iPhones were released in June, however iPhone 5 has not followed that tradition. Basically, I think that the following factors are probably playing roles in that decision.

1. Antennagate of iPhone 4 – that caused some new design of the form factor of iPhone 5.

2. Delay of release of white iPhone 4 – same as above, both of which are something that I don’t think Steve Jobs would tolerate recurrence in iPhone 5 as long as he is still in charge of Apple.

3. Japan Earthquake in March – that might caused some constraints in the production of part supplies though Apple has lucrative contracts with her suppliers.

4. Verizon’s iPhone 4 – it definitely means iPhone 5 would need to handle both CDMA and GSM, on top of other internal upgrades.

5. Android Phones releases – Apple has been a leader and don’t want to be a follower of competitors’ products. Hence, it can’t just ignore what’s going on in the market, namely the rapid release of Android phones from various companies. As such, they need to be at least on par with if not leap over most Android phones in terms of functions.

As such, rather than the previous rumor of iPhone 5 would be an iPhone 4S, an incremental upgrade, most likely Apple is taking its time to do above that to maintain its lead over Android phones. Given that, I’m not surprise Apple is planning to release iPhone 5 later.

However, I’ve another thought which I’ve not come across in the media about the release schedule of iPhone 5. i.e. Apple is actually reshuffling the release schedule of all its products in view of the change of its product lines. I think that Apple, in this year or two, is going to consolidate its product release schedules into 3 annual events:

Q1 for Macs (iMac, MacBooks and peripherals)
Q2 for Software (WDCC)
Q3 for iOS products (iPods, iPhone and iPad?)

Q1 release is no brainer, it is already in process. Q2 for software has just been done with OSX, iOS5, and iCloud. Q3 release has long been music event for iPods which took place in Septembers. As iPod’s significance in Apple has been diminishing over the past few years, I don’t think it makes any sense to keep that as music only event anymore. To be honest, iPod Shuffle, iPod Nano, iPod Classic are fiddles. iPod Touch is the core product in the iPod line. However, what is the difference between iPod Touch and iPhone? Not much, except the calling part. Thus, it is kinda meaningless to hold an event to tell the world how iPod Touch is gonna catch up with the features and form factors of iPhone released few months earlier. Thus, I would be surprise iPhone will be the main course in near future and iPods upgrades will be side dishes instead.

Well, what about iPad? iPad has long been released in Apr with an special event. Since iPad is a product between Macs and iPhone, so function wise it make sense either being grouped in Macs or iPhone releases, particularly the latter given it is running iOS. However, with iPhone and iPods to be covered, if iPad is included as well, the event would be too long and too much info for people to digest. So, it also make some sense to be grouped under the Mac event as it is taking place in Q1 which is closer to Apr than Q3.

Anyway, I’ve no insider news and won’t know whether I’m right till Apple makes the moves. I guess the release of iPhone 5 and iPad 3 should give a pretty good idea to verify my thoughts.

'Dad' again

2011-06-07T12:32:00.003+08:00

I'm happy to announce that I'm the father again to a new born baby boy. This little cute angel joined our family last week. That's why I've not updated my blog since then. As there's so much to do for the new born. i.e. all the diaper-changing, bottle-feeding, etc. Just exhausting. I do hire a helper during the day time to assist us during our paternal and maternal leaves. However, still, I'm the one that wake up every few hours to feed my boy. Sleep has become a luxury. Thank God that I'm an 'easy-sleeper' that take me no time to snore, unlike my poor wife who is a 'awakener' that can't sleep easily but wake up in a snap with a bit of noise. Though I've experience of being a hands-on dad for my older son, every baby is just different. So far, my boy doesn't neg for hugging and all that. But, the bad thing is that he doesn't suck much! So the feeding part is torturing, it just takes too exhausting to huddle him to suck bottle. I hope things will turn around soon. Otherwise, I don't know how can that be managed when I get back to work in about 2 weeks. I just wanna pray.....

Life Questions

2011-05-26T15:00:00.001+08:00

How to be a better father?
How to be a better husband?
How to be a better son and grandson?
How to be a better brother?
How to be a better employee?
How to be a better teammate?
How to be a better friend?
How to be a better citizen to the society?
How to be a better me?

I think I’m intelligent enough to figure out the answer of the individual questions above. Most of the answers are not really about money, not that I’ve plenty. The problem is carrying out the answers in reality effectively and efficiently. Namely, how to achieve an optimal balance in resource (time, attention, planning and action) allocation and expected results? Some people may think that I would have more control of the former, but actually, that all depends on the latter. I’m not just talking about the results that I expect myself, but more about what OTHERS expect from me!

No book would be able to teach me how to do all that. Cuz, it is ultimately written by ME, it is the book of my life! It is tough, but as long as life goes on, I just gotta suck it up and do it.

A vivid dream on May 19

2011-05-20T10:48:00.001+08:00

I’ve not have a memorable dream for a while. That’s why I was so surprise with what I can remember from what I dream last night. These are the sequential (somewhat incoherent) bits and pieces that I can still recall:

1. Discussion with my current boss about his assignment of sending me to Taiwan for an unknown period to manage a team of 12. I was unwilling to go due to family reason.

2. I was in a hotel in Taiwan. I was in a hotel lobby, can’t remember the details, but I was looking at a black and white carbon copy of floor map. I was told my room number is 812.

3. I was in the hotel room, it was kinda big, but it was dark outside. I prayed and bowed in all four directions to tell ‘the spirits’ that I was seeking for a peaceful co-existence with them for 2 nights. Please don’t bother me.

4. I went into the bathroom, somehow it become a large cave with hot spring inside. It was dark but I still can see there were people there. Many kids and two young hot Chinese girls were walking up the rocks towards me in blue and yellow towels. I then turned back to my room and somehow went to the reception to complain how come there were so many people (about 18) in my room.

5. Then, I was on a roof of a long rectangular building. Somewhat like a dock of a battleship. It was supposed to be the roof of a hotel. Exact place is unknown.

6. I was talking face to face of two of my ex-ex-ex colleagues (HT and RL). Then, man I saw crafts in the air. Very big craft maneuvered in the blue sky with some white clouds. They are Gundams! Also, other very strange and weird aircraft as well! One of them is a large white cylinder with a black star on it and a long red arm that can bend. I was screaming and looking for a camera to film them. HT was filming them by his iPhone. I was so excited and thought those aircraft must be going to an air show or something.

Well, that’s it!

Personal Growth

2011-05-18T11:42:00.001+08:00

Recently, I have done a little bit of self-reflection of the current stage of my life. It is by no mean thorough or serious, but I do have a feeling about personal growth that I wanna blog here.

Personal growth that I mean here is more about growth/enhancement/improvement of my mind/spirit/intelligence. With such growth, naturally, I should feel better today than yesterday. I should perform better today than yesterday. As a result, things will turn out better which may lead to financial gain or spiritual satisfaction.

Usually, the mean to achieve such growth is through learning, supported by appropriate amount of exercise, healthy diet, sleep and entertainment. Also, a stable environment would help as well, namely, a steady income, decent health, and okay relationship with people who have first person contact frequently including family members, co-workers, peers, etc.

The learning that I mean here is basically picking up new knowledge, skills, and thoughts that can be applicable in real life. That can be obtained by taking courses, reading self-help books, etc. The point is that it must be something specific.

I feel like I’ve not grown much in recent times. I think it has a lot to do for being a responsible family man. I’m NOT here to blame on my wife and my kid. I enjoy very much for being a married man and a dad. The joy and satisfaction that they have been giving me is just irreplaceable. However, every take comes with give. I’m not trying to get maximum of everything which is impossible. Instead, I think I need to figure out a way to ‘optimize’ my resource to get a more satisfactory balance of both. Having said this much so far, you can tell that I’m not happy with my personal growth side so far.

The resource that I’m talking about here is not too much about money, not that I’ve lots of it. Rather, it is about time management. I did blog about Time repeatedly before. I’ve never tired of this topic. Cuz, as older we are, at least I am, the more acute sense of time that I have. Perhaps, it has something to do with the fact that we have a longer history that we can do self-reflection on. When we are 20 years old, what we saw at the time comparing to what we had been at 18, not that big of a difference would be noticed. Also, a 20 years old would see a lot of unknown in his life down the long road in future. There was just so much to look forward to. We had time to ‘kill’. We were enjoying our youth. For an older person, got married and became a dad. Things are looked to be more stable. Roles and responsibilities are more defined. Basically, you can pessimistically say that we are ‘stuck’ to be this and that. Regardless, simply referencing our parents, we can pretty much tell what our life should be going forward.

It is by no mean pessimistic or easy. Once we are married, we can tell our life path will deviate from those spirit-free bachelors. Once we became parent, our life path will further deviate from those leissez-fare couples without kid. We made life-decisions and just live with the consequences of them. The joy and pain of bachelors and childless couples have nothing to do with us. Personally, I would not miss the joy and feel fortune of not having the pain of those people. Cuz, I made my choices. The issue here is that how to deal with the joy and pain of being married and a parent. The joyful part is easy, just takes it as it comes, I think it is no brainer. The hard part is to manage the pain. I know the ‘half-glass’ full theory, it is an easy but quick pain reliever. That actually is too passive to fool myself for long term. What I need is something more concrete and tangible. I’m not looking for a timetable, but at least a strategy of time-management that could re-trigger my personal growth. I think that I have reached a point that I’m kinda desperate to have one.

I don’t believe that I’ve to shortchange the joy that I gain from being a husband and a dad. For now, I just think that I need to manage my overall time more ‘efficiently’. I guess I just need to reshuffle my priorities and set up tangible and reachable goals. I’m not too worry about motivation part, cuz I know myself enough that if I’ve a better plan and got excited enough of the goals, my motivation engine will auto-start itself. I guess, I just need to squeeze an hour or so to be by myself undisturbed, to think, to scrabble on my iPhone, and think again….let’s see what I can come up with….man just thinking and blogging it simultaneously really help!

My latest thoughts on NBA 2011

2011-05-17T17:00:00.001+08:00

My favorite team Boston Celtics was out by Miami Heat. I was not surprised by the result, given that Rondo was playing with one arm and Shaq was too old to recover. The bench couldn’t perform at expected level. So, here it goes for the season. Well, Doc is gonna be back for 5 more years. It is kinda interesting that he wanted so much to go back to Orlando to be with his kids in college, to see them play sports, etc a year ago. Now, he would coach 5 more years and don’t miss his kids’ games no more! I guess money talks. Anyway, it would be interesting to see what Danny Ainge will do in the unknown off-season given the possible lock out. Anyway, I will just stay tune.

Fortunately, my second favorite team Chicago Bulls is cruising along, beat Miami Heat in the first game of Eastern final. I guess the Bulls will win. I just don’t want Heat to be in the Final. Yes, the new Big Three will win championship soon or later, but I prefer the latter. Also, I doubt they can win 6-8 rings as they wished. Cuz, the Bulls is for real and I think Bulls will be the most dominant team in the next 5 years at least, provided they don’t suffer heavy injury. Bulls is playing as a team, yes DR is dominant, but he is also a guy that bring the team together. So, they will be tough to bit as Tom Thibs’s air-tight defensive schemes just suffocate most individualistic players. I love teams play as a team. So, go Bulls all the way this year and they deserve the ring!

Dallas will win the West, though I like Thunder, particularly after reading news story about Kevin Durant. What a humble kid he is! Similar to DR, I think they are much better young players as role models than those flashy LBJ, Carmelo Anthony, etc. However, I still like Bulls better. Thunder would be a great team rising in the West.

Spurs, similar to the Cs, is just too old as a team. It’s time to rebuild. Lakers is interesting, they are not as old as people think, but I just can’t see they will be better next year. With the Phil Jackson’s Zen management, those wild characters just can’t be contained. I don’t see them doing any better next year than this year. Will Phil retire? Maybe, more interesting would be…will the famous triangular defense retires with him? I know Rex Winter (if I remember the name right) is the real master of Triangular defense, but I don’t know if there’s gonna be any successor to that….hmmm…..