Melbourne Museum
Thursday, February 02, 2006
The police are a bunch of monkeys
Science & Technology
Animal behaviour
The police are a bunch of monkeys
Jan 26th 2006
The Economist
Simian society, too, needs the forces of law and order
MOST people, even the law-abiding, have ambiguous feelings towards the police. They are a salvation when it comes to protecting life, limb and property, but their efforts are, perhaps, slightly less welcome if your foot happens to slip momentarily on the accelerator. Few, however, would argue that human societies could dispense with their activities altogether. Even in villages, where everybody knows everybody else and social disapproval and the near-certainty of exposure are enough to discourage most criminal acts, the local bobby is a reassuring presence.
Most people, too, would assume such policing is uniquely human. But they would be wrong—at least if Jessica Flack, of the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico, and her colleagues are correct. For Dr Flack thinks that monkey societies also have police. Moreover, removing those police makes such societies less happy places.
Keystone cops
The police in Dr Flack's monkey societies are not specially assigned task forces, but small coteries of high-ranking individuals. The point about these individuals' behaviour is that, unlike most so-called alpha animals, they do not just defend their own interests. They do that, too, of course. But they also intervene to break up conflicts between lower-ranking individuals in an apparently disinterested way.
Dr Flack had discovered this behaviour in earlier research. Her latest work, just published in Nature, looked at how important policing is in maintaining harmony in the monkeys she studies, an Asian species called the pigtailed macaque. To do so, she went to the opposite end of the biological scale from that occupied by ethology (the science of animal behaviour) and borrowed a technique from genetics, called knockout analysis. In genetics, this involves “knocking out” a particular gene and seeing what effect its absence has on a cell's biochemical network. In ethology, it involves removing particular animals from a group and seeing what effect that has on the group's social network.
Dr Flack's troop was comprised of 84 animals (of whom 45 were adults). She knew that three males in the group and one female were on the receiving end of a disproportionate number of acts of submissive behaviour. She also observed that these individuals acted as a police force by breaking up fights. Crucially, they did this by interposing themselves between the opponents, or threatening them both simultaneously and, as far as it was possible to see, impartially.
To look at the effect of such policing, the team first recorded details of the social network between members of the group. They looked at such things as grooming, sitting in contact with or close to others, and play. Then they rounded up and removed the male police for ten hours on a randomly chosen day once a fortnight (they left the female because they thought that removing her would be socially disruptive for other reasons). Ten hours was reckoned long enough for the effects of the police's absence to be noticed, but not so long that the remaining males would start manoeuvring to occupy the vacant alpha positions.
It turned out that policing is the keystone of macaque society. Removing the police resulted in the remaining monkeys grooming fewer others, playing with fewer others and dividing up into cliques as the social network that held the troop together broke down. The number of aggressive incidents also increased.
Dr Flack thinks that the role of policing in these monkeys is to allow individuals to socialise widely at little risk and thus hold a large troop together, since the police will intervene if things get out of hand. The benefit to the police themselves, presumably, is the size of the troop, with the attendant virtues of defensive strength and (for the males) more available females. In simian as in human society, rank hath its privilege—and its obligations, too.
Animal behaviour
The police are a bunch of monkeys
Jan 26th 2006
The Economist
Simian society, too, needs the forces of law and order
MOST people, even the law-abiding, have ambiguous feelings towards the police. They are a salvation when it comes to protecting life, limb and property, but their efforts are, perhaps, slightly less welcome if your foot happens to slip momentarily on the accelerator. Few, however, would argue that human societies could dispense with their activities altogether. Even in villages, where everybody knows everybody else and social disapproval and the near-certainty of exposure are enough to discourage most criminal acts, the local bobby is a reassuring presence.
Most people, too, would assume such policing is uniquely human. But they would be wrong—at least if Jessica Flack, of the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico, and her colleagues are correct. For Dr Flack thinks that monkey societies also have police. Moreover, removing those police makes such societies less happy places.
Keystone cops
The police in Dr Flack's monkey societies are not specially assigned task forces, but small coteries of high-ranking individuals. The point about these individuals' behaviour is that, unlike most so-called alpha animals, they do not just defend their own interests. They do that, too, of course. But they also intervene to break up conflicts between lower-ranking individuals in an apparently disinterested way.
Dr Flack had discovered this behaviour in earlier research. Her latest work, just published in Nature, looked at how important policing is in maintaining harmony in the monkeys she studies, an Asian species called the pigtailed macaque. To do so, she went to the opposite end of the biological scale from that occupied by ethology (the science of animal behaviour) and borrowed a technique from genetics, called knockout analysis. In genetics, this involves “knocking out” a particular gene and seeing what effect its absence has on a cell's biochemical network. In ethology, it involves removing particular animals from a group and seeing what effect that has on the group's social network.
Dr Flack's troop was comprised of 84 animals (of whom 45 were adults). She knew that three males in the group and one female were on the receiving end of a disproportionate number of acts of submissive behaviour. She also observed that these individuals acted as a police force by breaking up fights. Crucially, they did this by interposing themselves between the opponents, or threatening them both simultaneously and, as far as it was possible to see, impartially.
To look at the effect of such policing, the team first recorded details of the social network between members of the group. They looked at such things as grooming, sitting in contact with or close to others, and play. Then they rounded up and removed the male police for ten hours on a randomly chosen day once a fortnight (they left the female because they thought that removing her would be socially disruptive for other reasons). Ten hours was reckoned long enough for the effects of the police's absence to be noticed, but not so long that the remaining males would start manoeuvring to occupy the vacant alpha positions.
It turned out that policing is the keystone of macaque society. Removing the police resulted in the remaining monkeys grooming fewer others, playing with fewer others and dividing up into cliques as the social network that held the troop together broke down. The number of aggressive incidents also increased.
Dr Flack thinks that the role of policing in these monkeys is to allow individuals to socialise widely at little risk and thus hold a large troop together, since the police will intervene if things get out of hand. The benefit to the police themselves, presumably, is the size of the troop, with the attendant virtues of defensive strength and (for the males) more available females. In simian as in human society, rank hath its privilege—and its obligations, too.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Thursday, January 26, 2006
一月二十五日
一月二十五日
前陣子忙得要死
現在一下子清閒起來
竟然覺得好不習慣好悶好無聊
好想學點甚麼
好想做點甚麼
結果
我只是不停地吃了不知甚麼
分別跟梁小姐廖小姐談到了結婚
我知道自己最想要的
是每晚回家途中知道心愛的人在等我那份安全和實在
(現在每晚回家途中望望自己的家
都只看窗內黑漆漆黑漆漆黑漆漆沒有人沒有人沒有人...
有時打開門鎖甚麼也看不見的那一刻
真的想掉頭就跑...)
即使結了婚
我們也得工作
所謂愛巢都只會淪為另一個黑漆漆黑漆漆黑漆漆沒有人沒有人沒有人的空間罷了
或者
再甜蜜的愛情
再要好的朋友
再成功的事業
都不能填補巨蟹座的欠缺
前陣子忙得要死
現在一下子清閒起來
竟然覺得好不習慣好悶好無聊
好想學點甚麼
好想做點甚麼
結果
我只是不停地吃了不知甚麼
分別跟梁小姐廖小姐談到了結婚
我知道自己最想要的
是每晚回家途中知道心愛的人在等我那份安全和實在
(現在每晚回家途中望望自己的家
都只看窗內黑漆漆黑漆漆黑漆漆沒有人沒有人沒有人...
有時打開門鎖甚麼也看不見的那一刻
真的想掉頭就跑...)
即使結了婚
我們也得工作
所謂愛巢都只會淪為另一個黑漆漆黑漆漆黑漆漆沒有人沒有人沒有人的空間罷了
或者
再甜蜜的愛情
再要好的朋友
再成功的事業
都不能填補巨蟹座的欠缺
最實在的
還是接受現實
學懂獨處
愛自己
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
FW: 女人心目中的好男人心目中的好男人
心目中的好男人（22歲時第一次寫）
1.帥
2.迷人
3.有錢
4.忠實的聽眾
5.風趣
6.體力好
7.衣著合宜
8.品味高雅
9.時時讓我驚喜
10.狂野浪漫的好情人
心目中的好男人（32歲時改寫）
1.五官端正－最好還有頭髮
2.會幫我開車門，拉座椅
3.肯花錢帶我上館子吃頓好的
4.聽的比說的多
5.聽我講笑話，該笑時會笑
6.肯幫我提菜籃
7.好歹有條領帶
8.喜歡吃我煮的菜
9.不會忘了生日及週年紀念日
10.一週至少溫存一番
心目中的好男人（42歲時改寫）
1.還像個人－禿子也無妨
2.等我上了車才開車
3.工作穩定－偶爾在麥當勞請吃大餐
4.還肯聽我說話
5.聽得懂笑話
6.搬得動傢俱
7.會找遮得住"小"腹的襯衫穿
8.不會笨到去買須要開瓶器的香檳
9.上完廁所能把馬桶蓋歸位
10.每週刮鬍子
心目中的好男人 (52歲時改寫）
1.偶爾剪個鼻毛及耳毛
2.不在公開場合打嗝或挖鼻孔
3.有點債信
4.我興緻來的時候，不會呼呼大睡
5.一樣的笑話不講N次
6.週末還肯離開沙發
7.會穿成對的襪子及乾淨的內衣褲
8.肯吃電視快餐
9.多少記得別人的名字
10.偶爾刮個鬍子
心目中的好男人 (62歲時改寫）
1.不會嚇壞小朋友
2.還記得浴室在哪
3.大病沒有
4.醒的時候鼾聲不大（睡的時候可以大聲些）
5.還記得為何發笑
6.還站的起來
7. 不會光著身子亂跑
8.肯吃軟食
9.還記得假牙在哪
10.還記得‧‧‧
心目中的好男人（72歲那年改寫）
1.活著就好
2.活著就好
3.活著就好
4.活著就好
5.活著就好
6.活著就好
7.活著就好
8.活著就好
9.活著就好
10.只要活著就好一切都無所謂
1.帥
2.迷人
3.有錢
4.忠實的聽眾
5.風趣
6.體力好
7.衣著合宜
8.品味高雅
9.時時讓我驚喜
10.狂野浪漫的好情人
心目中的好男人（32歲時改寫）
1.五官端正－最好還有頭髮
2.會幫我開車門，拉座椅
3.肯花錢帶我上館子吃頓好的
4.聽的比說的多
5.聽我講笑話，該笑時會笑
6.肯幫我提菜籃
7.好歹有條領帶
8.喜歡吃我煮的菜
9.不會忘了生日及週年紀念日
10.一週至少溫存一番
心目中的好男人（42歲時改寫）
1.還像個人－禿子也無妨
2.等我上了車才開車
3.工作穩定－偶爾在麥當勞請吃大餐
4.還肯聽我說話
5.聽得懂笑話
6.搬得動傢俱
7.會找遮得住"小"腹的襯衫穿
8.不會笨到去買須要開瓶器的香檳
9.上完廁所能把馬桶蓋歸位
10.每週刮鬍子
心目中的好男人 (52歲時改寫）
1.偶爾剪個鼻毛及耳毛
2.不在公開場合打嗝或挖鼻孔
3.有點債信
4.我興緻來的時候，不會呼呼大睡
5.一樣的笑話不講N次
6.週末還肯離開沙發
7.會穿成對的襪子及乾淨的內衣褲
8.肯吃電視快餐
9.多少記得別人的名字
10.偶爾刮個鬍子
心目中的好男人 (62歲時改寫）
1.不會嚇壞小朋友
2.還記得浴室在哪
3.大病沒有
4.醒的時候鼾聲不大（睡的時候可以大聲些）
5.還記得為何發笑
6.還站的起來
7. 不會光著身子亂跑
8.肯吃軟食
9.還記得假牙在哪
10.還記得‧‧‧
心目中的好男人（72歲那年改寫）
1.活著就好
2.活著就好
3.活著就好
4.活著就好
5.活著就好
6.活著就好
7.活著就好
8.活著就好
9.活著就好
10.只要活著就好一切都無所謂
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Dean's List
一月二十一日
Faculty of Social Science Exemplary Teaching Awards and Dean's List Prize Presenation Ceremony
過去幾年都沒有出席
今年臨別秋波
就陪爸爸來湊湊熱鬧吧
看著台上的李少南、張健波和張謙
還有同場大量全黑full suit、green得不得了同學
本應感觸良多
可是我只覺得好疲倦
不停地打瞌睡
(領悟:健康身體的確是美好生活的基本)
讀書時要證明自己相對簡單
有考試、不同的獎項和比賽
但工作時又如何?
一位同學告訴我她正在考獎學金
想起當時我只差一步...
Faculty of Social Science Exemplary Teaching Awards and Dean's List Prize Presenation Ceremony
過去幾年都沒有出席
今年臨別秋波
就陪爸爸來湊湊熱鬧吧
看著台上的李少南、張健波和張謙
還有同場大量全黑full suit、green得不得了同學
本應感觸良多
可是我只覺得好疲倦
不停地打瞌睡
(領悟:健康身體的確是美好生活的基本)
讀書時要證明自己相對簡單
有考試、不同的獎項和比賽
但工作時又如何?
一位同學告訴我她正在考獎學金
想起當時我只差一步...
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
滿足感
一月十七日
部門例會
同事和上司說星期日的活動辦得不錯
真好
經過今次經驗
信心大了
也更知道日後該怎麼做
原來我們都是小朋友
都會因一句讚賞而高興
Iris,別興奮得太早啊
獎勵自己:
1.吃得好
2.買新衣
冷水一盆:剛收到信用卡月結單
Resolution: MMM or CB?
部門例會
同事和上司說星期日的活動辦得不錯
真好
經過今次經驗
信心大了
也更知道日後該怎麼做
原來我們都是小朋友
都會因一句讚賞而高興
Iris,別興奮得太早啊
獎勵自己:
1.吃得好
2.買新衣
冷水一盆:剛收到信用卡月結單
Resolution: MMM or CB?
Monday, January 16, 2006
返工
一星期返七日工
日日做多過十二個鐘
廢寢忘餐
無時無刻都諗住壇大野
好在各位同事好幫手
終於叫做搞掂
好鍾意呢種怒做ge感覺
o係office"支力"到唔合埋眼都唔得果一刻
仲以為自己趕緊Varsity
下星期終於有新同事
好野
可以早d放工!
日日做多過十二個鐘
廢寢忘餐
無時無刻都諗住壇大野
好在各位同事好幫手
終於叫做搞掂
好鍾意呢種怒做ge感覺
o係office"支力"到唔合埋眼都唔得果一刻
仲以為自己趕緊Varsity
下星期終於有新同事
好野
可以早d放工!
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Happy Birthday!
Happy birthday to you~
Happy birthday to you~
Happy birthday to BANANA~
Happy birthday to you~
Friday, January 06, 2006
六合彩一注獨得5591萬
【明報專訊】連續6期無人中頭獎的六合彩，昨晚再開彩，吸引了大批市民下注，最終由一名幸運兒獨得近5591萬元的頭獎獎金，成為六合彩踏入2006年「造就」的第一名千萬富翁。今次亦是六合彩設立30年以來，歷來第四高的頭獎派彩，而昨晚的二獎亦有10注中獎，每注分得獎金61.7萬元。
昨晚六合彩攪出中獎號碼分別為5、10、22、38、44、46號，特別號碼13號。馬會資料顯示，昨晚的六合彩總投注額高達1.25億元，若以680萬名市民推算，等如每名港人平均下注18元，即每人買了接近4注六合彩，港九多個投注站昨傍晚亦出現購買六合彩的人龍。
I am not the one.
昨晚六合彩攪出中獎號碼分別為5、10、22、38、44、46號，特別號碼13號。馬會資料顯示，昨晚的六合彩總投注額高達1.25億元，若以680萬名市民推算，等如每名港人平均下注18元，即每人買了接近4注六合彩，港九多個投注站昨傍晚亦出現購買六合彩的人龍。
I am not the one.
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Saturday, December 31, 2005
蘇民峰 - 2006年生肖運程
豬 肖豬運程 ( 1947、1959、1971、1983、1995 )
肖豬人今年春風得意，得天時之利。有貴人提拔，財運亨通。 凡事採取積極主動，由於運氣旺盛，為事業推動將帶來莫大的進展，自然財富也跟著來。
財運:今年財運亨通，有利投資，需要多動腦筋，決定宜快不遲疑。凡事順達，所謀必利，財源大進。
增財運方法: 在辦公室或房間放一盆植物。
感情: 肖豬女性今年感情運大旺，有利於締結良緣，人緣比往年佳，未婚者應把握今年的姻緣機會，易找到異性良緣！ 至於肖豬男性今年桃花仍可，只需抽多些時間，多些努力，便有機會結識到理想對象！
增愛情運方法: 女性黃色有利，可佩帶玉石或水晶的飾物。男性紅色有利，可佩帶星形的飾品。
事業: 肖豬人今年將有機會把事業或工作大步地往前推進，日正當中，用心的衝刺是絕對不容錯過的。 難得的好運，應好好珍惜，上班一族不但不會被裁員，還有利陞遷，並有加薪的機會。
乙亥年：95年--精神不佳，學業不利。35 年--身體欠佳，小心病痛。
丁亥年：凡事未利，小心謹慎。
己亥年：運勢不佳，不可妄動。
辛亥年：運程未利，守舊為上。
癸亥年：運勢仍可，需防小人。
一月份：運程未利，凡事小心。
二月份：運勢仍差，不宜妄動。
三月份：略有好轉，小心健康。
四月份：財運欠佳，橫財勿沾。
五月份：運程轉佳，財源大利。
六月份：旺勢持續，乘勝進取。
七月份：吉凶參半，凡事三思。
八月份：諸多紛爭，提防小人。
九月份：運勢轉差，守舊宜靜。
十月份：吉星拱照，凡謀必利。
十一月：壓力大增，各事小心。
十二月：運程不利，凡事謹慎。
http://www.haomama.com/forum/posts/list/389.page;jsessionid=A4D09838473AEC7693DEDA32F812C836埋單
2005
一月:新的學期，讀了自己好喜歡的幾科(News Translation, Anthropology, Economics...)
二月:為前路煩惱：讀書？工作？
三月：送舊，繼續煩惱
四月：當中大學生的最後一個月
五月：澳洲之旅!
六、七月：最後一個暑假
八月：上班
九月：Lowest days in my life
十月：Low
十一月: Low
十二月: Low low low
一月:新的學期，讀了自己好喜歡的幾科(News Translation, Anthropology, Economics...)
二月:為前路煩惱：讀書？工作？
三月：送舊，繼續煩惱
四月：當中大學生的最後一個月
五月：澳洲之旅!
六、七月：最後一個暑假
八月：上班
九月：Lowest days in my life
十月：Low
十一月: Low
十二月: Low low low
Friday, December 30, 2005
Monday, December 26, 2005
童心
一直都覺得自己比同齡的人老
(心理測驗顯示我的精神年齡是35歲!)
其實我很喜歡小朋友
今天跟許小姐回中大拍照(http://community.webshots.com/user/iris_grad_natalie)
她是我以前的補習學生
有好一陣子我天天見她
感覺比媽媽還親
這小女孩12歲了
但還像個小寶寶
天真得可愛
但又純潔得令人擔心
跟她在一起真的好開心
當小孩真好
Merry Christmas
Christmas
跟區小姐到港大和冠賢兄拍畢業照
閒談的感覺好舒服
可惜胃痛痛痛痛痛痛
手腳冰冷......
胡思亂想
以為自己得了腸胃癌
我快死了吧
下午去了雷小姐的洗禮
找到自己終身的寄託
的確是幸福的事
我也好幸福^.^
跟區小姐到港大和冠賢兄拍畢業照
閒談的感覺好舒服
可惜胃痛痛痛痛痛痛
手腳冰冷......
胡思亂想
以為自己得了腸胃癌
我快死了吧
下午去了雷小姐的洗禮
找到自己終身的寄託
的確是幸福的事
我也好幸福^.^
Friday, December 23, 2005
Christmas Party + 冬至
十二月二十二日
是日公司在會展Party
節目包括自助午餐、遊戲、抽獎...
好玩!
可惜一早起床便開始胃痛
痛痛痛痛痛
痛得連晚上冬至那餐都完全沒有吃
討厭病
討厭叫愛我的人擔心
是日公司在會展Party
節目包括自助午餐、遊戲、抽獎...
好玩!
可惜一早起床便開始胃痛
痛痛痛痛痛
痛得連晚上冬至那餐都完全沒有吃
討厭病
討厭叫愛我的人擔心
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Ups and downs
21 Dec 2005
Ups:
1. The Bosses commented positively on my report
2. Got a grand prize in Department Christmas lucky draw
3. Mango Sale
Downs:
1. Baby Annabelle just passed away
2. Pen's dear granny just passed away as well
Ups:
1. Alison is still strong
2. Pen still has a warm family and a nice boyfriend
3. Sun still rises
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Monday, December 19, 2005
星期天
十二月十八日
星期天
跟爸爸和哥哥打乒乓
其實不過想工作忙碌的爸爸可以放鬆放鬆
希望他開心
發明了芝麻蛋白蒸蛋糕
可惜忘了拍照
你說好吃
如果包裝得好
$10一小件絕無問題
呵呵呵!
下午在你家小睡一會
真好
晚上常睡得很差
但只要有你在旁
我便可以睡得又香又甜
真幸福
你吃了芝麻蛋白蛋糕(我造的!)、燒賣(我買的!)和咖啡(我沖的!)後
也露出了幸福的笑容
好可愛
最新目標:
1.重現腹肌(More Hoola Hoops and aerobic exercise, less food at night)
2.試盡各款方包(choice of the day: 菠菜方包from Pies & Tarts)
星期天
跟爸爸和哥哥打乒乓
其實不過想工作忙碌的爸爸可以放鬆放鬆
希望他開心
發明了芝麻蛋白蒸蛋糕
可惜忘了拍照
你說好吃
如果包裝得好
$10一小件絕無問題
呵呵呵!
下午在你家小睡一會
真好
晚上常睡得很差
但只要有你在旁
我便可以睡得又香又甜
真幸福
你吃了芝麻蛋白蛋糕(我造的!)、燒賣(我買的!)和咖啡(我沖的!)後
也露出了幸福的笑容
好可愛
最新目標:
1.重現腹肌(More Hoola Hoops and aerobic exercise, less food at night)
2.試盡各款方包(choice of the day: 菠菜方包from Pies & Tarts)
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Friday, December 16, 2005
尋找
十二月十五日
每當出席一些社交場合
看著別人說著假得要死的話和自己更假的所謂笑容
心底便會有把聲音問自己
Hey What are you doing? Are you happy?
晚上6:40離開公司
竟然要偷偷摸摸還帶點內疚
我是把生命給賣了嗎?
走遍中、上環為你找一個袋
可惜仍是徒勞
見面時你的冷淡更我心更沉更重
我真的好累啊
你可否問候一下?
當然我知道你那一刻不過是剛睡醒
但整晚我都好難受
看著電視螢光幕中的Jamie Oliver
拿著電話聽筒又不敢吵醒你
那個我又問自己:
What are you doing?
What are you looking for?
每當出席一些社交場合
看著別人說著假得要死的話和自己更假的所謂笑容
心底便會有把聲音問自己
Hey What are you doing? Are you happy?
晚上6:40離開公司
竟然要偷偷摸摸還帶點內疚
我是把生命給賣了嗎?
走遍中、上環為你找一個袋
可惜仍是徒勞
見面時你的冷淡更我心更沉更重
我真的好累啊
你可否問候一下?
當然我知道你那一刻不過是剛睡醒
但整晚我都好難受
看著電視螢光幕中的Jamie Oliver
拿著電話聽筒又不敢吵醒你
那個我又問自己:
What are you doing?
What are you looking for?
Thursday, December 15, 2005
口腹之肉
十二月十四日
喜歡吃
獨自吃開心
和喜歡的人一起吃更開心
昨天午餐跟各位MT吃越南菜
好好味
好開心
晚餐跟你簡單的吃
也很快樂
所以別為昨晚的趕忙而慚愧
我不會忘記我有事時你待我怎樣好
p.s.I love shocking pink!
p.p.s.肉肉肉肉肉...>.<
喜歡吃
獨自吃開心
和喜歡的人一起吃更開心
昨天午餐跟各位MT吃越南菜
好好味
好開心
晚餐跟你簡單的吃
也很快樂
所以別為昨晚的趕忙而慚愧
我不會忘記我有事時你待我怎樣好
可以當你的形象顧問
我好榮幸
p.s.I love shocking pink!
p.p.s.肉肉肉肉肉...>.<
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Management Outing
十二月十日
今天是NWSH Senior Management Outing的大日子
簡單來說
即是一眾董事經理高層去旅行
作為籌備人之一的我
如臨大敵
當然啦
在場位位都可以置我於死地
我又如何可以不緊張?
除了人數不夠多、船程太長、導遊不夠專業、行程太緊湊等方面有待改善之外
整個活動都尚算及格
玩得最高興是回程時與各MT與老闆玩集體遊戲如解手、拍七等
很久沒有這樣開懷玩樂過
Album: http://community.webshots.com/user/iris_cheng_NWSH_1
然後去銅鑼灣給你買了對耳環
好累
好想倒下
Saturday, December 10, 2005
畢業
十二月八日
中大畢業禮
各位同學似乎都覺得好無聊
我只覺得好熱和好睏
最精神是身邊的Maggie和小東向走過曾蔭權大叫"普選呀特首"的一刻
其實畢業與否
不在於這個儀式吧
下午崇基畢業典禮
爸爸媽媽也來了
他們看來好興奮（set了頭!!)
可惜他們只能坐在LT4看現場轉播
梁院長和院牧說話依舊風趣......
席中我不斷想著爸爸媽媽
不知從何時開始
我會時常擔心他們
是報應吧
中大畢業禮
各位同學似乎都覺得好無聊
我只覺得好熱和好睏
最精神是身邊的Maggie和小東向走過曾蔭權大叫"普選呀特首"的一刻
其實畢業與否
不在於這個儀式吧
下午崇基畢業典禮
爸爸媽媽也來了
他們看來好興奮（set了頭!!)
可惜他們只能坐在LT4看現場轉播
鞍山依舊蒼蒼
吐露依舊洋洋
崇基禮堂中大家的歌聲依舊雄壯梁院長和院牧說話依舊風趣......
席中我不斷想著爸爸媽媽
不知從何時開始
我會時常擔心他們
是報應吧
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Sunday, December 04, 2005
生活
跟birthday girl梁小姐等一行五人晚餐
席間談到大家將來想過怎樣的生活
這也是我常思考的問題
一直覺得金錢與游閒是魚與熊掌
還記得小時候
我們一家六口住在觀塘一幢很舊的大廈裡
吃的是白粥爛蘋果
四兄弟姊妹睡一張床
每天最快樂的是與家人同枱早晚餐的時光
三年級那年
爸媽開始了自己的生意
生活好多了
但爸媽每天工作十多小時
沒休息沒娛樂
我看著只有痛心和壓力
他們自此亦沒時間陪我們
直至今天
我仍然為著自己蒼白孤獨不完整的家庭生活而暗暗悲哀
我寧願繼續吃爛蘋果
現在嗎
雖然我喜歡自己多采多姿的工作
但畢竟人生苦短精神有限
每日上班下班上班下班努力工作後
已無餘力關心身邊的人
甚至花點時間讀本自己喜歡的書跑跑自己喜歡的路
也好像很奢侈
我知道我想要甚麼
我要很多很多時間在家(典型巨蟹座!)
我想睡覺、煮飯、跑步、行山、讀書、看電影
不需要太多的物質
不介意住公屋吃爛蘋果
不想過爸媽般的生活
這或許比發達更難
席間談到大家將來想過怎樣的生活
這也是我常思考的問題
一直覺得金錢與游閒是魚與熊掌
還記得小時候
我們一家六口住在觀塘一幢很舊的大廈裡
吃的是白粥爛蘋果
四兄弟姊妹睡一張床
每天最快樂的是與家人同枱早晚餐的時光
三年級那年
爸媽開始了自己的生意
生活好多了
但爸媽每天工作十多小時
沒休息沒娛樂
我看著只有痛心和壓力
他們自此亦沒時間陪我們
直至今天
我仍然為著自己蒼白孤獨不完整的家庭生活而暗暗悲哀
我寧願繼續吃爛蘋果
現在嗎
雖然我喜歡自己多采多姿的工作
但畢竟人生苦短精神有限
每日上班下班上班下班努力工作後
已無餘力關心身邊的人
甚至花點時間讀本自己喜歡的書跑跑自己喜歡的路
也好像很奢侈
我知道我想要甚麼
我要很多很多時間在家(典型巨蟹座!)
我想睡覺、煮飯、跑步、行山、讀書、看電影
不需要太多的物質
不介意住公屋吃爛蘋果
不想過爸媽般的生活
這或許比發達更難
Friday, December 02, 2005
過關
過了這一關
我知道
我會活得更好
為愛我的人
為我愛的人
這三個月真的很難熬
面對這種事
對不起
除了藏起自己
我不知可以怎樣
甚至
直到這一刻
我仍然不懂如何面對
無論如何
總算熬過了
往後就只剩錢的問題
......
多謝你們的關心和愛護
我知道
我會活得更好
為愛我的人
為我愛的人
這三個月真的很難熬
面對這種事
對不起
除了藏起自己
我不知可以怎樣
甚至
直到這一刻
我仍然不懂如何面對
無論如何
總算熬過了
往後就只剩錢的問題
......
多謝你們的關心和愛護
Sunday, November 06, 2005
跑
十一月六日
整整兩星期沒跑步了
全身的細胞都蠢蠢欲動
結果冒著胃痛的危險
晚上吃飽後跑跑跑
好爽
可惜真的胃痛
不然我會多跑幾公里
好想平日上班前或下班後也跑跑
一星期兩次也好
要努力
p.s.明天回中大講recruitment talk。好懷念當張佬人的日子。
整整兩星期沒跑步了
全身的細胞都蠢蠢欲動
結果冒著胃痛的危險
晚上吃飽後跑跑跑
好爽
可惜真的胃痛
不然我會多跑幾公里
好想平日上班前或下班後也跑跑
一星期兩次也好
要努力
p.s.明天回中大講recruitment talk。好懷念當張佬人的日子。
死心塌地
十一月五日
依著欄杆看著大海的我問你："你還記得那號碼嗎？"
"816，"你立即說。
想不到你細心得連這也記住。我是真的感動了。謝謝你。世界上沒可能有第二個人像你這樣愛我吧。激動不已的我只想擁著你瘋狂的哭。哭。哭。但我知道你會擔心。但我還是忍不住。在這些日子，你的不離不棄叫我慚愧......如果身份對掉，我也不能保證我可以做到。想不到你對我這麼好。你真的很好很好很好。
你太好。
依著欄杆看著大海的我問你："你還記得那號碼嗎？"
"816，"你立即說。
想不到你細心得連這也記住。我是真的感動了。謝謝你。世界上沒可能有第二個人像你這樣愛我吧。激動不已的我只想擁著你瘋狂的哭。哭。哭。但我知道你會擔心。但我還是忍不住。在這些日子，你的不離不棄叫我慚愧......如果身份對掉，我也不能保證我可以做到。想不到你對我這麼好。你真的很好很好很好。
你太好。
Friday, November 04, 2005
Sunday, October 02, 2005
無病呻吟
十月二日
好幾天幾乎沒睡
一早醒來餓極了
放棄跑步
吃了連續幾日的傷風必理痛
今天還是有點發燒
泡熱水澡後
身體不受控制地出汗
衣衫濕透
好熱
下午幸好有你陪我
簡簡單單的在家休息
到附近走走
我覺得好寫意好幸福
我是認真的
好幾天幾乎沒睡
一早醒來餓極了
放棄跑步
吃了連續幾日的傷風必理痛
今天還是有點發燒
泡熱水澡後
身體不受控制地出汗
衣衫濕透
好熱
下午幸好有你陪我
簡簡單單的在家休息
到附近走走
我覺得好寫意好幸福
我是認真的
24/9 - 30/9
很久很久沒有寫什麼了
還有誰會關心這個荒廢的blog嗎
九月廿四日
三號風球
你陪我到尖沙咀
最難過的時候你都在我身邊
...
中午一起到了表哥茶餐廳
食而不知其味
九月廿五日
認真的跑
我會堅持
九月廿六日
你第一天上班
中午時不能給你打電話了
好想你
很大雨
窗外的世界像黑白電影的畫面
又做錯事了
心情比天色更灰
幸好今天時兩年半紀念日
九月廿七日
連OA也有資格向我黑面
九月廿八日
原來一碼有三十六吋
我一生都會緊記
謝謝你晚上陪我散步
九月廿九日
工作工作再工作
晚上還得上一個workshop
終於明白生活的咄咄逼人
睡了有兩個小時吧
九月三十日
便服日
大家的心情也輕鬆多了
看著鏡中那穿起校服打著孖辮但殘得不得了的女子
我無話可說
想不到各位同事都這樣好玩
真好
第一次有人讚我的工作做得好
^.^
晚上跟各位GM和MT燒烤
好喜歡各位
真慶幸自己有份好工
我發覺自己好堅強
還有誰會關心這個荒廢的blog嗎
九月廿四日
三號風球
你陪我到尖沙咀
最難過的時候你都在我身邊
...
中午一起到了表哥茶餐廳
食而不知其味
九月廿五日
認真的跑
我會堅持
九月廿六日
你第一天上班
中午時不能給你打電話了
好想你
很大雨
窗外的世界像黑白電影的畫面
又做錯事了
心情比天色更灰
幸好今天時兩年半紀念日
九月廿七日
連OA也有資格向我黑面
九月廿八日
原來一碼有三十六吋
我一生都會緊記
謝謝你晚上陪我散步
九月廿九日
工作工作再工作
晚上還得上一個workshop
終於明白生活的咄咄逼人
睡了有兩個小時吧
九月三十日
便服日
大家的心情也輕鬆多了
看著鏡中那穿起校服打著孖辮但殘得不得了的女子
我無話可說
想不到各位同事都這樣好玩
真好
第一次有人讚我的工作做得好
^.^
晚上跟各位GM和MT燒烤
好喜歡各位
真慶幸自己有份好工
我發覺自己好堅強
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
書
九月二十一日
喜歡看書
讀得很雜
也吝嗇
捨不得買
常打書釘
喜歡書店中各人集體地沉醉在自我空間的感覺
今天翻了翻潘國靈的《城市學:香港文化筆記》和沈旭輝那本叫美伊什麼的書
欲罷不能
高興得要死
還有 Sarah Strohmeyer 的 "Barbie Unbound: A Parody of the barbie Obsession"
也好像很有趣
留意已久的牛棚書展也快開幕了
好想去
喜歡看書
讀得很雜
也吝嗇
捨不得買
常打書釘
喜歡書店中各人集體地沉醉在自我空間的感覺
今天翻了翻潘國靈的《城市學:香港文化筆記》和沈旭輝那本叫美伊什麼的書
欲罷不能
高興得要死
還有 Sarah Strohmeyer 的 "Barbie Unbound: A Parody of the barbie Obsession"
也好像很有趣
留意已久的牛棚書展也快開幕了
好想去
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
澳門二三事
九月二十日
因為工作時犯錯
心情極度低落
多謝Louisa和Mandy的安慰
我可是很堅強的
別擔心
下午去了澳門出席一個公司的活動
想起去年跟你來遊玩
又想起你現在正在為會計專業試努力
心情更沉重了
回程時跟上司和上上上司一起乘新渡輪豪華位
幸好可以分開坐
在船上吃了一點蛋糕
好吃
但浮沉了一會後
好想嘔
或者
把那一切都吐出來
我們會好過一點
I am very tough
I know
因為工作時犯錯
心情極度低落
多謝Louisa和Mandy的安慰
我可是很堅強的
別擔心
下午去了澳門出席一個公司的活動
想起去年跟你來遊玩
又想起你現在正在為會計專業試努力
心情更沉重了
回程時跟上司和上上上司一起乘新渡輪豪華位
幸好可以分開坐
在船上吃了一點蛋糕
好吃
但浮沉了一會後
好想嘔
或者
把那一切都吐出來
我們會好過一點
I am very tough
I know
Monday, September 19, 2005
努力
九月十九日
早上做了gym
本打算跑步
跑著跑著
兩旁的跑道都沒人
感覺很沒意思
還是做anaerobic算了
約了莊員在尖沙咀晚飯
呵呵
這間泰豊廔(http://www.openrice.com/sr2.htm?shopid=3436)真是好地方
雖然地點有點僻
但食物和服務都不錯
份量又大
我們十人吃一個六人餐都有剩
哈哈
大家可能跟我一樣吃月餅吃"濟"了
席間Heidi和Teresa不斷說起PA生活的萬般無奈
你們要加油啊
堅持自己理想的人最可敬
努力!
早上做了gym
本打算跑步
跑著跑著
兩旁的跑道都沒人
感覺很沒意思
還是做anaerobic算了
約了莊員在尖沙咀晚飯
呵呵
這間泰豊廔(http://www.openrice.com/sr2.htm?shopid=3436)真是好地方
雖然地點有點僻
但食物和服務都不錯
份量又大
我們十人吃一個六人餐都有剩
哈哈
大家可能跟我一樣吃月餅吃"濟"了
席間Heidi和Teresa不斷說起PA生活的萬般無奈
你們要加油啊
堅持自己理想的人最可敬
努力!
Sunday, September 18, 2005
中秋節
九月十八日
從小就很珍惜中秋節
不單是中秋
農曆新年、元宵、端午......所有中式節日
因為只有在這些日子
我才可以享受一家人一起晚飯
今年也不例外
唯一可惜的
是今早吃了四份一個榮華雙黃白蓮蓉和幾塊雞後
就肚脹肚痛
>.<
以後不再吃月餅和雞
你要加油啊
從小就很珍惜中秋節
不單是中秋
農曆新年、元宵、端午......所有中式節日
因為只有在這些日子
我才可以享受一家人一起晚飯
今年也不例外
唯一可惜的
是今早吃了四份一個榮華雙黃白蓮蓉和幾塊雞後
就肚脹肚痛
>.<
以後不再吃月餅和雞
你要加油啊
Saturday, September 17, 2005
跑!
九月十七日
終於認真的跑了4.5K
上次跑步已是那可怕的星期天
不斷的向前跑
感覺很好
我會繼續努力
下午跟MT和其他同事到鰂魚涌做義工探訪老人
出發途中
雨忽然下得很兇
風也刮得厲害
Louisa,June和我三個站在電車站
前有狂風暴雨
後有車輛駛過馬路濺起污水
我們的小傘子形同虛設
長髮比瘋婦還亂
尷尬極了
我只覺得好好笑
跟June笑破肚皮
探了三戶人家
都算幸福
...
好想念外婆
今天Chris和他的Joyce也來了
真sweet
我也好想你
終於認真的跑了4.5K
上次跑步已是那可怕的星期天
不斷的向前跑
感覺很好
我會繼續努力
下午跟MT和其他同事到鰂魚涌做義工探訪老人
出發途中
雨忽然下得很兇
風也刮得厲害
Louisa,June和我三個站在電車站
前有狂風暴雨
後有車輛駛過馬路濺起污水
我們的小傘子形同虛設
長髮比瘋婦還亂
尷尬極了
我只覺得好好笑
跟June笑破肚皮
探了三戶人家
都算幸福
...
好想念外婆
今天Chris和他的Joyce也來了
真sweet
我也好想你
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Monday, September 12, 2005
Saturday, September 10, 2005
Something happened
Something unfortunate happened. Hopefully in a few months time I will be fine. Don't worry about me. I am ok. But my dear friends, please forgive me for hiding myself. I do miss you all.
Please don't ask. Please.
Please don't ask. Please.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Saturday, September 03, 2005
男人標準身高如何計算
男人標準身高如何計算
北京娛樂信報 2005-09-02
男人的標準身高應該這樣計算的:
1.當他擁抱自己的女人的時候，女人的下巴可以微微的擱在他的肩膀上，這樣他的身高就很標準。
2.當女人投入他的懷抱，一張臉剛好貼在他的胸前，聽到他的呼吸聲。如果女人只能貼著他的橫膈膜，這個男的身高就不符合標準。
3.當女人痛恨他的時候，想摑他一巴掌時，手不用舉得太高，以致那一巴掌不夠重。
4.當女人用膝蓋撞他的時候，能夠撞到他的肚或腰部，而不是要害部位。隨時被女人撞中要害的男人，一定是本身身高不合標準。
5.他的高度剛好要女人微微抬頭仰望他，而不是看到他頭頂的白發或禿頭。
6.當他蹲下來的時候，剛好可以讓女人踏在他的肩膀上，攀過一堵牆。
7.當女人受傷害，需要保護時，男人忽然變得很高大，能夠給她安全感，能夠站在她面前保護她。如果無法在女人最需要他的時候變得高大，這種男人就太“矮”了。
8.有了孩子以後，男人忽而變小，跟孩子的高度一樣，和他一起在地上爬行。為了家人的幸福，他可以縮小自己。
以上純粹為一家之言,絕不代表本人立場
北京娛樂信報 2005-09-02
男人的標準身高應該這樣計算的:
1.當他擁抱自己的女人的時候，女人的下巴可以微微的擱在他的肩膀上，這樣他的身高就很標準。
2.當女人投入他的懷抱，一張臉剛好貼在他的胸前，聽到他的呼吸聲。如果女人只能貼著他的橫膈膜，這個男的身高就不符合標準。
3.當女人痛恨他的時候，想摑他一巴掌時，手不用舉得太高，以致那一巴掌不夠重。
4.當女人用膝蓋撞他的時候，能夠撞到他的肚或腰部，而不是要害部位。隨時被女人撞中要害的男人，一定是本身身高不合標準。
5.他的高度剛好要女人微微抬頭仰望他，而不是看到他頭頂的白發或禿頭。
6.當他蹲下來的時候，剛好可以讓女人踏在他的肩膀上，攀過一堵牆。
7.當女人受傷害，需要保護時，男人忽然變得很高大，能夠給她安全感，能夠站在她面前保護她。如果無法在女人最需要他的時候變得高大，這種男人就太“矮”了。
8.有了孩子以後，男人忽而變小，跟孩子的高度一樣，和他一起在地上爬行。為了家人的幸福，他可以縮小自己。
以上純粹為一家之言,絕不代表本人立場
週末
九月三日
很久沒跑步了
本來打算做做gym
但今天醒來竟然出奇的累累累
明天才跑吧
下午代表公司去觀塘做義工
像回到中學時代
晚上煮了西蘭花炒肉片和海鮮漢堡
好味~
還是最喜歡自己煲的白飯
p.s.買了枝金啡色eyeliner,但好像跟膚色太接近,效果一般>.<
很久沒跑步了
本來打算做做gym
但今天醒來竟然出奇的累累累
明天才跑吧
下午代表公司去觀塘做義工
像回到中學時代
晚上煮了西蘭花炒肉片和海鮮漢堡
好味~
還是最喜歡自己煲的白飯
p.s.買了枝金啡色eyeliner,但好像跟膚色太接近,效果一般>.<
Friday, September 02, 2005
會展廚房
九月二日
中午跟Susan, Chris 和CY吃飯
第一次真正覺得自己是中環人
兩位男士說他們的office好靜好悶
Chris說"換左MT合照做wallpaper,好refreshing!醒哂!"
大家都說努力要佈置好自己的位子
有空歡迎來參觀
下午才知道原來傳訊部的同事來過找我lunch
但我已經出外了
希望他們不會覺得我偷懶
五時多終於可以去會展
先在Harbour Road Cafe做訪問
然後負責人帶我們入廚房
哈哈!好高興!
好有趣!
上菜時幾百人的侍應隊有趕急但秩序地送餐
像軍隊
真的好高興
好想"嘩!嘩!嘩!"的大叫和大笑
但同行的同事有點cool
唯有努力地抑壓自己的興奮
好想念其他MT和朋友
我知道你們一定會陪我開懷的大笑大叫
今晚會展Grand Hall有Shaw Prize的頒獎晚宴
見到大量TVB的工作人員
好想遇上認識的人
但始終沒有碰見誰
Hall 1有Gucci 的 Fashion Show
好想看啊
Hall 2 有楊千嬅和其他歌手的concert
Hall 3 有東華宴會
一直參觀到晚上九時多
負責人送我們每人一條新圍裙留為紀念
^.^
你說"出唻做野果d人講野做人都好小心,你如果表現得好興奮會好低B"
我想繼續做吵吵鬧鬧大笑大喊的自己
是我太幼稚
還是我的同事們真的好文靜?
中午跟Susan, Chris 和CY吃飯
第一次真正覺得自己是中環人
兩位男士說他們的office好靜好悶
Chris說"換左MT合照做wallpaper,好refreshing!醒哂!"
大家都說努力要佈置好自己的位子
有空歡迎來參觀
下午才知道原來傳訊部的同事來過找我lunch
但我已經出外了
希望他們不會覺得我偷懶
五時多終於可以去會展
先在Harbour Road Cafe做訪問
然後負責人帶我們入廚房
哈哈!好高興!
要預備幾百圍酒席
會展廚房的設備當然也超巨型
浴缸大的湯煲、六呎高的燒味爐、直徑三呎的鍋......好有趣!
上菜時幾百人的侍應隊有趕急但秩序地送餐
像軍隊
真的好高興
好想"嘩!嘩!嘩!"的大叫和大笑
但同行的同事有點cool
唯有努力地抑壓自己的興奮
好想念其他MT和朋友
我知道你們一定會陪我開懷的大笑大叫
今晚會展Grand Hall有Shaw Prize的頒獎晚宴
見到大量TVB的工作人員
好想遇上認識的人
但始終沒有碰見誰
Hall 1有Gucci 的 Fashion Show
好想看啊
Hall 2 有楊千嬅和其他歌手的concert
Hall 3 有東華宴會
一直參觀到晚上九時多
負責人送我們每人一條新圍裙留為紀念
^.^
你說"出唻做野果d人講野做人都好小心,你如果表現得好興奮會好低B"
我想繼續做吵吵鬧鬧大笑大喊的自己
是我太幼稚
還是我的同事們真的好文靜?
Thursday, September 01, 2005
開學日
九月一日
第一日正式到自己崗位報到
傳訊部的同事看來好nice
希望可以好好相處
好喜歡自己的位子
我坐在另一個部門的暗角位
偷懶好方便 ^.^
右邊有窗
可以看到天空
真好
中午部門有welcome lunch
去了Ole吃西班牙菜
好飽
一切都很好
最高興的是做newsletter可以外出採訪
下午去了富城管理的君頤峰
果然是豪宅
三年的MT program真正的開始了
好像又多讀一個degree
還有很多很多東西要學呢
晚上為蔡小姐送行
Cy, Noel, Agnes, Teresa也來了
大家雖然好像已經各奔前程
但仍然很有心
蔡小姐
一路順風!
第一日正式到自己崗位報到
傳訊部的同事看來好nice
希望可以好好相處
好喜歡自己的位子
我坐在另一個部門的暗角位
偷懶好方便 ^.^
右邊有窗
可以看到天空
真好
中午部門有welcome lunch
去了Ole吃西班牙菜
好飽
一切都很好
最高興的是做newsletter可以外出採訪
下午去了富城管理的君頤峰
果然是豪宅
三年的MT program真正的開始了
好像又多讀一個degree
還有很多很多東西要學呢
晚上為蔡小姐送行
Cy, Noel, Agnes, Teresa也來了
大家雖然好像已經各奔前程
但仍然很有心
蔡小姐
一路順風!
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Monday, August 29, 2005
睏
八月二十九日
沒法睡
加上Monday blue
令一早上去了上水Urban Landscape我有點頹
幸好中午和大家在exp/2吃飯
再逛逛又一城
心情好像好了點
好喜歡這班新同事啊
下午去GS見到張大俠
好悶
臨走時有人來不及出升降機
連伯伯都忍不住要取笑
乘的士往Urban Parking途中
遇著個應該七天沒說過話的司機
下班後和大家逛apm
有很多很多很多東西想買!
好睏
沒法睡
加上Monday blue
令一早上去了上水Urban Landscape我有點頹
幸好中午和大家在exp/2吃飯
再逛逛又一城
心情好像好了點
好喜歡這班新同事啊
下午去GS見到張大俠
好悶
臨走時有人來不及出升降機
連伯伯都忍不住要取笑
乘的士往Urban Parking途中
遇著個應該七天沒說過話的司機
下班後和大家逛apm
有很多很多很多東西想買!
好睏
Sunday, August 28, 2005
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
八月二十四日
八月二十四日
早上去了Urban Group
精美早餐+精彩lecture+靚靚親善大使+相架連相+"大學"證書
我們都受寵若驚
下午參觀了惠康清潔
悶
再去僑樂
我明白老闆想我們學多點
但1.5小時的參觀overrun了1.5小時
實在是...嘩!
晚上為著區小姐的一句話忐忑不安
早上去了Urban Group
Beyond expectation!
精美早餐+精彩lecture+靚靚親善大使+相架連相+"大學"證書
我們都受寵若驚
下午參觀了惠康清潔
悶
再去僑樂
我明白老闆想我們學多點
但1.5小時的參觀overrun了1.5小時
實在是...嘩!
晚上為著區小姐的一句話忐忑不安
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
巴士廠
八月二十三日
不習慣
這兩晚睡得很差
今天上午參觀了柴灣新巴城巴廠
嘩!
好好玩
我們坐在特別為預備的0號單層巴士在廠內四處遊覽
還連人帶車穿過了洗車機
又看了如果何維修各部分等等
我們興奮得手舞足蹈
像小學生
下午去了兩間公司聽兩個悶死人的簡介
早了半小時下班
然後...
還以為你會想見我
不習慣
這兩晚睡得很差
今天上午參觀了柴灣新巴城巴廠
嘩!
好好玩
我們坐在特別為預備的0號單層巴士在廠內四處遊覽
還連人帶車穿過了洗車機
又看了如果何維修各部分等等
我們興奮得手舞足蹈
像小學生
下午去了兩間公司聽兩個悶死人的簡介
早了半小時下班
然後...
還以為你會想見我
Monday, August 22, 2005
開工大吉
八月二十二日
真的放晴!
第一天上班
早上在總公司跟其他十二位MT一起辦手續
對將來三年的工作開始知道個大概
要努力!
(很久沒有聽過自己叫自己努力了^.^)
大家都很nice
一群年輕人嘻嘻哈哈
好像o-camp
這個多星期都是orientation
每日visit不同的子公司
第一天下午是會展
...
想起了不少當記者時在會展的經歷
在welcome party上見了很多位高層和同事(早知著低胸啦)
看來很nice
希望將來工作愉快!
p.s.快點出糧吧!要還卡數和買衫買鞋買袋買化妝品...
真的放晴!
第一天上班
早上在總公司跟其他十二位MT一起辦手續
對將來三年的工作開始知道個大概
要努力!
(很久沒有聽過自己叫自己努力了^.^)
大家都很nice
一群年輕人嘻嘻哈哈
好像o-camp
這個多星期都是orientation
每日visit不同的子公司
第一天下午是會展
...
想起了不少當記者時在會展的經歷
在welcome party上見了很多位高層和同事(早知著低胸啦)
看來很nice
希望將來工作愉快!
p.s.快點出糧吧!要還卡數和買衫買鞋買袋買化妝品...
Sunday, August 21, 2005
最後一個暑假的最後一天
八月二十一日
本打算在開始上班前好好的跑步
但膝蓋說不
算
其實一早已想好明天該穿什麼
但還是花了大半個小時試試試試試
又練習了前天看"都市閒情"時學的set頭方法
為新工作我就只預備了這些
對不起
我就是這麼膚淺
Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time兩天便看完了
誠意推薦
Cofession by a Shopaholic也好看
發覺自己只喜歡用第一人稱寫的故事
自我中心的小女孩
晚上煲了瑤柱瘦肉冬瓜湯
加味千拉麵
以後該沒時間認認真真的玩煮飯仔了吧
如果明天放晴
你說多好
p.s.忽然很想吃印度咖哩
本打算在開始上班前好好的跑步
但膝蓋說不
算
其實一早已想好明天該穿什麼
但還是花了大半個小時試試試試試
又練習了前天看"都市閒情"時學的set頭方法
為新工作我就只預備了這些
對不起
我就是這麼膚淺
Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time兩天便看完了
誠意推薦
Cofession by a Shopaholic也好看
發覺自己只喜歡用第一人稱寫的故事
自我中心的小女孩
晚上煲了瑤柱瘦肉冬瓜湯
加味千拉麵
以後該沒時間認認真真的玩煮飯仔了吧
如果明天放晴
你說多好
p.s.忽然很想吃印度咖哩
Saturday, August 20, 2005
Dog and callgirl
Now reading: "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time" by Mark Haddon
Just finished: "Callgirl" by Jeannette Angell
Both are fun. Enjoy.
Just finished: "Callgirl" by Jeannette Angell
Both are fun. Enjoy.
Friday, August 19, 2005
雨
八月十九日
雨下得很兇
沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了
小時候很喜歡雨天
最喜歡跟雨先生談話
常覺得掉在我家窗邊的雨水們很可憐
不可以像別的小雨點一樣自由自在的四處遊玩
昨天在A-one坐在落地玻璃前吃了最愛的新鮮出爐提子麥包
想起有些人在滂沱大雨中工作、受苦
我覺得好慚愧
雨下得很兇
沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了沒完沒了
小時候很喜歡雨天
最喜歡跟雨先生談話
常覺得掉在我家窗邊的雨水們很可憐
不可以像別的小雨點一樣自由自在的四處遊玩
昨天在A-one坐在落地玻璃前吃了最愛的新鮮出爐提子麥包
想起有些人在滂沱大雨中工作、受苦
我覺得好慚愧
Pornography can make you blind
Cor blimey
Aug 18th 2005, From The Economist print edition
Gory and erotic images can affect your vision
IT'S true. Pornography can make you blind. Look at a smutty picture and, according to research by Steven Most, of Yale University, and his colleagues, you will suffer from a temporary condition known as emotion-induced blindness.
Dr Most made this discovery while studying the rubbernecking effect (when people slow down to stare at a car accident). Rubbernecking represents a serious lapse of attention to the road, but he wondered if the initial reaction to such gory scenes could cause smaller lapses. The answer is, it does. What he found was that when people look at gory images—and also erotic ones—they fail to process what they see immediately afterwards. This period of blindness lasts between two-tenths and eight-tenths of a second. That is long enough for a driver transfixed by an erotic advert on a billboard to cause an accident.
The researchers conducted two experiments. In the first, the results of which will be published in next month's Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, the experimental subjects were shown a sequence of images. Some of these images were gory (violent injuries and mutilated bodies) while others were photographs of landscapes and buildings—things thought to be emotionally neutral. The subjects were asked to watch out for a picture that had been rotated, without being told what was in it. Between the horror picture and this target were two to eight neutral pictures. The closer the grim picture was to the target, the less likely the subjects were to spot the target. When the gory pictures were substituted by erotic ones, the outcome was the same.
Dr Most thinks that the explanation for this temporary blindness is that there is an information-processing bottleneck in the brain when it is presented with important stimuli. When the human brain was evolving, such stimuli would not have been two-dimensional images. They would, rather, have been part of the real world. Gory scenes would have had survival value (ie, “am I going to be next?”), while erotic ones would have had reproductive value. Paying attention to the landscape would have been a distraction.
In the age of photography, though, it is the image that is the distraction, and if the distracted individual is travelling at speed in a car, such distraction could be fatal. So the team carried out a second series of experiments, still unpublished, that were intended to discover whether their subjects could override this emotion-induced temporary blindness by using what they rather grandiloquently called an “attentional strategy” (ie, focusing harder on the target image). This was arranged by asking the subjects to find not any rotated photo, but a rotated photo of a building, in the array of images. The fact that they had to pay attention to both content and orientation meant they focused harder. As the researchers had expected, in this version of the experiment subjects were, on average, better at spotting the target image.
But that average concealed some interesting differences that depended on a subject's personality. The researchers knew from previous studies that the more neurotic someone is, the worse he is at controlling his attention, so they decided to see how a measure of neuroses known as the harm-avoidance scale correlated with their results. The harm-avoidance scale is a measure of a person's reaction to negative or frightening stimuli. They found that the lower a subject's score on this scale was, the more successful he was at detecting the target. This information might be useful when considering the reliability of witnesses to crimes.
http://economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4292593Starving for the cameras
Starving for the cameras
Aug 18th 2005
From The Economist print edition
People dying from hunger like those in Niger should not have to wait for the TV crews to arrive
THE Famine Early Warning Systems Network, known as FEWS Net, monitors the threat of mass hunger in some of the poorest parts of the world. It is hardly surprising, then, that FEWS Net has published an inquiry into the world's failure to respond to food shortages in Niger and the rest of the Sahel. The report is subtitled simply: “What went wrong?” That is the right question to ask. But what is surprising, and disconcerting, is that the report was written in 1997, not 2005.
This illustrates two things: Niger's present nightmare is a recurring one; and whatever went wrong in 1997 was not put right by 2005. In both cases, signs of distress were recognised early, but the response was dilatory. In both cases, relief agencies and donors failed to settle on an assessment of need. The decisive difference is that, in 1997, the international media were largely absent. In 2005, by contrast, the drought of attention eventually turned into a deluge. The Niger appeal received more money in the ten days after the media arrived on the scene than it had in the previous ten months. As a result, the worst may now be over there.
Unfortunately, the media will always arrive late, if at all. Famine is a complex process, not a single, abrupt event. Food prices rise, families sell their assets, some migrate in search of work or wild foods. As hunger sets in, the body's own assets decline. It is only after stomach muscles have wasted that the distended bellies so sadly familiar from television pictures appear. These images have become necessary to the genre. The falling livestock prices that long preceded them are not as telegenic.
Hunger also prevails far beyond the media spotlight. According to FEWS Net, many more people are affected by continuing food crises in Ethiopia, Somalia, Zimbabwe and Sudan. In each of those countries, there are also many hungry and dying babies. But the bright light the media sheds on its chosen subject throws everything else into shadow.
The bandwagon dilemma
The media attention now devoted to Niger and the political weight it carries pose a tactical dilemma for the aid agencies. Do they slow the bandwagon down to try to redirect it to other destinations it might otherwise bypass? Or do they take advantage of the media spotlight to wring as much money out of donor governments as they can?
To downplay the crisis carries a big risk: there is a high political price to pay if one is seen as not doing enough in the face of such hardship. But there are equal and opposite dangers. Inevitably, the media sometimes overstate things. Loose talk of famine and millions of starvation deaths can do more harm than good. Such talk can tempt private traders to hoard grain, either out of fear that they, too, will succumb to famine or out of greed, anticipating the higher prices an international relief effort will pay. Media reports may also have prompted Niger's neighbours, from which it normally buys food, to restrict exports of grain to the country.
Famine is preventable because it is predictable. The job of foreseeing it falls to the early warning systems, such as FEWS Net, which is funded by the American government, and its UN counterpart. The job of preventing it falls first and foremost to the World Food Programme, another UN agency, plus a long train of private agencies. The job of funding their efforts falls to no one in particular. But then, when the cameras arrive, it falls to everyone at once.
Last year, Hilary Benn, Britain's minister for international development, made two proposals that now look more timely than ever. The most obvious one is to establish a standing fund on which relief agencies can draw. Such a fund should not free these agencies from accountability to their donors. But it should spare them from the need to court their paymasters in a panicked response to every emergency.
Early interventions are not only cheaper than belated ones. They can also avoid some of the dangers of food aid. Cheap food dumped on local markets for long periods might save some from starvation, but it can also hurt farmers, perversely eroding a country's agricultural capacity in the name of food security. In Ethiopia, which in 2003 received food aid equivalent to 15% of its annual cereal production, agricultural yields have stagnated. An early intervention that arrives before people's livelihoods are destroyed and before they are too weak to work can offer cash or vouchers with which to buy food on the market, rather than emergency rations to keep them alive.
Mr Benn's second proposal is that one agency, such as the European Commission's humanitarian agency ECHO, be designated a “financier of last resort”, a kind of swing provider of aid, whose job is to cater to the crises every other donor neglects. Both proposals have merit. The world's system for fighting the direst cases of mass hunger should not rest on a global sympathy contest umpired by television cameras.
http://economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4293207
Aug 18th 2005
From The Economist print edition
People dying from hunger like those in Niger should not have to wait for the TV crews to arrive
THE Famine Early Warning Systems Network, known as FEWS Net, monitors the threat of mass hunger in some of the poorest parts of the world. It is hardly surprising, then, that FEWS Net has published an inquiry into the world's failure to respond to food shortages in Niger and the rest of the Sahel. The report is subtitled simply: “What went wrong?” That is the right question to ask. But what is surprising, and disconcerting, is that the report was written in 1997, not 2005.
This illustrates two things: Niger's present nightmare is a recurring one; and whatever went wrong in 1997 was not put right by 2005. In both cases, signs of distress were recognised early, but the response was dilatory. In both cases, relief agencies and donors failed to settle on an assessment of need. The decisive difference is that, in 1997, the international media were largely absent. In 2005, by contrast, the drought of attention eventually turned into a deluge. The Niger appeal received more money in the ten days after the media arrived on the scene than it had in the previous ten months. As a result, the worst may now be over there.
Unfortunately, the media will always arrive late, if at all. Famine is a complex process, not a single, abrupt event. Food prices rise, families sell their assets, some migrate in search of work or wild foods. As hunger sets in, the body's own assets decline. It is only after stomach muscles have wasted that the distended bellies so sadly familiar from television pictures appear. These images have become necessary to the genre. The falling livestock prices that long preceded them are not as telegenic.
Hunger also prevails far beyond the media spotlight. According to FEWS Net, many more people are affected by continuing food crises in Ethiopia, Somalia, Zimbabwe and Sudan. In each of those countries, there are also many hungry and dying babies. But the bright light the media sheds on its chosen subject throws everything else into shadow.
The bandwagon dilemma
The media attention now devoted to Niger and the political weight it carries pose a tactical dilemma for the aid agencies. Do they slow the bandwagon down to try to redirect it to other destinations it might otherwise bypass? Or do they take advantage of the media spotlight to wring as much money out of donor governments as they can?
To downplay the crisis carries a big risk: there is a high political price to pay if one is seen as not doing enough in the face of such hardship. But there are equal and opposite dangers. Inevitably, the media sometimes overstate things. Loose talk of famine and millions of starvation deaths can do more harm than good. Such talk can tempt private traders to hoard grain, either out of fear that they, too, will succumb to famine or out of greed, anticipating the higher prices an international relief effort will pay. Media reports may also have prompted Niger's neighbours, from which it normally buys food, to restrict exports of grain to the country.
Famine is preventable because it is predictable. The job of foreseeing it falls to the early warning systems, such as FEWS Net, which is funded by the American government, and its UN counterpart. The job of preventing it falls first and foremost to the World Food Programme, another UN agency, plus a long train of private agencies. The job of funding their efforts falls to no one in particular. But then, when the cameras arrive, it falls to everyone at once.
Last year, Hilary Benn, Britain's minister for international development, made two proposals that now look more timely than ever. The most obvious one is to establish a standing fund on which relief agencies can draw. Such a fund should not free these agencies from accountability to their donors. But it should spare them from the need to court their paymasters in a panicked response to every emergency.
Early interventions are not only cheaper than belated ones. They can also avoid some of the dangers of food aid. Cheap food dumped on local markets for long periods might save some from starvation, but it can also hurt farmers, perversely eroding a country's agricultural capacity in the name of food security. In Ethiopia, which in 2003 received food aid equivalent to 15% of its annual cereal production, agricultural yields have stagnated. An early intervention that arrives before people's livelihoods are destroyed and before they are too weak to work can offer cash or vouchers with which to buy food on the market, rather than emergency rations to keep them alive.
Mr Benn's second proposal is that one agency, such as the European Commission's humanitarian agency ECHO, be designated a “financier of last resort”, a kind of swing provider of aid, whose job is to cater to the crises every other donor neglects. Both proposals have merit. The world's system for fighting the direst cases of mass hunger should not rest on a global sympathy contest umpired by television cameras.
http://economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4293207
Thursday, August 18, 2005
七月十四
八月十八日
早上跑步
有點慢
好!明天加速!
多流汗更爽
試用了LF的Perfect Lip三天
但好像沒有什麼大變化
臨睡前還是用Vaseline護唇最好
頭髮愈來愈旱
每天乾折的情況也愈來愈嚴重
近年已差不多隔天用VO5
也有吃點芝麻什麼的
但也沒有起色
買了橄欖油
聽說可以護髮
希望有效
背部曬傷的地方仍在甩皮
快點回復正常吧
晚上
一個人在家
廳燈忽明忽暗
原來今天是
七月十四
好想快點脫離這種生活
早上跑步
有點慢
好!明天加速!
多流汗更爽
試用了LF的Perfect Lip三天
但好像沒有什麼大變化
臨睡前還是用Vaseline護唇最好
頭髮愈來愈旱
每天乾折的情況也愈來愈嚴重
近年已差不多隔天用VO5
也有吃點芝麻什麼的
但也沒有起色
買了橄欖油
聽說可以護髮
希望有效
背部曬傷的地方仍在甩皮
快點回復正常吧
晚上
一個人在家
廳燈忽明忽暗
原來今天是
七月十四
好想快點脫離這種生活
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
雜記
八月十七日
好幾天沒跑步了
昨晚一睡竟然就是九小時
醒來仍是迷迷糊糊的
勉強自己更衣做gym
但亂來了一會便回家了
好想打波好想玩
忽然想起ocamp也差不多要開始了吧
好想玩水戰跳camp fire舞好好的瘋狂幾天
下午約了糖和Angy看Charlie and the Cholocate Factory
在電影中心做了問卷調查
紀念品竟然是戲票一張!
哈哈!真幸運
Johnny Depp很精彩
好喜歡那些小矮人和歌舞場面
Anyway,值得一看
又發了一個脾氣
又吃了一個漢堡包
好幾天沒跑步了
昨晚一睡竟然就是九小時
醒來仍是迷迷糊糊的
勉強自己更衣做gym
但亂來了一會便回家了
好想打波好想玩
忽然想起ocamp也差不多要開始了吧
好想玩水戰跳camp fire舞好好的瘋狂幾天
下午約了糖和Angy看Charlie and the Cholocate Factory
在電影中心做了問卷調查
紀念品竟然是戲票一張!
哈哈!真幸運
Johnny Depp很精彩
好喜歡那些小矮人和歌舞場面
大道理有點土
有些情節和場面明顯地可以更好
整體上很像Clockwork OrangeAnyway,值得一看
又發了一個脾氣
又吃了一個漢堡包
蔡瀾:看女人
蘋果日報 2005-08-17
外國雜誌選出全球最有權力女性排行榜，美國國務卿賴斯，是第一位。
也是最醜的。
醜女見得多，像賴斯那麼醜得出色的難見，小眉小眼，額頭比朱元璋的下巴還要長，梳了個僵硬得像假髮一邊劉海，遮也遮不住。一張血盆大口，中間露出一個泰利．湯馬士一樣的大牙縫，呀哎哎，中國古代人一看到，一定嚇死。雖說權力最大，也要拍男人總統的馬屁才行。
菲律賓的阿羅約夫人，未做總統之前假扮得小鳥依人狀。權力一抓，母夜叉一個，貪污被人轟，怎麼說也不肯下台。賴斯那個名字應該留給她，叫為賴死。
有權力的女人，長得最像樣是昂山素姬，但她是身不由己的，父親留下的宿命感，迫她上台。如果身置和平世界，她做個聯合國的兒童或環保大使，那就更加美麗。
上帝造人，是公平的，要是長得醜，只有求上進，成功的例子很多，但是醜人多作怪屢見不鮮。
阿羅約時常作囂張狀，鼻邊那顆痣也愈長愈大，和她的自大狂一樣。
賴斯的表情也令人難於接受，派那麼一個國務卿到中東去，一輩子也得不到酋長們的歡心。
好在去年第八位的印尼前總統梅加瓦蒂跌出排行榜，她不止醜，而且胖。
胖女人有兩種，胖得結實的不要緊，胖得肌肉鬆弛，一定很懶。結實女人又分兩種，面目可愛的，多數是好人。相貌可憎的，危險得很。
個子矮小的女人血液循環得快，所以腦筋靈活，但也分兩種，長得美的多數不差，難看的也很陰險，把你的骨頭吃掉了你還不知道。
女人，還是高大的好。她們較蠢，但沒甚麼心機。高大的女強人少之又少，但做起老婆或情婦，一流的。
外國雜誌選出全球最有權力女性排行榜，美國國務卿賴斯，是第一位。
也是最醜的。
醜女見得多，像賴斯那麼醜得出色的難見，小眉小眼，額頭比朱元璋的下巴還要長，梳了個僵硬得像假髮一邊劉海，遮也遮不住。一張血盆大口，中間露出一個泰利．湯馬士一樣的大牙縫，呀哎哎，中國古代人一看到，一定嚇死。雖說權力最大，也要拍男人總統的馬屁才行。
菲律賓的阿羅約夫人，未做總統之前假扮得小鳥依人狀。權力一抓，母夜叉一個，貪污被人轟，怎麼說也不肯下台。賴斯那個名字應該留給她，叫為賴死。
有權力的女人，長得最像樣是昂山素姬，但她是身不由己的，父親留下的宿命感，迫她上台。如果身置和平世界，她做個聯合國的兒童或環保大使，那就更加美麗。
上帝造人，是公平的，要是長得醜，只有求上進，成功的例子很多，但是醜人多作怪屢見不鮮。
阿羅約時常作囂張狀，鼻邊那顆痣也愈長愈大，和她的自大狂一樣。
賴斯的表情也令人難於接受，派那麼一個國務卿到中東去，一輩子也得不到酋長們的歡心。
好在去年第八位的印尼前總統梅加瓦蒂跌出排行榜，她不止醜，而且胖。
胖女人有兩種，胖得結實的不要緊，胖得肌肉鬆弛，一定很懶。結實女人又分兩種，面目可愛的，多數是好人。相貌可憎的，危險得很。
個子矮小的女人血液循環得快，所以腦筋靈活，但也分兩種，長得美的多數不差，難看的也很陰險，把你的骨頭吃掉了你還不知道。
女人，還是高大的好。她們較蠢，但沒甚麼心機。高大的女強人少之又少，但做起老婆或情婦，一流的。
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
President Bush and evolving ideas of evolution
New Yorker
Issue of 2005-08-22Posted 2005-08-15
How did we-not just Americans but human beings in general—come to be? Opinions differ, but for most of recorded history the consensus view was that people were made out of mud. Also, that the mud was originally turned into people by a being or beings who themselves resembled people, only bigger, more powerful, and longer-lived, often immortal. The early Chinese theorized that a lonely goddess, pining for company, used yellow mud to fashion the first humans. According to the ancient Greeks, Prometheus sculpted the first man from mud, after which Athena breathed life into him. Mud is the man-making material in the creation stories of Mesopotamian city-states, African tribes, and American Indian nations.
The mud theory is still dominant in the United States, in the form of the Book of Genesis, whose version of the origin of our species, according to a recent Gallup poll, is deemed true by forty-five per cent of the American public. Chapter 2, in verses 6 and 7, puts it this way:
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Mud is not mentioned by name, but you'd have to be a pretty strict Biblical literalist not to infer that mud is what you get when you add water to dust.
A competing theory is that people, along with the rest of the earth's animals and plants, evolved over billions of years, beginning as extremely simple organisms and, via the accumulation of the tiny fraction of random mutations that turn out to be useful, developing into more complex ones. This view has gained many adherents since it was conceived, a century and a half ago, by Charles Darwin. It commands solid majorities in most of the developed world, and, thanks to the overwhelming evidence for its validity, has the near-unanimous support of scientists everywhere. Here in the United States, according to Gallup, it is subscribed to by about one-third of the populace—still running second to mud, but too large a market share to ignore altogether, especially in some of the battleground states.
On the one hand this, on the other hand that. George W. Bush is not normally the type to endorse shilly-shallying, but this time he went for it. At a “round table” with Texas reporters, the President was asked to comment on “what seems to be a growing debate over evolution versus intelligent design” and whether “both should be taught in public schools.”
THE PRESIDENT: I think—as I said, harking back to my days as my governor—both you and Herman are doing a fine job of dragging me back to the past. (Laughter.) Then, I said that, first of all, that decision should be made to local school districts, but I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.
Q: Both sides should be properly taught?
THE PRESIDENT : Yes, people—so people can understand what the debate is about.
Q: So the answer accepts the validity of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution?
THE PRESIDENT : I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting—you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.
Looked at one way, this colloquy is an occasion for national shame, albeit with a whiff of the risible: here is our country's leader, the champion-in-chief of educational standards, blandly equating natural science and supernatural supposition as “different schools of thought.” Looked at another way, it represents progress of a sort. Twenty-five years ago, Ronald Reagan, then the Republican candidate for President, endorsed the teaching of “creationism”; five years ago, George W. Bush did the same. “Creationism” holds that dinosaurs and people coexisted, and that the fossil record is a product of Noah's flood. Next to that, “intelligent design” represents a scientific advance, or a tactical retreat, or maybe just the evolutionary process at work. I.D. recognizes that the age of the universe is measured in billions, not thousands, of years; that fossils are evidence, not divine tricks to test believers' faith; and that organisms change over time, sometimes via natural selection. This is tantamount to an admission that the Genesis story is poetry, not history; allegory, not fact.
But I.D.—whose central (and easily refuted) talking point is that certain structures of living things are too intricate to have evolved without the intervention of an “intelligent designer” (and You know who You are)—enjoys virtually no scientific support. It is not even a theory, in the scientific sense, because it is untestable and unsupportable by empirical evidence. It is a last-ditch skirmish in a misguided war against reason that cannot be won and, for religion's sake as well as science's, should not be fought. If the President's musings on it were an isolated crotchet, they would hardly be worth noting, let alone getting exercised about. But they're not. They reflect an attitude toward science that has infected every corner of his Administration. From the beginning, the Bush White House has treated science as a nuisance and scientists as an interest group—one that, because it lies outside the governing conservative coalition, need not be indulged. That's why the White House-sometimes in the service of political Christianism or ideological fetishism, more often in obeisance to baser interests like the petroleum, pharmaceutical, and defense industries-has altered, suppressed, or overriden scientific findings on global warming; missile defense; H.I.V./ AIDS; pollution from industrial farming and oil drilling; forest management and endangered species; environmental health, including lead and mercury poisoning in children and safety standards for drinking water; and non-abstinence methods of birth control and sexually-transmitted-disease prevention. It has grossly misled the public on the number of stem-cell lines available for research. It has appointed unqualified ideo_logues to scientific advisory committees and has forced out scientists who persist in pointing out inconvenient facts. All this and more has been amply documented in reports from congressional Democrats and the Union of Concerned Scientists, in such leading scientific publications as Nature, Scientific American, Science, and The Lancet, and in a new book, “The Republican War on Science,” by the science journalist Chris Mooney.
Mooney's book is more judicious than its move-product title, which, as he acknowledges in an opening chapter, is not meant to apply to moderate Republicans past (such as Dwight D. Eisenhower) or present (such as John McCain). Anyway, a few small fissures are beginning to appear in the stone wall. Bill Frist, M.D., the Senate Majority Leader, has broken with the White House on stem-cell research. The White House science adviser, John H. Marburger III, evidently embarrassed by his boss's evolutionary equivocations, told the Times that “intelligent design is not a scientific concept.” And the cover story in the current National Journal, a well-informed and relentlessly nonpartisan Washington weekly, reports that growing numbers of Republican politicians and corporate chieftains “who once dismissed as unproven the idea that the burning of fossil fuels is causing a harmful rise in Earth's temperature have now concluded that global warming is real—and very dangerous.” As a result, the magazine says, “Advocates of muscular governmental efforts to slow or reverse global warming predict that the United States will eventually take strong action—but they doubt that such action will come on Bush's watch.” In this White House, science's name is mud. And, unlike those intelligent designers in the sky, all this crowd knows how to do is sling it.
— Hendrik Hertzberg
www.newyorker.com
Issue of 2005-08-22Posted 2005-08-15
How did we-not just Americans but human beings in general—come to be? Opinions differ, but for most of recorded history the consensus view was that people were made out of mud. Also, that the mud was originally turned into people by a being or beings who themselves resembled people, only bigger, more powerful, and longer-lived, often immortal. The early Chinese theorized that a lonely goddess, pining for company, used yellow mud to fashion the first humans. According to the ancient Greeks, Prometheus sculpted the first man from mud, after which Athena breathed life into him. Mud is the man-making material in the creation stories of Mesopotamian city-states, African tribes, and American Indian nations.
The mud theory is still dominant in the United States, in the form of the Book of Genesis, whose version of the origin of our species, according to a recent Gallup poll, is deemed true by forty-five per cent of the American public. Chapter 2, in verses 6 and 7, puts it this way:
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Mud is not mentioned by name, but you'd have to be a pretty strict Biblical literalist not to infer that mud is what you get when you add water to dust.
A competing theory is that people, along with the rest of the earth's animals and plants, evolved over billions of years, beginning as extremely simple organisms and, via the accumulation of the tiny fraction of random mutations that turn out to be useful, developing into more complex ones. This view has gained many adherents since it was conceived, a century and a half ago, by Charles Darwin. It commands solid majorities in most of the developed world, and, thanks to the overwhelming evidence for its validity, has the near-unanimous support of scientists everywhere. Here in the United States, according to Gallup, it is subscribed to by about one-third of the populace—still running second to mud, but too large a market share to ignore altogether, especially in some of the battleground states.
On the one hand this, on the other hand that. George W. Bush is not normally the type to endorse shilly-shallying, but this time he went for it. At a “round table” with Texas reporters, the President was asked to comment on “what seems to be a growing debate over evolution versus intelligent design” and whether “both should be taught in public schools.”
THE PRESIDENT: I think—as I said, harking back to my days as my governor—both you and Herman are doing a fine job of dragging me back to the past. (Laughter.) Then, I said that, first of all, that decision should be made to local school districts, but I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.
Q: Both sides should be properly taught?
THE PRESIDENT : Yes, people—so people can understand what the debate is about.
Q: So the answer accepts the validity of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution?
THE PRESIDENT : I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting—you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.
Looked at one way, this colloquy is an occasion for national shame, albeit with a whiff of the risible: here is our country's leader, the champion-in-chief of educational standards, blandly equating natural science and supernatural supposition as “different schools of thought.” Looked at another way, it represents progress of a sort. Twenty-five years ago, Ronald Reagan, then the Republican candidate for President, endorsed the teaching of “creationism”; five years ago, George W. Bush did the same. “Creationism” holds that dinosaurs and people coexisted, and that the fossil record is a product of Noah's flood. Next to that, “intelligent design” represents a scientific advance, or a tactical retreat, or maybe just the evolutionary process at work. I.D. recognizes that the age of the universe is measured in billions, not thousands, of years; that fossils are evidence, not divine tricks to test believers' faith; and that organisms change over time, sometimes via natural selection. This is tantamount to an admission that the Genesis story is poetry, not history; allegory, not fact.
But I.D.—whose central (and easily refuted) talking point is that certain structures of living things are too intricate to have evolved without the intervention of an “intelligent designer” (and You know who You are)—enjoys virtually no scientific support. It is not even a theory, in the scientific sense, because it is untestable and unsupportable by empirical evidence. It is a last-ditch skirmish in a misguided war against reason that cannot be won and, for religion's sake as well as science's, should not be fought. If the President's musings on it were an isolated crotchet, they would hardly be worth noting, let alone getting exercised about. But they're not. They reflect an attitude toward science that has infected every corner of his Administration. From the beginning, the Bush White House has treated science as a nuisance and scientists as an interest group—one that, because it lies outside the governing conservative coalition, need not be indulged. That's why the White House-sometimes in the service of political Christianism or ideological fetishism, more often in obeisance to baser interests like the petroleum, pharmaceutical, and defense industries-has altered, suppressed, or overriden scientific findings on global warming; missile defense; H.I.V./ AIDS; pollution from industrial farming and oil drilling; forest management and endangered species; environmental health, including lead and mercury poisoning in children and safety standards for drinking water; and non-abstinence methods of birth control and sexually-transmitted-disease prevention. It has grossly misled the public on the number of stem-cell lines available for research. It has appointed unqualified ideo_logues to scientific advisory committees and has forced out scientists who persist in pointing out inconvenient facts. All this and more has been amply documented in reports from congressional Democrats and the Union of Concerned Scientists, in such leading scientific publications as Nature, Scientific American, Science, and The Lancet, and in a new book, “The Republican War on Science,” by the science journalist Chris Mooney.
Mooney's book is more judicious than its move-product title, which, as he acknowledges in an opening chapter, is not meant to apply to moderate Republicans past (such as Dwight D. Eisenhower) or present (such as John McCain). Anyway, a few small fissures are beginning to appear in the stone wall. Bill Frist, M.D., the Senate Majority Leader, has broken with the White House on stem-cell research. The White House science adviser, John H. Marburger III, evidently embarrassed by his boss's evolutionary equivocations, told the Times that “intelligent design is not a scientific concept.” And the cover story in the current National Journal, a well-informed and relentlessly nonpartisan Washington weekly, reports that growing numbers of Republican politicians and corporate chieftains “who once dismissed as unproven the idea that the burning of fossil fuels is causing a harmful rise in Earth's temperature have now concluded that global warming is real—and very dangerous.” As a result, the magazine says, “Advocates of muscular governmental efforts to slow or reverse global warming predict that the United States will eventually take strong action—but they doubt that such action will come on Bush's watch.” In this White House, science's name is mud. And, unlike those intelligent designers in the sky, all this crowd knows how to do is sling it.
— Hendrik Hertzberg
www.newyorker.com
女體
八月十六日
最會挑剔自己:
頭髮太乾
眼睛太小
雙眼皮向內
黑眼圈太深
皮膚偏黃,常敏感
嘴唇不夠嫩紅,唇紋太多
肩膀太瘦
有byebye肉和Canadian fat
...
下刪五萬字
女孩子投資在外表的時間心機金錢實在無法估計
焗油做mask搽lotion做運動節食買衣服化妝...
我和你們一樣
每天就這樣忙碌地生活著
p.s.已不去想為什麼,只盡情享受上街有人望有人撩有人讚靚的虛榮
最會挑剔自己:
頭髮太乾
眼睛太小
雙眼皮向內
黑眼圈太深
皮膚偏黃,常敏感
嘴唇不夠嫩紅,唇紋太多
肩膀太瘦
有byebye肉和Canadian fat
...
下刪五萬字
女孩子投資在外表的時間心機金錢實在無法估計
焗油做mask搽lotion做運動節食買衣服化妝...
我和你們一樣
每天就這樣忙碌地生活著
p.s.已不去想為什麼,只盡情享受上街有人望有人撩有人讚靚的虛榮
Monday, August 15, 2005
Surprise!
八月十五日
Surprises!
1. "She" finally comes!
2. 完美午餐: 煙三文魚蘆筍白汁雞肉意粉配三文魚生!
3. 新奇下午茶: 綠茶咖啡鴛鴦原多士配熱奶茶
4. 陪你到Le Saunda買鞋,結果自己也買了一對,特價後買滿$1000還再減$100,抵!
5. 抽獎贏了$100 cash coupon!
好開心啊!
Surprises!
1. "She" finally comes!
2. 完美午餐: 煙三文魚蘆筍白汁雞肉意粉配三文魚生!
3. 新奇下午茶: 綠茶咖啡鴛鴦原多士配熱奶茶
4. 陪你到Le Saunda買鞋,結果自己也買了一對,特價後買滿$1000還再減$100,抵!
5. 抽獎贏了$100 cash coupon!
好開心啊!
Sunday, August 14, 2005
自欺欺人
八月十四日
新紀錄!
跑了五公里!
雖然明知不算快也明知可能只是跑步機出錯
但仍有丁點的成功感
中午煮了個味千豬骨拉麵獎勵自己
包裝上說100克拉麵只有39kcal,湯料也只有31.3kcal
一個110克的麵豈不是只有約100kcal?!
太不可思議了吧
看著只下了三分一湯料但仍呈奶白色的湯的我
雖然很懷疑
但仍告訴自己這午餐不油膩
讓自己好過點
(可惜太重味精了,害我渴了大半天)
傍晚又吃了大半個A-one的合桃提子粿麥包
我又對自己說
晚上少吃一點,不怕
嘻嘻
每天我們就這樣自欺欺人地生活著吧
新紀錄!
跑了五公里!
雖然明知不算快也明知可能只是跑步機出錯
但仍有丁點的成功感
中午煮了個味千豬骨拉麵獎勵自己
包裝上說100克拉麵只有39kcal,湯料也只有31.3kcal
一個110克的麵豈不是只有約100kcal?!
太不可思議了吧
看著只下了三分一湯料但仍呈奶白色的湯的我
雖然很懷疑
但仍告訴自己這午餐不油膩
讓自己好過點
(可惜太重味精了,害我渴了大半天)
傍晚又吃了大半個A-one的合桃提子粿麥包
我又對自己說
晚上少吃一點,不怕
嘻嘻
每天我們就這樣自欺欺人地生活著吧
Saturday, August 13, 2005
煩惱時請想起(我)媽媽
有煩惱時會想起媽媽的話
A-Level放榜當日
得知成績後我非常激動
立即打電話給母親大人
我(泣不成聲,渾身發抖):媽,我有5個A呀
媽:吓?gum其他科呢?
我(當堂冷靜清醒哂):我考5科ja
爸:點解人地有10個A 9個A o既?
我:er...
以為三年前這爸媽這幾句話已算精警
誰料高處未算高
前陣子為著不知在兩個offer中如何取捨而煩惱
認真詳細地分析給媽媽聽兩者的利弊
媽媽是個很棒的生意人
打算問問她的意見
她聽過後
沉默地想了一會,說:
gum我聽日去問下黃大仙好冇?
原本眉頭深鎖的我立即洩了氣
當堂整個人輕鬆下來
所以
煩惱時想想我媽媽
立時壓力全消
正!
A-Level放榜當日
得知成績後我非常激動
立即打電話給母親大人
我(泣不成聲,渾身發抖):媽,我有5個A呀
媽:吓?gum其他科呢?
我(當堂冷靜清醒哂):我考5科ja
爸:點解人地有10個A 9個A o既?
我:er...
以為三年前這爸媽這幾句話已算精警
誰料高處未算高
前陣子為著不知在兩個offer中如何取捨而煩惱
認真詳細地分析給媽媽聽兩者的利弊
媽媽是個很棒的生意人
打算問問她的意見
她聽過後
沉默地想了一會,說:
gum我聽日去問下黃大仙好冇?
原本眉頭深鎖的我立即洩了氣
當堂整個人輕鬆下來
所以
煩惱時想想我媽媽
立時壓力全消
正!
Friday, August 12, 2005
八月十二日
八月十二日
Pen帶了我和Alison去虞家媽媽晚飯
討論我們的創業大計
Alison條裙好靚!
在Lane Crawford逛了逛
好想買鞋
可惜它們不是太高就是沒有size(好彩!)
這兩天吃得很放肆
也沒有運動
>.<
Pen帶了我和Alison去虞家媽媽晚飯
討論我們的創業大計
Alison條裙好靚!
在Lane Crawford逛了逛
好想買鞋
可惜它們不是太高就是沒有size(好彩!)
這兩天吃得很放肆
也沒有運動
>.<
Thursday, August 11, 2005
玩!
八月十一日
跟爸媽上茶樓後
已是十一時多
趕緊回家換衣服
你陪我打ping pong
自知運動細胞有限
不敢奢望可以將球正常地跟對方有來有回
但今次居然例外
好開心
這個半小時的遊戲令我重拾了一丁點自信
下午跟你吃了個泰式下午茶
hope you find it HOT enough
晚上約了吳山老師,MsLiu和子喬在旺角晚飯
同場還有Kirsty, Kat, Agnes, Tracy 和 Sylvia
好多女人
吵死
^.^說起中學時的趣事
直落LKF
好玩!
凌晨四時多才回到家
雖然睏
但臨睡前仍堅持要自己做個保濕mask
怕夜睡皮膚會乾ma~
跟爸媽上茶樓後
已是十一時多
趕緊回家換衣服
你陪我打ping pong
自知運動細胞有限
不敢奢望可以將球正常地跟對方有來有回
但今次居然例外
好開心
這個半小時的遊戲令我重拾了一丁點自信
下午跟你吃了個泰式下午茶
hope you find it HOT enough
晚上約了吳山老師,MsLiu和子喬在旺角晚飯
同場還有Kirsty, Kat, Agnes, Tracy 和 Sylvia
好多女人
吵死
^.^說起中學時的趣事
直落LKF
好玩!
凌晨四時多才回到家
雖然睏
但臨睡前仍堅持要自己做個保濕mask
怕夜睡皮膚會乾ma~
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
吸引力勝粉臉酥胸 青年男士愛異性美臀
not mine
「天使面孔、魔鬼身材」是不少女士夢寐以求，也是 不少男士的夢中女神。一項調查發現，三十歲以下的被訪 成年男士，有六成認為女性的臀腿部分，較臉孔更有吸引力。
記者：黃穎妍
一家內衣公司上月以網上問卷形式，訪問了本港一千五百名年齡介乎二十至四十九歲的男女，當中男女比例為一比二，以了解本港男性及女性最重視女性身體哪一部位。結果顯示，六成被訪女士認為臉孔最能吸引異性，其次是臀腿，佔兩成。
雖然整體而言，三成五被訪男士認為女性臉孔最吸引，其次才是女性臀腿，有三成男士認為這部分最吸引；不過，在二十至二十九歲組別中，有高達六成被訪男士認為女性臀腿最具吸引力，比率遠高於選擇臉孔的三成及胸部的兩成。四成九的被訪男士，認為女性的臀腿最能凸顯女性的美態。
調查又顯示，四成五的受訪女士最希望改善臀腿線條，因可令穿衣更好看；當中八成受訪女士曾嘗試不同方法，包括運動、服用減肥藥、參加美容院療程及穿矯形內衣等改善臀腿線條。但八成被訪女性卻因運動時沒有針對性的肌肉鍛煉、或不能持之以恆等原因，認為成效不大。
「T-BACK」不能好好承托
該公司的市場推廣部主管許妙斯表示，女性胸、腰、臀最佳比例為一點三比一比一點三，她表示只要符合比例便可以，三圍數字不定是愈大愈好。該公司更列舉多位美臀明星，他們的身體比例都較勻稱。她指出，本港女士因生活習慣及缺乏運動，令臀部出現「鬆弛」現象，多做運動才是「治本」之道。
許妙斯最後提醒一眾女士選購尺碼合適的內衣褲，「不少女士常誤以為穿小一個碼，可令身形看來更好，但其實應穿合身及把臀部包藏得更好的內褲。」她指出近年愈受歡迎的「T-BACK」不能好好承托臀部，只是女士們為「襯衫」美觀而穿。
p.s.我覺得美腿仲緊要喎!
p.p.s.我想割左自己下半身
Monday, August 08, 2005
Sunday, August 07, 2005
跳水
八月七日
早上做gym
好幾天沒跑步了
小腿說要休息休息
下午去了黃埔的"天下第一腩"
你吃牛腩麵
我吃牛肚米
好吃好吃
其實我可以再吃多一點
不過你說要減肥
陪你忍口吧
黃埔今天有澳洲跳水隊和韻律泳隊表演
嘩
水池直徑頂多三米
水深只有兩米半
表演者仍然可以從容從十七米高跳板跳下來
絲毫無損
精彩!
最重要的是
佢地好靚仔呀!仲有腹肌潻!
早上做gym
好幾天沒跑步了
小腿說要休息休息
下午去了黃埔的"天下第一腩"
你吃牛腩麵
我吃牛肚米
好吃好吃
其實我可以再吃多一點
不過你說要減肥
陪你忍口吧
黃埔今天有澳洲跳水隊和韻律泳隊表演
嘩
水池直徑頂多三米
水深只有兩米半
表演者仍然可以從容從十七米高跳板跳下來
絲毫無損
精彩!
最重要的是
佢地好靚仔呀!仲有腹肌潻!
Saturday, August 06, 2005
Friday, August 05, 2005
Appetites: Why Women Want
<> by Caroline Knapp
For 3 years, Caroline ate the same food everyday: a sesame bagel for breakfast, a Dannon yoghurt (coffee flavor) for lunch and an apple with some cheese for dinner. She once suffered from anorexia and weighed only 83 lbs. Hunger was once the only way to make her feel secure and peaceful...
All about eating disorder, motherhood, feminism, consumerism and most of all, desire.
For 3 years, Caroline ate the same food everyday: a sesame bagel for breakfast, a Dannon yoghurt (coffee flavor) for lunch and an apple with some cheese for dinner. She once suffered from anorexia and weighed only 83 lbs. Hunger was once the only way to make her feel secure and peaceful...
All about eating disorder, motherhood, feminism, consumerism and most of all, desire.
妖言惑眾的大學排名可以休矣
饒美蛟﹕妖言惑眾的大學排名可以休矣
8月 5日 星期五 明報
作者為嶺南大學副校長
由時美真主持的香港專業教育網（「教育網」）又公布了所謂的每年一度的「香港最佳大學排名榜」，其所依據的指標數據部分源自香港大學民意研究計劃（主持人為鍾庭耀）進行的市民電話調查所得，另一部分則由教育網自訂的若干指標。
今年的調查，民意的調查方法沒有什麼變化，自訂的指標及其計算方法則有大更改。令人困惑的是，教育網在過去幾年進行的大學排名榜，不斷更改其排名所用的評價指標及計算方法，隨其偏好而決定，而且完全不加以解釋，筆者有理由相信，背後有玄機。如果篇幅許可，筆者可以詳加說明，這裏暫且不說。
陳坤耀校長周前在接受記者採訪時，用了「妖言惑眾」四字斥責時美真與鍾庭耀二人多年來採用的民調與大學排名方法。以陳校長的社會地位與聲望，如果沒有實據，他不會信口開河作出如此強烈的評語。本文現就下列港大民意研究計劃的調查，以及教育網新的指標及計算方法提出嚴重質疑﹕
本人一直認為，教育網與港大民意研究計劃根據普通市民的意見來評定大學的師資、研究水平、課程多元化及院校的畢業生表現是何等的荒謬。根據他們的調查方法與樣本，筆者向他們提出以下兩項挑戰﹕
兩個挑戰提案 每題10萬港元
第一，請舉出國際上有哪一所大學排名機構是採用以工人、文員、主婦、學生及中學程度水平以下的市民評估大學的師資、研究水平的（鍾的評分由0至10分）﹖
第二，請舉出有哪一位人士（不一定是學者）採用只有兩個或3個自稱為僱主的市民樣本來評定院校畢業生的表現，並據此在國際期刊上發表論文﹖（鍾庭耀今年的市民樣本，浸大有3個，嶺大、教院及城大各為2。）
以上兩個挑戰提案，每題10萬港元，請在兩個月內提出其他同樣的做法。第一提案去年已提出，但迄今沒有人提出。鍾庭耀去年企圖轉移視線，向傳媒提供說美國蓋洛普的民意調查與他進行的相同。事實上，前者的調查只是向美國人問了一個以下的簡單問題﹕「綜合各大學的要素，請你指出哪一家美國大學最佳﹖」蓋洛普並未要求為大學的師資及研究水平評分數﹗第2挑戰提案是今年本人特別增加的。
教育網今年新採用了「院校教師學生比率」作為排名指標之一，但在計算各院校的學生人數時，只計算修讀學士學位的學生，難道教資會資助各院校的研究學部及副學士課程的學子不是學生﹖這個嚴重的錯誤是基於無知抑或其他﹖
此外，其他嚴重的錯誤還包括，研究經費撥款及研究作品等指標的計算，只考慮總量而不是人均量，研究著作也是以量而非質為準，而且還把一些非研究作品也計算在內。在新生入學成績方面，使用的衡量尺度不一，把院校提供的各科目成績的中位數與平均值混合一起計算。而且中英語文成績亦不加以計算在內，得出的結果怎能正確﹖
最後再提一點，該網今年採用的新的「等距」計分法，其背後的邏輯令人百思不得其解。簡單而言，該網站按院校的各個評價指標得分而加以排序（由1至8），如某院校在某一個指標如排第1則得所佔權重百分比的滿分，排序第2者則得7/8的分數，餘此類推。這種等距離的計分法不能反映實際的得分差別情，因為排序之間的實際得分，差距可能不大或很細小，怎能胡亂給予等距離的評分﹖
由於等距的計算法，造成了各院校最後得分的嚴重偏差。以教育網的排序結果與得分來看，港大與科大分別排第1與第3，前者得分為93.8分，科大70.1分，兩校相差達23.7分。對熟悉香港高等院校的學術界人士來說，會馬上質疑﹕姑不論兩校的排序如何，兩校的得分差距有這麼大嗎﹖很明顯，這是錯誤的計分法使然。此外，在這種荒唐的評分法下，如以60分作為及格分數，04與05年有4至5所院校不及格（理大、嶺大、教育、浸大及城大），這幾所院校真的辦得如此差﹖教育網長期作此種方法的大學排名，是否要這幾所大學關門大吉﹖
8月 5日 星期五 明報
作者為嶺南大學副校長
由時美真主持的香港專業教育網（「教育網」）又公布了所謂的每年一度的「香港最佳大學排名榜」，其所依據的指標數據部分源自香港大學民意研究計劃（主持人為鍾庭耀）進行的市民電話調查所得，另一部分則由教育網自訂的若干指標。
今年的調查，民意的調查方法沒有什麼變化，自訂的指標及其計算方法則有大更改。令人困惑的是，教育網在過去幾年進行的大學排名榜，不斷更改其排名所用的評價指標及計算方法，隨其偏好而決定，而且完全不加以解釋，筆者有理由相信，背後有玄機。如果篇幅許可，筆者可以詳加說明，這裏暫且不說。
陳坤耀校長周前在接受記者採訪時，用了「妖言惑眾」四字斥責時美真與鍾庭耀二人多年來採用的民調與大學排名方法。以陳校長的社會地位與聲望，如果沒有實據，他不會信口開河作出如此強烈的評語。本文現就下列港大民意研究計劃的調查，以及教育網新的指標及計算方法提出嚴重質疑﹕
本人一直認為，教育網與港大民意研究計劃根據普通市民的意見來評定大學的師資、研究水平、課程多元化及院校的畢業生表現是何等的荒謬。根據他們的調查方法與樣本，筆者向他們提出以下兩項挑戰﹕
兩個挑戰提案 每題10萬港元
第一，請舉出國際上有哪一所大學排名機構是採用以工人、文員、主婦、學生及中學程度水平以下的市民評估大學的師資、研究水平的（鍾的評分由0至10分）﹖
第二，請舉出有哪一位人士（不一定是學者）採用只有兩個或3個自稱為僱主的市民樣本來評定院校畢業生的表現，並據此在國際期刊上發表論文﹖（鍾庭耀今年的市民樣本，浸大有3個，嶺大、教院及城大各為2。）
以上兩個挑戰提案，每題10萬港元，請在兩個月內提出其他同樣的做法。第一提案去年已提出，但迄今沒有人提出。鍾庭耀去年企圖轉移視線，向傳媒提供說美國蓋洛普的民意調查與他進行的相同。事實上，前者的調查只是向美國人問了一個以下的簡單問題﹕「綜合各大學的要素，請你指出哪一家美國大學最佳﹖」蓋洛普並未要求為大學的師資及研究水平評分數﹗第2挑戰提案是今年本人特別增加的。
教育網今年新採用了「院校教師學生比率」作為排名指標之一，但在計算各院校的學生人數時，只計算修讀學士學位的學生，難道教資會資助各院校的研究學部及副學士課程的學子不是學生﹖這個嚴重的錯誤是基於無知抑或其他﹖
此外，其他嚴重的錯誤還包括，研究經費撥款及研究作品等指標的計算，只考慮總量而不是人均量，研究著作也是以量而非質為準，而且還把一些非研究作品也計算在內。在新生入學成績方面，使用的衡量尺度不一，把院校提供的各科目成績的中位數與平均值混合一起計算。而且中英語文成績亦不加以計算在內，得出的結果怎能正確﹖
最後再提一點，該網今年採用的新的「等距」計分法，其背後的邏輯令人百思不得其解。簡單而言，該網站按院校的各個評價指標得分而加以排序（由1至8），如某院校在某一個指標如排第1則得所佔權重百分比的滿分，排序第2者則得7/8的分數，餘此類推。這種等距離的計分法不能反映實際的得分差別情，因為排序之間的實際得分，差距可能不大或很細小，怎能胡亂給予等距離的評分﹖
由於等距的計算法，造成了各院校最後得分的嚴重偏差。以教育網的排序結果與得分來看，港大與科大分別排第1與第3，前者得分為93.8分，科大70.1分，兩校相差達23.7分。對熟悉香港高等院校的學術界人士來說，會馬上質疑﹕姑不論兩校的排序如何，兩校的得分差距有這麼大嗎﹖很明顯，這是錯誤的計分法使然。此外，在這種荒唐的評分法下，如以60分作為及格分數，04與05年有4至5所院校不及格（理大、嶺大、教育、浸大及城大），這幾所院校真的辦得如此差﹖教育網長期作此種方法的大學排名，是否要這幾所大學關門大吉﹖
Thursday, August 04, 2005
生日快樂!
八月三日
行完山
先找個地方更衣沐浴化妝
當然啦
出席林小姐的廿二大壽生日晚宴
不打扮一下怎成
晚上在銅鑼灣Fat Angelo's晚飯
好多人
Cy, Florence, Agnes, Teresa, 文,鳳, Key, Catherine, 我和壽星女十人一起
順利成為全場最嘈吵的一枱
好想知道林小姐的生日願望是否跟楊千嬅的一樣:希望全世界o既女人都再冇水腫o既煩惱!^.^
本來打算到林小姐家過夜玩一晚
但雙腿實在疲勞
林小姐第二天也要上班
還是回家吧
然後和Agnes在After School跟Pen, Alison和詹坐了一會
好充實滿足的一天
行完山
先找個地方更衣沐浴化妝
當然啦
出席林小姐的廿二大壽生日晚宴
不打扮一下怎成
晚上在銅鑼灣Fat Angelo's晚飯
好多人
Cy, Florence, Agnes, Teresa, 文,鳳, Key, Catherine, 我和壽星女十人一起
順利成為全場最嘈吵的一枱
好想知道林小姐的生日願望是否跟楊千嬅的一樣:希望全世界o既女人都再冇水腫o既煩惱!^.^
本來打算到林小姐家過夜玩一晚
但雙腿實在疲勞
林小姐第二天也要上班
還是回家吧
然後和Agnes在After School跟Pen, Alison和詹坐了一會
好充實滿足的一天
八仙嶺
八月三日
陽光普照,氣溫32度
約了林小姐征服八仙嶺
幾年沒走過這路徑了
好興奮!
11時由鶴藪出發
期待已久的旅程,開始!
鶴藪圍->鶴藪水塘->屏風山->黃嶺->犁壁山->純陽峰->仙姑嶺->大尾篤
四時多完成全程
好滿足!
愛當空烈日
愛藍天白雲
愛在山脊上看到左右兩邊的無盡風光
愛走走走走走的感覺
愛你呀,林小姐!
p.s.戴了頂像防毒面具的防曬帽,厚厚的SUNPLAY塗滿手臉,晚上又敷了個美白Mask。以為萬無一失,更衣時才發現原來自己穿的背心是入膊的...背部忘了塗防曬,現在又紅又燙,好痛! >.<
陽光普照,氣溫32度
約了林小姐征服八仙嶺
幾年沒走過這路徑了
好興奮!
11時由鶴藪出發
期待已久的旅程,開始!
鶴藪圍->鶴藪水塘->屏風山->黃嶺->犁壁山->純陽峰->仙姑嶺->大尾篤
四時多完成全程
好滿足!
愛當空烈日
愛藍天白雲
愛在山脊上看到左右兩邊的無盡風光
愛走走走走走的感覺
愛你呀,林小姐!
p.s.戴了頂像防毒面具的防曬帽,厚厚的SUNPLAY塗滿手臉,晚上又敷了個美白Mask。以為萬無一失,更衣時才發現原來自己穿的背心是入膊的...背部忘了塗防曬,現在又紅又燙,好痛! >.<
Monday, August 01, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)