儘管很多女人會認為花心的男人最討厭，然而很多過來人卻會告訴你，其實唔嗲唔吊又唔知想點的男人才最討厭。推他一下好像迫他去死，他痛苦煩惱一臉茫然反問你應該怎線個死樣你真的很想兜巴星佢，你是他女友，不是他老母，如何代他下決定？
http://hk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/blogs/yihing/%E4%BB%96%E8%B7%9F%E6%88%91-%E8%B5%B7%E4%B9%8B%E5%BE%8C%E6%89%8D%E8%AA%AA%E5%BF%98%E4%B8%8D%E4%BA%86%E8%88%8A%E5%A5%B3%E5%8F%8B-%E6%80%8E%E9%BA%BC%E8%BE%A6-033601100.html
Usual as a general observation of human nature
The general impression of the government is more like a boyfriend who has a bad character (Low level of policy and plans for the society), unwilling to change or improve (Very limited accountability), and instead appeal on emotional forgiveness (Home is Hong Kong campaign and etc)
I would have dumped him if we are dating.
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.
