2005-12-10

我们的教育,感动的小学作业,童年的遗憾

虽已经读书到博士,看着那份小学生作业,却不禁怜惜起自己的已早早失去的童年,没有天真,没有创造力。

记得小时候,作文课上要求写一篇有关团结的议论文,我“天真”的将其写成甲与乙的对话,我自信可以得到认可,但结果是课上的点名批评,得到是老师的严肃责斥,同学的哄堂大笑。对于孩子,勇气、自信、天真是最为珍贵,它们孕育了创造力,我们民族最缺的是创造力,但我们教育却将它们深深地掩埋。

作业中,那名小学生与刘老师之间真挚的沟通是多么令人向往,勇气、自信、天真、耐心、用功和创造力另我惭愧,我也爱上了那位最美丽的刘老师。

呼吁我们的教育向那位刘老师致敬。














2005-12-04

找适合自己的Wiki系统

Wiki的方式非常适合研发团队协同写作,以微内容(microcontent,blog也是一种微内容)的方式,共同完成一些技术文档,随想随写。

成熟的Wiki系统已经有很多,但如何选择一款适合自己的?在选择伊始,总是令人无处下手。WikiMatrix收集进20多种Wiki系统,并提供功能比较,我相信应该对你有所帮助。

在我个人所咨询过的团队中,我推荐Confluence,唯一缺憾的是要付费的,并且不是OpenSource的,但考虑到维护问题,相信这笔费用是值得的。

注:不知为什么?WikiMatrix没有收录SnipSnap

2005-12-02

BlogSpot再次被封,启用新的虚拟主机空间SiteSled

从2005年121日中午始,我的adaptivein.blogpsot.com再次的不能访问了,好心人又做了默默无闻的工作,呵护着我脆弱的思维,虽然我已不是花朵。

寻找新空间,令人无奈,感谢Wo Wei的Sitesled的推荐SiteSled空间看齐来还不错。若还有什么更好的空间和建议,欢迎各位网友指出,找个Blog空间太难了。

注:再次启用http://www.adaptivein.org/,目前仅做URL解析,重定向到http://adaptivein.sitesled.com/

希望AdaptiveIn.Org能够在新的一年里找到更好的空间,正式使用AdaptiveIn.Org域名。

2005-12-01

Provisioning的解释和翻译

Provisioning”在企业级信息资源管理(Enterprise-level Resource Management)研究中经常碰到的。该词按照Webopedia的解释,Provisioning是“向用户提供数据和技术资源访问的过程”。

有一点要清楚,Provisioning在不同的IT场合有不同的含义。比如,在网格计算(Grid Computing)中,Provisioning表示激活(Activate)某个Grid部件。再比如,“User Management and Provisioning”,用户管理(User Management)做MIS的应该是非常的熟悉,就是增、删、改、查系统用户资料,但Provisioning既然和User Management是并列的关系,具体指的是什么?。

User Provisioning”是身份管理(Identity Management)的重要单元,按照Oracle的定义:从应用实例或目录中添加、更新和删除用户的过程。其实加入我们重新构建一个信息系统的话,User Provisioning所强调“过程”是可以忽略的,但当从企业级别的层面看待企业的信息基础设施时,不可能每一个信息系统都完全的新的一套用户管理,怎么办,这就是User Provisoning,建立一些复杂的用户资料(User Profile)映射。在企业内,管理这些映射要比想象的复杂的多,这也就是为什么强调“xxx的过程”。

比较了很多翻译,最终还是选择“供给”。大家有什么更好的建议欢迎指出,谢谢^_^

注:Online Etymology Dictionary给出了Provision的词源,“providing beforehand”。

2005-11-28

网络的“脆弱”

我们已经认识到网络正在改变我们的生活,让生活变得更加的丰富多彩,我现在也难以想象没有互联网的生活会是怎样?《一起恶作剧引出中国首例网络诽谤案》描述一个简单的故事,却令我沉重起来。

我们这个社会并没有理解互联网,蝴蝶效应式的事件愈来愈多。赵强压根就没想到小小的恶作剧会发展成这种结果,绢子更没有想到会有人这么无聊,双方的家庭无辜的受到牵连。对于互联网,个人显得脆弱,国家也一样,前不久法国骚乱不也说明了这点。

依据Jean Carlson的“Highly Optimized Tolerance”理论:对于由许多子系统所连结成的复杂系统, 不管是自然演进还是人为设计, 当系统可以有效的容忍某些不确定因素时, 对于其它未被考虑到的不确定因素系统将变得更敏感。

我们这个社会并没有适应有网络的生活方式。怎么去适应?我现在不清楚,但至少有点可以明白,这是机会。

2005-11-25

Add CMD prompt option to context menu of Windows Explorer

Using the following registry, you can open a cmd prompt window by clicking 'Open CMD here' option of context menu of windows explorer. the default working directory of cmd prompt is the folder where the context menu poped up.

--------------------------------------
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\Folder\shell\Command Prompt]
@="Open CMD Prompt Here"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\Folder\shell\Command Prompt\command]
@="Cmd.exe /k pushd %L"

2005-11-24

Run Groovy in Windows Exploer directly

Groovy is not directly excuted by windows expoler in the current release, helped by ‘groovy.bat’ in cmd window. Using the following registry file, you can open or run groovy script conviently.

Note: you must adjust the groovy path in the following registry file, according with your enviroment.

-------------------------------------------------
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\.groovy]
@="groovyFile"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\.groovy\ShellNew]
"NullFile"=""

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\groovyFile]
@="Groovy Program"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\groovyFile\Shell]
@="open"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\groovyFile\Shell\open]

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\groovyFile\Shell\open\command]
@="\"D:\\java\\groovy-1.0-jsr-03\\bin\\groovy.bat\" \"%1\" %*"

2005-11-22

什么是唯理主义?

他们认为:
第一,所有有益于人类的制度在过去都是人们在明确意识到它们所具有的可欲结果的情况下发明出来的,因此人们未来也应当按照这种方式去发明这样的制度。
第二,只有当我们能够证明这些制度在任何特定的情形中所产生的特定结果都会比另一种安排所产生的结果更有优越的时候,我们才应当对它们表示赞同和尊重。
第三,我们完全有能力按照这种方式来型构我们的制度,进而使我们的制度在所有可能的结果当中切实实现那些我们认为比其他所有结果更为优越的结果。
第四,当我们对所有因素做有意识的思考能够使一种与自生自发过程结果不同的结果变得更为优越的时候,我们的理性就决不应当再去诉诸那些自发的或机械的手段。

摘自:邓正来,2001. 《哈耶克论文集》,p.206

2005-09-03

互相尊重是做人、做事的起码基点

所谓的专家言论(应对本地人和外地人实施不同房价,是控制人口的有效方法)缺少社会的良知。 无论是老百姓还是那些生活无忧的专家们,其实都已经看到或体会到“当前北京的人口问题本质是‘资源分配不公’”。

为什么还在拆东墙,互相尊重是做人、做事的起码基点。

2005-05-14

Do You Used To Say ‘But’ Or ‘No’ In Conversation?

In this speech, we will investigate some interesting personal behaviors in discussion or in meeting. In a product research project, we often take part in some discussions with teammates for consensus to tackle crucial problem.

At first, let me present three scenarios with which you may feel familiar.
In the 1st scenario, you mentioned an advice about the problem that need to be solved in the meeting, and you prepare to appreciate other teammate’s advices about the problem or commentaries about your advice. Dramatically, you heard a ‘But’ or ‘No’ said by your mate. It’s the first word at the beginning of his speaking. To some extent, you feel unhappy for negative expression of the successive speaker, although you have prepared to adopt it. An impulse to defend your advice emerges. Several suits of counter plans are being conceived in company with the ‘rival’ introducing his advice or commentary. What will, you imagine, happen later?

Let us investigate the 2nd scenario out from the 1st scenario. You have been listened for a long time, your brain sparkles again and again and some great ideas come into being. Only a chance of speaking you need and hope the speaker finish his tedious preachment. While speaker having finished, the word ‘No’ or ‘But’ comes out from mouth. And you continue to present your great ideas unselfconsciously. Would you perceive there is a bitter dispute subsequently?

It’s the turn that we investigate the 3rd scenario. You are cautious and peaceful. Moreover you are smarter. You have been audience of the dispute for a long time. You are confused that there are no too much differences of the viewpoint held by the both side of dispute in nature. However, there are great difference in literature, different expression, different explanatory manner and different literal term. If you loss your patience, how do you jump in the dispute? Would you say ‘But’ or ‘No’, which is the first word in order to chime in the dispute. If you did, the dispute would become a chaos, no consensus and long-playing dispute.

Generally, Saying ‘But’ or ‘No’ at beginning of speaking does not mean negativeness at all, but it is just an interjection word to say ‘hi, I have something to complement it’ or other similar expressions. Although the defensiveness is necessary in conversation, the behavior of those makes irrational defensiveness, which would result in self-sealing processes and misunderstanding. The irrational defensiveness restrains the innovation and consensus in teamwork obviously. Shown by several informal behavior experiments, resisting saying ‘But’ or ‘No’ would keep the rhythm of discussion, make conversation more logical and substantial. The cause of personal defensiveness and the relations between personal defensivenesss and saying ‘But’ or ‘No’ are still not clear. Fortunately, A more formal, systematic and scientific behavior experiment is going to be prepared for.

---
based on my presentation

2005-01-13

米诺与苏格拉底的对话


米    诺:你是不是在追求真理?
苏格拉底:对,我是在追求真理。
米    诺:那么,你知不知道什么是真理?
苏格拉底:我想我并不知道什么是绝对的真理。
米    诺:那么,你既然不知道什么是真理,如果那一天遇到真理了,你既然不知道,你如何“认识”他?如果你能够认识真理,那就表示你“知道”什么是真理了,那么你还要追求真理做什么?

2005-01-09

如果不做会怎么样?

    在决定做一件事情的时候,常用而又非常实效的方法就是列出这件事情的可能的“好处”和“坏处”。无论是否有个针对该事情的详细分析报告在你面前,在决策前需要自己列一下,最后敲定结果。


    但有的时候,需要换一个角度,换一个位置,问一下自己如果我不做这件事情会怎么样?有什么好处?有什么意思?当列出后,也许会做出令自己的都惊奇的决策。 这一方法至少有一点需要注意,千万不要对照着前一方法的内容去分析,而是争取做到忘掉它。