Overextension

 

This obviously applies to businesses and companies too. It's sad that most public companies are constitutionally designed to overextend...

IMO Non-PC

IMO 2024 出咗結果

雖然我本人對數學冇咩特別興趣，但由於各種原因我係會留意 IMO 結果嘅。意思大概同大家留意奧運嘅原因差唔多：啲結果好多時有指標性作用。

眾所周知我係有少少 IOI 背景嘅，咁 IOI 同 IMO 喺最 top tier 係有少少重疊嘅 (喺我嘅水平就冇 :0) ，基本上就係量度 IQ。

所以 IOI 同 IMO 嘅國家排名係國家 （亦某程度上係族裔 -- 建議睇埋某啲國家嘅選手嘅姓名）嘅 IQ 排名。（當然小國人口基數唔夠大會影響獎牌數目，不過 somehow 個影響唔多似係 linear。）

國家同族裔嘅 IQ 排名唔係純粹作為飯後談資，而係對預測世界往後幾十年發展嘅指標嚟。喺我個mental model入面，中國嘅崛起唔係純粹因為政治制度經濟環境推動，而係民族嘅智慧嘅體現。當然，純粹智慧係冇用嘅，仍然要依靠制度將呢份力量正確引導去有用嘅地方。

但起碼呢個就解釋咗點解中國會不斷變強，但非洲冇運行，南美冇運行。好多人覺得印度會好似中國咁樣快速發展經濟，但喺我 projection 底下，印度係複製唔到中國嘅模式。歐美勢力普遍對中國有偏見，對印度呢個曾經被殖過嘅國家多啲好感，所以佢哋啲 projection 比較 optimistic，但老老實實淨係講 IQ 就已經同中國差幾皮。

所以 IMO 2024 出咗結果之後，我有少少嚇親。但照計可能係 outlier 嚟，計返印度往績，佢總成績同香港(!)差唔太遠。以人口基數嚟講，印度其實係好撚弱。當然，我可能有少少(只係少少)bias，因為印度嘅 IOI 成績係差過香港嘅。嘿嘿。

可能有人會話我種族乜乜乜，但 #先知力 係唔講政治正確嘅，心存偏見會令 #先知力 減弱。好多人靠經濟預測搵食，與其相信「國家級宣傳機器」 (正讀：思si1 哎aai1 囈ai1)，不如望下呢啲仲好。

Pan-Omnism

It's so obvious.

... in retrospect.

Everything anyone truly believes in is "true".

It is their reality.

A common objection is that what if what they believe in doesn't make sense? Or isn't even logical? Can somebody believe even "the sky is blue" and "the sky is not blue" at the same time?

Right, these are ideas from dualistic thinking.

A common pattern in dualistic thinking is that in addition to the subject idea, they create another "judge" idea that comments on and criticizes the subject idea.

Obviously that thing is "true" too (for whoever created the judge), but we don't actively do that here.

"The sky is blue" does not attack, nor does "The sky is not blue" (somewhat). What causes the conflict that makes people uncomfortable is the insistence on so called "logical consistency", where one idea must stand while the other must die.  This insistence on "logical consistency" is a always-resident program in most (learned?) people's minds, given high priority and authority as a "judge".

Yet the key insight to Pan-Omnism is that the practitioner of Pan-Omnism does not create the judge. Others may in their own ideas create judges and appear to attack their own ideas or other people's ideas. Those judges are "true" too btw.  But as long as the practitioner does not place the judges above other ideas, everything exists in harmony (for the practitioner at least), and there is nothing to be worried about.

After all, all ideas are part of the Creation, and who are we to say that any part of this divine creation is "wrong"?

This is the esoteric meaning of "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

-

The modern crippled variant of such inclusivity (i.e. no tolerance for intolerance) gives rise to the so called "paradox of tolerance". We must not forget that such idea is always true, but the attack towards the so called "intolerance" (often implemented as "intolerable") is really unnecessary.

The idea seems to be modeled upon scarcity limitations of physical reality, where the problem does seem to bear out. But if we consider this as a philosophical idea without a physical implementation, it doesn't seem really necessary.

Eve -> Wisdom -> Reasoning -> Dialectic

This passage is totally fascinating. How did that Agrippa guy realize this shit...?

I mean, I was kind of given jigsaw puzzles to solve, but did he as well? :-/

Btw, side tracking on the issue of scholasticism and dialectism -- it seems like this very classical Greek approach to knowledge and truth *really* doesn't vibe with me. It feels like I suddenly realized where modern philosophy was birthed from and my mind shrieked in horror LOL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48QMQNdZCqA

The Occult Philosophy of Cornelius Agrippa - 2 of X - Life and Works

By "ESOTERICA" (Dr. Justin Sledge)

(Emphases mine)

Adam had these magical miraculous abilities to manipulate nature; if you

reconcile yourself to God or if you become in the process of reconciling

oneself to God, you would get similar kinds of powers. So magic here at this

time period is in some sense a byproduct of that reconciliation. So as one is

reconciled back to the Divine, original sin is sort of washed off, and as

original sin is washed off so to speak one would gain those prelapsarian Powers

over nature, and that is simply what Agrippa at this time and many people this

time thought of as ultimately what's going to be magic. So that's magic in a in

a short sense of a definition of how one would get these sort of powers. Now

one of the things that's happened is that when the fall occurred, this fall is of

course brought on by Eve, and the mythology that Agrippa develops is that

Eve represents wisdom or Reason rather she represents sort of like dialectical

reasoning and she kind of infected Adam with this dialectical reasoning this

kind of logical reasoning which he also Associates by the way with

scholasticism. This has made it such that human beings have tried to reason

their way to to the Divine, Agrippa thinks that's not going to work you can't

reason your way back to the Divine, because the mind itself is somehow fallen-

in fact it's being duded in some sense by reason itself. And so what has to

happen -- again this is where the more Protestant side Agrrippa's thought pops

out -- is that the only way to restore that is through a type of Faith, but a

mystically informed faith that shorts that circuit. You can't reason your way

back to the Divine, but what you can do is your mind can leap up to the Divine

and it can sort of short the circuit between yourself and God, and that

shorting of that circuit is achieved by kind of mystical faith, and the

mechanisms by which to use that mystical Faith are encoded in texts like text

of the Kabbalah and text of the Corpus Hermeticum. So the idea is the further

we get back in time the further we get access to technologies that allow us to

reconcile ourselves to God, because people back then were just closer to the

Divine. The fall of human beings was simply closer to them and therefore they

weren't as "fallen" as we are now. This idea of the essential aspect of faith

and really faith alone by which one reconciles oneself to God, which again has

this kind of protestant bent to it in a certain kind of way, this is going to

do two things for Agrippa.

Underlying mechanisms of synchronicity?

記得讀洪承喜本講做女巫經歷嘅書嗰陣，佢講同類嘅罕見咨詢項目好多時會同一日發生。

諗起老豆以前睇症嗰陣都成日咁講，平時好日都唔冇一單嘅同類病症，同一日嚟兩三單。

我估見開眾生嘅職業都應該係有咁上下嘅體會。

呢啲奇怪現像，但唔知點理解。

最近先 connect 到，呢個係原始嘅同步 (synchronicity) 現像。所謂嘅同步，就係有兩單本身貌似冇關係嘅事件，唔知點解喺非常接近嘅時空發生。嗰啲嘢未必對你有咩深刻意義 (eg. 睇症都係咁睇)，純粹就係會咁發生。

例如，我最近喺街撞到熟人，好多時都係之前嗰日見過佢。唔知點解，第二日又會好隨機咁撞到。有冇啲咩特別意義呢，又真係唔多似有。

唔知呢啲所謂巧合，可唔可以用呢啲生活中嘅證據，砌出一個理論去說明宇宙嘅同步係點發生㗎呢？

當然我都唔介意話呢個係純粹一個宇宙「公理」，但如果真係有一個咁嘅公理，大概可以推斷出宇宙唔係一個純粹做粒子運算嘅機器，而係會承認某種符合人類認知嘅概念，否則我哋就唔會解讀/留意得到呢啲「同步」⋯

一念三千

對佛法本身冇乜興趣

但每次好奇心驅使學多幾個名詞 (唔係學佛理，係名詞咋)

都會發現：屌，原來係講緊XXX

eg. 「一念三千」其實大概就等於「我係神」....

(當然呢啲嘢就唔可以亂咁俾人知，所以就好懚晦⋯ 但你唔知呢個事實，始終係唔會有資格去到老師級數。)

又例如

《金剛經》係講 simulation theory 嘅

淨土宗係啲 New Age affirmation 嘅純淨版

有時啲 mapping 太過出乎群眾所想，未到老師級嘅佛學愛好者就會開始跳掣。

.. 所以... 對佛法本身冇乜興趣...

Mulled Wine + Coke

- 紅酒 (~250ml)

- 可樂 (~250ml)

- 肉桂

- 薑

- 少量丁香

- *八角

- *多香果 (Allspice)

- *其他香料

將(~150ml)嘅紅酒同(~150ml)可樂加熱，加入香料，超低火慢煮 30 分鐘；記住唔好煲燶，如果煮乾要加水；目標係煮走大約一半水份

將煮好嘅液體加入杯中，然後將用剩嘅(~100ml)紅酒同(~100ml)可樂加埋落去 (小心可樂泡沫)

可以當係可樂煲薑進化版，主治傷風咳嗽

按：100ml紅酒有 ~10-15ml 酒精..

[病到仆街，冇圖]

Psy

話說，每次見到啲西方心理學家嘅嘢，腦入面總係會有一種好雜亂甚至似係 white static noise 嘅感覺。唔舒服。

所以我到而家都睇唔到啲咩 Karl Jung 嘅嘢，諗多兩下都少少唔舒服。當代嘅仲有 Jordan Peterson，條友勁出名，但我完全唔知佢有啲咩思想諗法，又係只要一專心諗就會唔舒服⋯

(Freud 呢啲就算9數啦...)

超譯老子

一般做古文研究，係講究訓古考據，理論上所有論點都有文獻依歸。

但由於近年發現「過去係唔存在」，幾千年前發生過啲乜，根本係唔會有客觀定案。

尤其《道德經》呢類連起源都唔清唔楚，作者同成書故事都流於傳說，其實某程度上可以話本書係石頭爆出嚟，來歷不明。而當中內容，又係中華玄學嘅頂點。

喺咁嘅情況下，嘗試用文字考據方式去解讀作品，似乎係緣木求魚。

所以「超譯」就啱喇。

「超譯」其實唔係真係咁過份。大家都知道《道德經》版本眾多，唔同版本嘅內容甚至可以完全相反，成書兩千幾年嚟大家抄錯經文、注錯解釋，甚至為各種理由撰改內容，咩都可能發生。

所以要還原經文原意，最好嘅方法，梗係靠「源頭」嘅大能，由頭寫返個正確版本出嚟。

無所憑靠咁寫，我哋平時已經做緊。但《道德經》本身有傳承嘅力量，食得唔好嘥，作為一個玄學嘅綱目啱啱好。

所以「超譯」就啱喇。

一般嘅翻譯，通常係作者對內容嘅認知比較全面，所以譯者喺認知未及得上作者嘅情況下，只能夠嚴謹就住文字翻譯。嚴謹嘅作用，係保障譯文唔會偏離作者意圖，亦即係唔會偏離作者所見到嘅真相。但《道德經》既無作者，亦無客觀真相，所以「超譯」，*以至任何翻譯*，都係考譯者嘅功夫。

二十年前嘗試過搞唔撚掂，且看隔咗咁耐，我有冇進步。呢個係對自己嘅測驗嚟。

------------------

The path you walk is not eternal;

The names you give things are not constant.

In the beginning, there were no names;

Everything came to be when they were given names.

Therefore, without names, wonders can be observed;

And with names, we see the boundary of things.

These two are the complements of the same mystery.

This mystery feeds on itself, and it is the source of all wonder.

-

Everyone knows beauty as beauty, because of appalling things;

They know good as good, because of evil.

Therefore, to have and to lack are brought about together;

Ease and difficulty are brought about together;

Long and short are measured together;

High and low, Music and noise, front and back,

they are opposite sides of the same thing.

Therefore enlightened masters do not act on aspirations, and they do not teach using words and contrasts.

Everything in the universe

function without self-aggrandizement;

create without owning;

act without clinging on;

achieve without revel.

Only those who do not cling on will not be vanquished.

-

-

The Dao is ever-flowing, so it never ruptures.

It is the fountainhead of everything in the world.

It rounds sharp corners,

detangles complexities,

mellows brightnesses,

and settles with dusts.

In its deep serenity, it peacefully exists without disturbance.

I do not know who created it;

It seems to have come before the gods.

(20/7/2024)

PS: 特別鳴謝 Gemma2 27B

關於「天子」

「天子」係周朝開始先有，商朝稱「帝」。

秦始皇稱帝，唔叫「天子」。

後來漢以後就亂咁互用。

單于據漢書全名為「撐犁孤塗單于」，「天為「撐犁」，謂子為「孤塗」，單于者，廣大之貌也，言其象天單于然也。」 所以都係「天子」咁解。

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingir

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengri

... 之但係點解「單于」唔讀得「dan」？

(同仆老師傾完之後我結論都係「做人唔好太何文匯，呢啲嘢信韻書就算⋯」)

Free Will of the complement

There is free will of the self for sure.

And then there is free will of the complement.

That is what they call "randomness", but obviously it's anything but.

太極

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMDqHcSxHcA

太極同道家啲實踐嘢其實我識得好少

入面講到啲圈圈冇範圍限制，個玩法幾得意。 正所謂「天大地大人亦大」，相信呢種訓練都係幾有效嘅。

另外佢嗰啲哼哼哈哈聲似乎真係有啲料到。主持諗到「哈哈」嗰下都幾得意。

唉，世界太大，可以學嘅嘢太多。

Free Will => Everything is True (somewhat)

The fundamental law of free will implies there is a rule against omniscience.

The rule against omniscience implies there cannot be an accurate theory of everything.

This implies theories either have to be incomplete, or wrong in certain areas, or have to self-limit their scope.

This implies that whatever theory we adopt, they are incomplete in some ways and is never totally correct.

From the perfectionist perspective, this means all theories are "wrong".

But another way to look at it is that, all theories are correct as chosen and adopted.

The modern way of attacking theories in the form of "your theory cannot be right because <flaw>" is not helpful except to show that "all theories are wrong" (which is, unless you're aiming at nihilism, not helpful), because we already shown that all theories have this problem. 

Instead, we must reflect on *why* we choose and adopt particular theories. Is it Occam's razor? Or something else? Or do we have particular axioms and prefer the theories that allow them?

But, in the end, it's still a matter of choice. And because we (those who do not prefer nihilism) prefer not to point at some flaws of a theory and label it wrong, it's probably more useful to think of them as all equivalently "correct" (this admittedly reeks of objectivism though!), and thus all valid choices.

The law against Omniscience

Before making the decision, you do not know what decision you will make. (The corollary is that once you have made the decision you lose the freedom of choice.)

Seems tautological. (And it is, I think)

The interesting part is that this resonates deeply in with the fundamental laws against omniscience -- the most interesting example being the classical proof for the halting problem.  The "diagonalization" trick only works if you presume there is a way to predict whether some arbitrary program halts, so that you can just do the opposite thing.

And thus we obtain a link between Free Will and the Law against Omniscience.

Ogi Ogas calls it the "Failsafe Supreme". I think it's just a universal law of free will (which, we could imbue intentions into it, but seems unnecessary).

I mean, the whole system is crafted so beautifully. If "we" created this, we must be such immensely powerful beings before we forgot who we were...

Decisions, Free Will, and Omnipotence

- Before you make a decision you do not know what you will decide.

- If you have no choice, it is because you have already made the decision.

- I am

- Everything is connected.

The puzzle is now, why does it not feel like I make decisions outside of my body?

- Am I not actually making decisions (even for myself)? No, I think, therefore I am making decisions.

- Have I forgotten those decisions? Perhaps, but if I truly wanted an alternative, I could always make the choice. So even if it was a forgotten prior decision, I must be implicitly allowing it to continue.

- What does it "feel like" to make a decision, for a human? We think we have a rational chain of thought that leads to a decision.  Cause and effect. Memory of the thought process and the feelings while making the decision.

Ah, but if I postulate that I am not the human, then it solves all those "feeling I made a decision" problems. I simply took the perspective of the human, thus giving up the memory of making decisions that were not up to the human to make.

Note: there is no real reason to make the postulation except that it has been part of traditional wisdom to consider it, and curiously it solves the problems.

mtg color pie

The MTG color pie is actually a surprisingly useful conceptual tool if only to describe the "affinity" of the magic...

It might sound "unserious" to use game design mechanics as a serious metaphor... but it's the best one (and most fleshed out one) that I know of...

又喺夏天去東京

又喺夏天去東京

今次係老婆想去個 event，我反正得閒就一齊去

為咗善用時間，搭咗凌晨機

冇咩點 plan 行程，大概每一日都會有啲想去嘅地方，但細節冇咩點安排。隨緣。

第一餐喺度食。

啲鰻魚食到廣東叉燒嘅味道。 (應該都係啲肉用啲甜甜哋嘅醬攞去燒嘅味道⋯

本身係十一點幾，佢門口已經有人排隊。排到我哋嗰陣，出面人龍就已經長到....

之後誤打誤撞入咗個金魚展覽：

十分十分之靚。

之後去咗池袋。究竟呢條友係乜水？

Sunshine City 有個水族館。唔計食咗嗰啲，究竟我一日見到幾多條魚？

仲有企鵝同塘鵝

夜晚好 random 咁走咗入間食もつ鍋嘅餐廳。

第二日，明治神宮。行完正常路線之後走咗啲偏少少嘅路。

你見冇人嘅～

宝物殿

武道場

見到有人著校服/制服出出入入。

似係竹林

喺附近事但食咗個晏

走咗去參觀有錢人住所

朋友介紹嘅雞湯關東煮：

嚿大根好大份⋯

老婆念念不忘嘅蘋果，老遠走去食：

Random 撞到一班人 cosplay Mario Kart。結論：呢啲嘢，一個人做好kam，成班人做就好型。

Gongcha 人哋排晒隊呀。

之後老婆走咗去夾公仔。我同佢一齊夾咗陣，然後悶得滯走咗去打太鼓。我用100yen玩一舖太鼓嘅期間，佢應該敗咗一兩千yen⋯

我打完太鼓之後，見到佢隻遊城十代喺個邊邊就嚟跌落嚟咁款。我黎手用嚿鉗壓咗佢落嚟，成功執咗雞。原來職員見佢玩得咁辛苦（i.e. 課咗咁多金），幫佢擺咗一個比較容易夾嘅位。

Anyway, 最後夾到，皆大歡喜。

是晚終於冇落雨。酒店天台其實幾靚。原來喺東京，十樓(酒店有十層)已經算係幾高。周圍冇咩更高嘅樓，個景唔錯。

第三日，老婆走咗去佢啲 event。我自己搵嘢做。

最後走咗去川崎市嘅「日本民家園」。不過首先要去個廁所先。

話說個「電車」站係有ドラえもんtheme，可能係因為嗰度附近有個藤子·F·不二雄博物館。

話說雖然我係去「日本民家園」但附近有一大堆嘢：

係好靚嘅：

佢有幾間屋直頭俾你入去坐，感受喺爐邊煲水嘅樂趣。

夏日火火，咁玩真係幾有趣。不過都係冬天先喇。

更多相

佢哋將其中一間屋變咗做餐廳，有麵食。

之後都係咁上下嘅嘢

屋頂種花花草草，幾得意。

出口係咁嘅款。你話嗰頭係咪好很靚。

出口行兩步就係個唔知邊個藝術家嘅展館。一場嚟到就入去望下。

最神奇係見到佢拍嘅 60 年代香港舊相。

呢個直頭係傳說中 Doki Doki Panic 入面隻怪嚟

張飛

出面係咁。真係好靚。

附近仲有啲咩科學館、唔知咩田園乜乜，但冇行到。

諗住仲有時間望下個藤子F不二雄博物館。

點知要一早網上預約。

:-/

晏晝諗住返「市區」同老婆會合，約咗喺原宿，諗住去間動物 cafe。點知嗰頭勁多人⋯

仲要落雨⋯

最後因為我等得耐周圍亂行，唔覺意見到間動物 cafe 已經爆滿，直接撤退。

天氣真係麻麻，落雨開遮會俾啲風吹到反晒。我最後放棄開遮⋯

最後去咗間 Family Restaurant 食 (Italian Tomato)。貪佢有得玩機械人。

返到香港先留意到原來樓下都有間 Italian Tomato..

第四日。朝早去咗築地食魚生。主要都係一陣有嘢喺銀座做，所以順便到此一遊

由於上次喺歌舞伎座睇得幾開心，所以今次帶埋老婆嚟感受下。

上次主要係歌舞，今次個表演比較似舞台劇故事性多啲。所以有少少睇到一頭霧水。

夜晚同蝶主席喺居酒屋：

話說去居酒屋途中，差啲俾 Google Maps fake 咗。佢叫我搭「東京上野線」，但其實上京線係包三四條線：

我分唔出佢想我搭 JU JJ 定 JT，然後東京站勁 Q 多人，我見到有車就上咗先。

東京站嘅「東京上野線」個月台係咁嘅樣。你唔係分得到 7 同 8 嘅車有咩唔同吖嘛？

最屈機係車廂入面個告示牌寫住「東京上野線互通」之類嘅字樣。我心諗：唔通條條線都係同一路線嘅？

去到上野站先至見到之後個站名。望返 Google 條線，咦，唔同站名㗎喎？仆街，即刻落車再睇下點搞。

搞完一輪之後，我靈機一觸走去開 Apple Maps 睇下佢點點我。屌，一開，寫到清清楚楚，搭 「JJ」吖嘛。 -_-

Anyway, 我哋係準時去到目的地嘅。

之後睇返張單，嘩屌，飲飽食醉，每人港幣兩舊水左右。痴線。然後諗返啲酒精飲品都係 500~600yen 咗右。喺香港可樂都飲唔到。

第五日，去咗上野動物園。

隻北極熊三十度太陽下曝曬。好慘 :'(

上野不忍池啲荷花未開，得零星幾朵。我哋早咗兩個星期左右。

大概就係咁。

另外呢啲花周圍都有，幾靚。