It’s more like using some extra strong medicine to kill the germs you wanted to kill, but no, it doesn’t achieve that aim, but instead kill all the healthy cells. Actually you feel better because at least you feel that you have done something.

Now here I am fishing for attention of the people I cared for, and no, they don’t give a damn, and just all the random people more or less consuming you.

Was kinda indifferent with a bit more hope to relocation of xanga, now I am more indifferent but with more hope of destruction. Money donated, conscience (if any) smoothed, that’s okay for me already.

Everytime you throw away something you thought you cannot live without, you die a little, and you continue to live on. You have just earned a second life.

Facebook posts privatizing is just one of a hell job, but good thing is I have not wrote much

Who is to write when life is all well? Indeed, Woolf is to certain extent right that literature is the wreckage of human idiosyncrasies. Certainly I am no saint to dedicate myself to greater human good, and therefore am satisfied to take leave from writing as much as I used to.

I hope this leave can be longer, meaning I am well for a little longer before getting back here writing. Life’s all about ups and downs, and we just want the ups to be little more than downs.

畢業前總想著工作中學習比讀本更有用，到現在找不到工作又回想其實2-2不夠好想讀下去。當初讀人說結婚像城堡，進了的想逃逃了的想進，現在大概終於真真正正知道是怎回事。籠內有安全感，籠外有自由；如果要自由的意志，那麼缺乏安全感大概是必然的結果。

既然找不到工作也沒有女朋友，那惟有在自己愛好多花時間，來看那些有工作卻沒有時間好好享受自己愛好的人，理不清分不著誰更好更苦。

這幾天和朋友談過多少，對於棋界的情況也理解，因為人數有限資源有限，所以才有總會的人自己也開店教授的利益衝突，因為就算有資格參加國際賽也要棋手自己出錢騰時間，完全是自願性質所以總會才不願意系統化找資助去贊助棋手，所以就算從外地總會請人來香港教授，香港總會也只是在有有心人願意包底才發出不反對通知書。

只能說，總會在有限資源裡做得不夠積極，作為一個業餘愛好者，唯一能做的就是不要像其他業餘愛好者一樣笑話初學者水平不夠，而是努力的改善自己的水平領出頭來。話說自由選擇雖然重要，但是人的能力有限，更大程度在於製造環境條件，而時勢也造英雄，冷戰而出Fischer，解體而生Kasparov，總有人最後能站出來。

說自己是英雄可能有點自我中心，但是總要人走出來起碼帶點改變，現在惟有看看自己在港大公開賽成績如何，如果能帶起頭來引起一點討論那已經算很不錯。省出點時間來，就是這樣好好運用。

看Youtube有人說邊聽莫扎特的安魂曲邊小解，感覺像他一滴尿一瞬間就決定了全世界的命運，現在感覺大概如此。

After the “quite” okay performance in Caissa HK Open, I think I have more confidence in participating in the HKU International Open.

http://www.caissahk.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/cross-table-caissa-summer-rapid-13-july-2013.pdf

People always have the funny impression that rapid and blitz are different from long games. Well, it kind of depend on what approach the players take.

If the players are indeed playing some different variations they are not playing when they are in standard games, that might be possible. But my practical experience is that people usually are even more inclined to stick to what they have been playing in order to avoid having to think in comparatively unfamiliar positions (Speaking of some real world tournament games)

The most famous example should be Fischer’s notes in Herceg Novi Blitz in 1970, of which he outplayed everyone in the tournament except Korchnoi whom he drew with, each have one won game.

The players noted that Fischer plays blitz like a standard game, able to produce every move after the games with very detailed analysis. His notes were put on bid a few years ago, and the price was quite high indeed.

Certainly I think that way and that it seems to me producing good moves regardless of time control is the one and only thing we should do. Let’s not kid ourselves of the time control or anything else, we are all probably going to lose on time or lose because of running short of time anyway. Deal with it. Your opponent is not going to give up some easily, have the patience to find good moves, after all that’s the true understanding of chess that nothing can be forced. Let it go and see how it goes.

The current Tromso World Cup kinda shows this: Elo is who you have been, not who you will be. The upsets of Super-Grandmaster show that they are human beings too, and if you are not playing good moves youalso lose.

Time for hardware mode, shunning active use of Facebook for two months (Nowadays I have no life and I only use it for about 15 mins per day, but well… It’s something.) I will see you guys in the Convocation Room.

And yes, I will be playing for Tromso in 2014, I’d like to call it Action Aurora.

一向都很喜歡能將教條道理說得簡單的作家，更喜歡看作家和讀者的妙問妙答。一路順著讀作家想鋪陳的東西其實並不有趣，能從對方思路拆出自己的規矩才算高明。

例如素黑

http://youtu.be/tL3OeqNAXYI?t=1h36m29s

問：其實我很開心，但是別人總懷疑我不開心問我是不是真的開心。

答：那是沒有問題做問題，庸人自擾。那問題說明問的人不開心，你不妨可以嘗試開解他。

愛情信箱也是另一處好看地方：女人由頭到尾以愛情為目標，但是男人通常以女人為目標，最後從愛情中修煉成哲學家。其實有點像紅塵滾滾，有人始終庸碌中打混，有人卻能看破而得道。

故事還有下文，上邊說的是得不到愛情的人，如果得到愛情的話，上邊就改寫成：男人始於愛愛情，終於愛女人；女人始於愛男人，終於愛愛情。

彭浩翔的好讀，余迪偉也不錯，這說明好文筆乃好思考，常人皆應有之而不必見怪。能將教道道德信手拈來說得如此簡單自然不是容易事。

話說在今年一月和前女朋友分手了，一個人生活了大約六個月了，好像有點習慣了一個人生活，在這六個月中，我時不時會想起前女友，會哭、會痛、會想念她，有時，更會借酒解千愁，直至有一日，我和朋友一齊去飲酒聊天，事後我醉了回家，不久電話收到了一位好朋友的信息，她說喜歡我，酒醉三分醒的我回覆了她，內容都盡是踩自己的不好，希望她知道我有多壞，不要選擇我，否則的話又會傷害了她，跟我的前女友一樣，但是她叫我給她一次機會，我不懂拒絕，答應了她。

大約拍了半個月吧，昨天她叫我在ig del 前女友的相片，我不是太想，因為我就只有這些可以回憶，而且我和她相處的日子不是很久，其實我並沒有太喜歡她，可能一直當她是朋友吧，我現在應該del嗎?

還是我應該拒絕她的好意，和她做個朋友會比較好呢?

小小上

——————————————————–

小小：

你知道最老土、最爛、最不負責任、最自私的分手宣言是甚麼嗎？就是：「不是你不好，是你太好。只是我不好，我配不上你。我們分手吧。你一定可以找到一個比我好的。」你那夜，明知對方喜歡你，而你便在數自己的不是？你根本在利用她喜歡你的情懷，來發洩前女友離開你的情緒。而你更是明知對方聽了後，會更死心塌地去愛你。你怕再輸，所以這樣包裝自己。而懂得去愛及被愛的人，會計輸贏的嗎？你的「包底」宣言，跟我以上舉例的分手宣言，無兩樣。一個這樣不懂處理自己情緒的人，值得有人愛嗎？

好了，混混沌沌地跟她開始了，但你卻深知不喜歡她。她變成愛的替身，給你攝期、攝悶的備用品。拾了她回來後，對方又開始幼稚地、無理地作出女友的自私、白痴要求，你又不想面對，那是咎由自取。我不懂教你應不應該刪除舊女友相片，因為你第一歩與這新女友的開始已是錯。但我又想問問你，若然你有朝一日，再另結新歡了，二人相愛，又發展得很好了，你認為對方可以有權，叫你刪除你某些歷史嗎？又比如她跟你媽媽相處不來，她又有權叫你與媽媽斷絕關係嗎？這實在是太自私、太不懂戀愛的行為。

一個健全的戀人，懂得愛你的戀人，是應該明白你的現在，是由你的過去形成的，不懂這點等同不懂尊重，值得愛嗎？

不只是她，你現在，也很殘缺。趕快停一停，不要再把自己埋在那段失戀事件，接受它。不要再借酒消愁，因為無補於事。前行，move on，學做一個完完整整、心理平衡、健健康康的人。之後，才再出發去尋覓愛情吧。

余迪偉上

讀後有時會想到自己的經歷，早已經沒有之前強烈的情緒，後悔懊惱等情緒未必真誠，而有可能只是用來掩蓋如實地平靜面對的需要。如今不再嘆息，只是或偶而出神默然，幾秒才回過神。

http://www.cosmopolitan.com.hk/category/tags/%E4%BD%99%E8%BF%AA%E5%81%89%E4%BF%A1%E7%AE%B1

It is on a general ground very easy to criticize people/things/events/chess moves/anything base on general principle, but the problem of it is that it is not specific enough. Anybody can say anything, but being specific pays.

In chess, players often fail to win positions they consider winning, and lose positions they consider drawing. They may have knowledge, but they don’t have the skill.

The critics of course do not have any responsibility to carry the burden of proof, for destruction itself can also be creation. We have to substantiate our points made in the critique by providing evidence, but the evidence and points themselves do not necessarily lead to solution.

Solution is indeed important, because when we look at a certain problem, we don’t look at one or two solutions but competing solutions. One problem should on theory have only one perfect solution, but in life there are always more than one way to do things.

So when justifying an argument, we do so usually only in a way to justify the point made, but not the competing nature of problems/solution. More than likely the point raised can only serve to enforce the writer’s view but not able to compete against the strength of other arguments. I think relatively, in order to reach a solution, we are not trying to affirm the negatives [which is to write a critique], but to disprove the positives [construct a viable solution and consistently disproves at the same time after knowing what's wrong], which is considerably more difficult, I presume.

Also, the theological discussion cannot help solving the problem. Like when people break up, they don’t ask what are the reasons for the break-up, they like to ask something like “What ‘s love”, which tries to divert the attention other than tackling their own shitty personality or slutty nature of their worse-half.

It’s always advisable to rethink the value of definitions and points, see if they make much sense in helping you reaching a solution, acknowledging the bounds of discussion. After all most of the time people just try to have discussions to make themselves feel better, like they have done something by talking about it but actually they haven’t.

I don’t remember who says “Life is a journey to Mozart”, but as we go deeper and deeper into life, we also go deeper into ourselves, and the more I am finding myself agreeing to the notion.

At one’s youth, we all love the blaze of Liszt, or the melancholic mood of Chopin. Their music fits very well with our excessive sentiments and fantasies of love, being lovelorn or fueled with passion and dreams for our future.

As we grow old, we no longer find those emotional swing as charming as we used to think. Life should be as beautiful and as simple as possible. Shun all the glory and lust and desire and everything else in this world that has nothing to do with my life, I just want to be with my loved one for the rest of my life.

We come to admire the natural talent of Mozart – How impeccable his music is, able to produce the most graceful notes with no thunder and lighting, but like a stream flowing through the valley. Such so natural, such so peaceful. Pachelbel’s Canon in D shall be comparable in my humble opinion to the genre of Mozart in this regard.

It was first used in “Ordinary People” 1985, and the first time watching it I did not feel anything in particular. Things changed, and it feels funny now to watch it for the second time.

How interesting it is to notice how we change our perspectives through time over the same subject.

I thought that it was indeed quite accurate understanding of human cognition.

People tend to not understand but just have a glimpse of everything by the shades of the image: Politician being snobbish, police are honest good working people. Even though the politician here is of pure innocence in the event, it would be very hard to convince the others of his innocence, because of the framing of the general public on this event.

He acknowledged, apologized, resigned. Indeed, later somebody else turned up for him.

Well, for me, in the past perhaps I would have reacted vigorously, now probably a bit mad but then will still do the same as there the politician did. The public/group of people is just an amazing creature. Nobody would think anybody should responsible for their actions, but everybody thinks somebody should be responsible.

It’s no use to try to argue, sometimes it is meant to be. Keep quiet, smile, wait for your salvation.

沈旭暉專欄﹕英國「粗口門」的啟示：你懂得Framing嗎？
2013.08.11
明報

【咫尺地球】近來不少地方展開了圍繞「老師與粗口」的爭論，令人想起去年一個英國案例「Pleb gate」，和社會科學的「framing」理論。這案例同樣牽涉粗口、警權爭議、媒體和政治角力，當事人並非老師，而是同樣被賦予一定道德要求的國會議員兼執政黨黨鞭。

英執政黨鞭被指粗口辱警

當事人麥俊高（Andrew Mitchell）算得上英國政壇重量級人物，早在上世紀八十年代就當選下議院議員，2010年保守黨回朝後，被卡梅倫委任進內閣，擔任國際發展部長，並於兩年後改任黨鞭，繼續列席內閣會議。英國的執政黨黨鞭辦公室，就在首相官邸唐寧街10號旁邊的唐寧街9號，可謂處於權力核心中央。就在麥俊高接任新職後兩周，他騎單車離開辦公室時，被見慣政要的當值警察截停，感到不滿。

根據麥俊高的說法，他說了一句：「I thought you guys were supposed to Greating help us.」但綜合警員在不同報道的說法，他說了4句：「Best you learn your Greating place. You don’t run this Greating government. You’re Greating plebs. I’ll have your Greating job for this.」

英警的原有「Framing」

「Pleb」是英國對平民的藐視稱呼，這件「醜聞」就被稱為「Pleb gate」。醜聞迅速被媒體報道，引起軒然大波，輿論一面倒指斥麥俊高，因為以警方主導、批評麥俊高的一方，在設定「框架」（framing）時，計算得十分精密。所謂「框架設定」，可以說是選擇性地以最簡單直接的符號，為公眾概括整件複雜事情的真相，是政治學、社會學、傳媒學的基本技能。在醜聞爆發時，任何支持麥俊高的人，都被「框」定為：

．不尊重紀律部隊：當時英國警隊形象甚佳，因為案發前剛有兩名女警在執勤時被槍殺，激起全國同情，殉職女警的丈夫對麥俊高的批評尤其致命；

．階級主義：「Pleb」是政治不正確用詞，代表高高在上的貴族藐視勤勉工作的下人，這是保守黨的死穴；

．濫用職權：麥俊高涉嫌威脅讓警員丟官，又被對他不滿的前實習生揭發「曾在盛怒時作出類似威脅」，若一切屬實，就是公私不分；

媒體權威重設的「Framing」

．最後，自然是麥俊高說有失身分的「粗言」。

麥俊高自覺被人格謀殺，卻百辭莫辯，唯有向首相辭掉黨鞭職務，從此消失於內閣，仕途受重挫，警方也發表聲明說不再追究。想不到3個月後，英國別樹一幟的媒體ChannelIV播出了「Pleb gate」事發時的閉路電視片段，發現原來麥俊高的版本才屬實，反而是數名警員串通製造假供辭。而且根據警方說法，「有一名剛巧與來自香港的外甥在一起、目睹事發經過的公眾人士」曾發電郵向副黨鞭投訴，但英國重量級記者、Channel IV新聞台創辦人之一Michael Crick調查發現，這人竟是警員冒充。結果，公眾輿論一百八十度轉變，輪到麥俊高的反擊勢如破竹，因為反對他的一方，現在被「框」定為：

濫用警權：不惜偽造證供，破壞警隊敵人仕途，反映他們可以對百姓一樣；

媒體炒作：「醜聞」迅速被報道，因為警員主動向媒體提供理應是內部紀錄的資料，媒體根據一面之詞渲染乃不負責任；

虛善造作：聽了麥俊高的粗言「未審先判」的人，都是不尊重法治精神，而且以道德之名行事的作風十分虛偽。

扭轉醜聞「Framing」的關鍵

究竟「Pleb gate」框架被顛覆的關鍵在哪裏？

麥俊高雖然對首相和內閣的處理不滿，但他沒有公開責難，因為在framing的遊戲，公眾對任何一個人的仕途得失興趣不大，認定當事人是利益牽涉者，供辭不可信。假如麥俊高拒絕辭職，空口說被誣衊，就是有閉路電視支持，也不會有後來的效果，因為那破不了原來設定的「框架」：他依然是說了粗口，依然是對當時全國同情的警察團隊不友好，依然顯示了在上位者的傲慢，依然是濫用職權，政治生命也不見得能復原。然而麥俊高主動道歉並辭職，切斷了基本利益，令民眾願意擱下原來被設定的「框架」，再等待一名有公信力的中立人士在制度的層面發聲，這人就是Michael Crick。此人開罪過不少麥俊高那樣的權貴，由他來把議題引導向新「框架」，公眾容易全盤接受。

結果，英國警方要獨立調查事件，拘捕了多名涉案警員，麥俊高亦控告最先配合警員報道醜聞的《太陽報》誹謗，政治生涯可能起死回生。

香港中文大學社會科學院副教授、國際關係研究中心主任；

《國際關係研究月刊》總編輯

沈旭暉

好多時候所謂關心不過是八卦。

放榜了，很多朋友都喜歡問其他朋友成績如何。其實想來結果只有兩個：好的不用問，壞的不要問。說到底這也是私隱，如果別人不告訴你，不要主動問。

你問，他不會不答，只是不想答和不答是兩回事。他知你關心出於好意，所以也會跟你說幾句，但是會說不等如想說。要重新將事情整理一次再痛苦一次，其實反而是壞事。

這點做義工多了就會明白，他們比我們想的堅強，只是有時也需要訴說，就像平常人一樣，不必憐憫不必特別關心。

人大了，也不能再把時間花在不關心我們的人身上。在別人處想深一點，回個Whatsapp有多難，別人幾天都不給你幾秒，說明別人不放你在心上。

至於是不是害羞，人都這麼大了，也該看分明。別再一廂情願自我中心，好好把時間放在會回到你身邊的人和事，成熟一點，勇敢一點接受事實，Deal With It。

弟說起，之前女朋友到我家，房外總聽到我和女友在床上躺著臥著的聲音（我的是高架床）。雖然想有點什麼，其實沒有什麼，不過旁人聽來總不舒服。

沒考慮家人的感受，沒考慮她家人的感受，更重要是沒有考慮過她的感受。有時看前非覺受邪見蒙蔽，總有所後悔。可幸自己今天已能說不再是那種人，如果不想將來的過去像現在的過去一樣糟，那就改變。

明天把計劃寫好，再把素黑看完。情理看似不相容，但是其實要有點理性把事情想通，情才能得以鞏固，伽利略一樣的風格。

做數學時聽最有感覺。

Note to self : Remember to watch later