鄧氏二世祖

有時喺 social media 會見到鄧兆尊講自己點樣做二世祖幾個老婆嘆世界

其實我一直都心諗你身家有幾多個億先夠厚臉皮自認二世祖？

照睇十億八億應該係有嘅，以二世祖模式養三四個老婆好似真係勉勉強強。

無聊起嚟走去睇下佢之前爭產爭啲乜

然後心諗：屌，一棟舊樓同埋間餐廳嘅股權？成家人幾個億？

That said 祥嫂個故仔真係好經典。廿歲𡃁妹走去做咗個名星阿叔嘅妾，唔通唔係睇錢份上咩。一齊幾十年，生咗幾個仔女，一直都唔俾法律名份，個老嘢其實都算係幾仆街。

然後臨死先肯法律上結為夫婦，但最後又要喺遺囑度只留 $1 俾個老婆，雖然個老婆係睇錢份上先同你一齊幾廿年都唔算咩愛情，但咁樣跣人一鑊都真係好癲。 咁你可以話個女人謀你啲錢立心不良，但本身個關係都已經係主要靠錢維繫，若果指控人謀你啲錢又有啲唔合理。

想像到祥嫂得知個老嘢唔打算留遺產俾佢嗰陣，真係會 whole life flashed before my eyes 咁嘅狀況。等幾十年就係為呢一刻，埋門一腳若果撻Q真係會發癲⋯⋯ which is probably what happened.

Egoistic Design

I play WoW classic (vanilla/TBC), exclusively. Retail is basically a shit game.

Yesterday, came across a video titled "Ion Hazzikostas Just Explained 17 Years of WoW Design – Incredible Talk", where a youtuber reacts to a WoW game designer's reflecting on the history of game design in WoW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNftgcdIAHQ 

And my takeaway was that it took him/them 17 years to realize that maybe, only maybe, that designing games from the players' perspective is a better idea than shoving personal ideals down their throats.

It's absolutely amazing how people (especially artists) bring their own ego to work. It's not that you should become a slave to your players/users/customers... it's that your ego is the least important thing. What you're there is to create art. Art isn't owned by anyone. It's an interaction between the divine, the artist, and the experiencer.

I thought this should be the first thing people need to learn when doing any kind of design. It was drilled into my psyche when I joined my company. I'm shocked this isn't a standard thing. No wonder designs in other places tend to suck.

Lawrence

某位大學老師無端端俾人告，我睇完判詞左望右望都睇唔出端倪

今日網上偶然見到，傳話「劉姓男友」係Lawrence

屌，原來係咁

講真 DoJ 嗰班友仔落手都真係狠喇，咁都真係走去告⋯

麥記可樂

唔知會唔會搞到好似耶撚咁，人哋講感恩，我就講顯化。

但幾個月前，我有排好 crave 麥記嘅可樂 (按：唔鍾意飲罐裝可樂，啲 carbonic acid 太濃 (i.e. "太多氣"))，但麥記單買大可樂 $19，同埋個餐冇咩分別 （但有時唔想食嘢，淨係想買個可樂）

有一兩次我真係俾咗 $19 買個大可樂飲。然後心諗點解佢要咁貴。

然後而家就咁樣樣⋯

所以都只可以話係巧合。

Subjective Logic

Q: Is logic subjective? (cf. https://centraltrunks.blogspot.com/2024/11/can-logic-be-retroactively-filled-in.html )

A: Sure, why not? Logic is just another language or protocol, it can be whatever you define it to be.

Q: Even if the logic directly contradicts itself?

A: Sure. People change their mind all the time. It can be encoded as a logic system.

Q: But surely nobody would *think* it's actually "true" to keep contradicting oneself, right?

A: People believe in all sorts of funny things. It's only because you are immersed in the environment that believes those things to be true and real, that you don't see how strange it can be from the outside.

Q: Yes, there are things that took me decades of contemplation to figure out, but in retrospect is very simple.

A: People are also very slow to figure things out, so to speak.

Q: But what about computation? Is the result of a computation fixed?

A: It depends on whether you had an idea what the outcome is. If you already have a concrete idea, then it is more fixed than if you didn't. Since a computational system is designed by "you", it system will behave exactly as you *think* it would behave -- in retrospect. So the computation system will *eventually* make sense (because you think things will eventually be figured out), but not necessarily at the outset.

666

 今朝同美國同事開完個會

諗住搭 X 點鐘班車返 office

一出門見到三部𨋢都停喺大堂

6、6、6

我心諗 JM9 (我當時仲未諗起原來係所謂魔鬼數字...)

由於時間緊迫，我一路跑住落街

最後差三秒鐘上唔到車。

Human-chimp differences

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rwg5HZ1htQ "New Study Shatters the 1% Human-Chimp Difference Myth"

https://evolutionnews.org/2025/05/additional-method-of-analysis-confirms-human-chimp-genomes-are-about-15-percent-different/

Interesting.