Let’s Party Like It’s 2018

A friend recently shared an article by the former Australian Ambassador to China.

Australia is muddled on the middle kingdom

Now, I understand the author is close to him, so I aim to be respectful, but there were moments when I felt the piece echoed sentiments that is rather out of touch.

I agree with the author that politicians should be practical and well-versed in their dealings. In viewing of this, a diplomatic trip to Beijing might indeed be productive.

However, certain points in support of this stance struck me as questionable. For instance, the author’s claim that Beijing’s air quality improved mainly due to relocating steel plants seemed oversimplified. A conversation with Hebei locals might offer a more rounded perspective.

继续阅读Let’s Party Like It’s 2018

Cold War II Niall Ferguson on The Emerging Conflict With China

No introduction needed.

  • We are in Cold War II;
  • Could be much worse than Cold War I, economic wise and technology wise;
  • Russo-Ukrainian War is the first hot war in Cold War II just like the Korean War is the first hot war in Cold War I;
  • Stakes are high for both China and the US over Taiwan. Things could escalate very fast;
  • The Chinese model is unappealing in 2 aspects: Innovation and Human Rights.

Hardware hack and supply chain security

Bloomberg just made big news.

In its recent issue, it featured a cover story: “The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate U.S. Companies“, detailed how Chinese military planted malicious chips into motherboards manufactured by Taiwanese supplier, supplying motherboards to a major server provider whose servers were used by almost 30 US companies, including Amazon and Apple. And by  doing this, Chinese military gains potential access to these companies and even US military.

Here’s the malicious chip on the motherboard:

Here’s a illustration of that process directly from their website: 继续阅读Hardware hack and supply chain security

Call for smartasses

Some of you may have seen this video, since it has been around for several years:

(For those you feel so compelled to up-vote this video, sorry I don’t have such a button on my blog, but you are welcome to go to YouTube and search for “Short Comedy Sketch” and express your sympathy there. :)) 继续阅读Call for smartasses




@猛虎细嗅蔷薇 的回答已经切中了要点:
是否有利于经济发展,是否能带来经济发展,是否有实用价值,是一个非常单一的标准。而人类社会的发展是非常多维度的。无数美好的理想,信念,从实用角度一文不值。那是因为只知道从实用角度看,本来就错了。李明确说,党的执政合法性来自于“舍我其谁的执政能力”,但是说出来的执政能力表现完全集中于经济发展。 由此看来,李世默的演讲,其实本来不值得探讨。

另一方面,这个演讲的新鲜之处在于,显然他在为现行体制辩护——如果如楼上某些人所言,他仅仅是在 消解宏大叙事,那就完全不必赞美现行体制了,也不必论证党的执政合法性了——论证的起点却是共产主义宏大叙事的幻灭。此外,他选择直面执政合法性这个敏感 话题。直率的不像体制内!


  1. 共产主义宏大叙事已经是共产党执政的负资产,必须要抛弃,只是要讲策略,讲时机;
  2. 从现实出发从经济发展出发重新打造ccp的执政合法性;



An antidote to the so-called Chinese way of teaching

As I said before, I don’t think there is a single “Chinese way of teaching”. In addition, the Chinese ways of teaching are also changing. However, there are characters that are commonly agreed to be associated with Chinese ways of teaching: emphasis on discipline and order, rely primarily on repetition and memorization.

In the discussion provoked by the BBC documentary, “Are our kids touch enough: Chinese school”, I’ve seen a lot of people praising these characters. Well, here’s an antidote to the obsession of academic achievement:

Mind you, I don’t see this as a full argument against Chinese way of teaching. I’d love to get more cases like Gillian Lynne from Mr. Ken Robinson. However, this talk at least challenges us, reminds us to look further, wider, beyond academic achievement, in education. I’ll provide a Chinese translation to the transcript in another post.









2008年4月23日,有人(ID:Vicky. H)在华盛顿邮报的讨论区发表评论,说他收到这么一封邮件,据传邮报已经发表过了,但是没有证据。诗篇结尾签名是Duo-Liang Lin, Ph. D.




4月25日,一个ID叫做“A Poem Published by the Washington Post. ”的人又重新贴了这一首诗,加上了Duo-Liang Lin的签名。


Its authorship could not be confirmed.

此后国内媒体多声称这首诗是“林良多”教授发表在《华盛顿邮报》上。其实,Duo-Liang Lin的中文名字叫做“林多樑”;他向华盛顿邮报说明过自己并非作者;华盛顿邮报说的很清楚,作者身份无法确认。


P.S. Times在2008年也有一篇文章提到了这首诗:

Poetry and Prosaic Advice

Advantages of Chinese Teaching

OK, I use this title just to bring attention.

After watching all 3 episodes of the BBC documentary, Are our kids tough enough, Chinese School,  in my opinion, there is one aspect of British kids that really needs to improve: coping with competition and failure.

When British kids were in the PE class, they were very upset that they might fail. Philippa actually sobbed on not passing one item. And she said:

“I just don’t think comparing yourself to others is a good, healthy life style.”


Philippa is not alone. In the 1st episode, we saw another boy sobbed during PE class.

Well, I have to agree with Philippa that it is not a healthy life style. But competition is part of life. Ranking students all the time with different measures is of course too much, but exposing them to a certain dose of competition is essential to their development. To Philippa, I’d say it’s equally not healthy if young people are so scared of competition that they sob on a failure in just one PE preparation. I don’t want my daughter to be so fragile.

So this is the advantage of Chinese teaching. Put all the drawbacks aside, this is probably one thing Britain should learn from Chinese teaching: To get the kids used to competition.


BBC的纪录片“Are out Kids Tough Enough? Chinese School”,中文名“我们的孩子足够坚强吗?中式学校”一下子就火了朋友圈了。上网一搜,各种评论铺天盖地。赶快花了两个小时找到看看,免得落后时代太远。下面的我的感想和评论:







It’s about language and culture, dude


It came to me as a complete surprise that the BBC documentary Are Our Kids Tough Enough? Chinese School got so much attention, and the debate over which is better, the Chinese way or the British way, actually got so heated up.

So I just spent 2 hours watching it on Youtube and here’s what I think.

First of all, I’d say the heated debate and all the furious comments on which way of teaching is better are mostly not based on the video itself. Because what the documentary shows is not a meaningful comparison. All the Chinese teachers simply failed miserably in managing their classes from the very beginning, due largely to, in my humble opinion, cultural conflict and language barrier. So I’ll base my comment on the program and maybe comment on the debate over this program in a separate post.

The Experiment

I don’t know who organized this. I think it’s a fantastic idea in terms of cultural exchange. But if the goal is to compare the Chinese way of teaching to the British way of teaching,  it cannot be taken seriously.

Teaching involves extensive interaction between the teachers and the students. Language barrier and cultural difference cannot be overlooked. Stories of foreign teachers got frustrated in Chinese classes because Chinese students were inactive have been around since 20+ years now. Why should we expect the Chinese teachers not to be shocked in a British school? This cultural shock should be expected and extra time should be planned for both the teachers and the students to adapt.

继续阅读It’s about language and culture, dude