The good news is that you can be as brilliant as Tiger Woods, Warren Buffet, or even Mozart! The bad news is that you are probably a bit too late. But don’t despair, there is still hope.

Geoff Colvin’s book, Talent is Overrated (ISBN: 978-1591842941), repeated what Malcolm Gladwell mentioned in Outliers that there is a magical 10,000 hours for geniuses. Anyone can perform as brilliantly as a genius after about 10,000 hours of practice. In fact, many studies revealed that the majority of those prodigious geniuses — Tiger Woods, Warren Buffet, Mozart — did just that. The only difference is that they started early and so appeared to be childhood prodigies. If you trace their training history, you will find that they all achieved the “greatness” level after about 10 years’ training.

I knew one such genius myself. It was first grade. He surpassed me oh so effortlessly on every subject and clinched #1 in class ranking without a hint of studying. I was so jealous of his brilliancy. He was the darling of every mother. “Why can’t you be like him?” I wanted to hate him, but he asked me to play at his house, so I did.

As we played, his mother was tutoring his elder brother right next to us (we all live in small apartments, there wasn’t much privacy then). And I found out why he invited me. I was his shield, his excuse, and his escape. Without I being there, his mother would have drilled and tutored him at the same time — one effort for the benefit of two. Ha! He was no genius. In fact, poor guy, he was trapped by his under-performing brother so that he couldn’t play everyday as I. We became best friends and, uh, his grades declined quickly.

So, if you wish to play like Tiger, invest like Warren, or compose like Mozart, all you have to do is put in about 10,000 hours of practice. On average, that would take about 10 years. That’s the good news. The bad news is by the time you finished that 10 years, others would have done their 20 years. Where is the hope? In professional fields and business, most people don’t really get better with time and 2,000 hours of practice are enough to make you shine. If you would spend half a day every week, that’s 4 hours a week, you will be quite good in a year’s time. If you keep it up, you will be super in about 3 years. It may be hard to be a brilliant golfer, but it takes surprising less to be better than everyone around you.

Are you willing to do 4 extra hours of practicing every week for a year? I have given this advice to many people, almost 100% had their lives get in the way: family, friends, kids, entertainment, social activities, etc. In the end, no one put in those hours.

Sadly, I concluded you really don’t want to be a genius. You just want an excuse of not being one.

I have been avoiding this curiously titled book for a long time. When Kid produced a paperback version and asked me, “Donate or keep?” I put it on my physical reading queue (as opposed to my digital one on my Kindle, in the form of sample downloads).

It began slowly and it took a long time for the main characters to meet each other. The setting was creepy, cold, dark, and foreign. I cringed at several scenes that were quite graphic and violent. They are fully capable of giving people nightmares or keeping them awake at night. If this were a movie (and it is), it would match the horror of Se7en.

Although it gripped me all the way to the finish, I am not clicking my Amazon account to acquire the next two books from Stieg Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy. I guess this one felt a bit too intense.

Herr Larsson died before publishing the trilogy and he delivered the manuscripts at the same time. All together, they sold nearly 30 million copies worldwide. But there will be no more Lisbeth Salander stories, at least not from the same author.

The original title of the book is “Men who Hate Women.” I actually think that’s a better title. I avoided the book for its feminist reputation. I was quite wrong, at least for this one. It depicted many men that hated women, but did not preach or lecture on feminist ideologies at all.

As a computer guy, I was quite amused by the technologies and the clear preference for Apple laptops. Top hackers, such as Salander, should be using a Linux box. Her magical hacking skills became too convenient a solution. Her shrewd manipulation of corporate financing and money laundering was too. For a anti-social, under-educated (albeit talented), lone hacker. That’s not quite believable. But I am being nerdy here.

The medical industry recommends 2 servings of fish every week; preferably one fatty kind, like Salmon or Tuna, and another white fish. This, they say, is good for our health. If everyone on earth followed that advice, we would extirpate all edible fish from the ocean, and probably fresh water too. So ecology is against personal health. Historically, ecology always loses in such battles.

Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) predicted that the world will run out of foods to sustain human population. This famous Malthusian crisis became a fallacy. Industrial and green revolutions drastically increased human productivity and probably extended earth’s capacity for human population to essential infinity. (That is, we will have mastered space colonization before we run out of foods.) In term of food production, however, there is an interesting concept of “feed conversion ratio,” that certain foods are economically costlier to produce than others. If they are similar in terms of nutrition or to human palates, then it would be logical for us to choose those foods of better conversion ratio. Or, turning the question 180 degrees, if we are genetically engineering foods anyway, we should aim to make ones with better and better conversion ratio.

Paul Greenberg depicted the gloomy destinies for all four fish: Salmon, Bass, Cod, and Tuna. He loves Salmon and Tuna. They are beautiful animals, excellent in taste, and good for our health. Bass, to Paul, is a generic name for fishes of a similar shape and meat texture. Cod is supposed to be the epitome of ocean abundance. Human beings have long and loving relationships with all four fish for centuries. And, at the same time, we are destroying them, intentionally and systematically: people, Paul being one of them, simply enjoy hunting and eating those fish too much to stop. What to do?

Ban all industrial fishing. Fisheries shall be open only for “artisan fishermen” that are licensed and their catch limit controlled. For supermarket level consumption, turn to farm fish that have excellent conversion ratio, such as Tilapia.

Can wild- and farmed-form of any animal co-exist in this human-centric world? Yes, there are pigs and boar, farmed and wild turkeys, probably both farmed and wild rabbits too. Same could work for fish. Let’s see.

周瑜和諸葛亮的競爭,是三國中的個小插曲. 最後,周瑜長嘆,認輸了.

書中描述周瑜是個文武雙全的美男子. 他娶了美女小喬. 又是吳國軍方第一把. 也就是說,他是天之驕子,世界上該有的:名,利,外表,內涵,權勢,美妻,他都有了. 幹嘛還跟諸葛亮爭什麼爭呢? 因為”贏”的追求是個無底洞,永遠不會滿足的.

赤壁之戰,周瑜大勝. 但幾次他要殺諸葛亮都沒成. 徣完東風後,諸葛亮飄然而去. 周瑜知道這下不好搞了.

一氣周瑜是諸葛亮巧取南郡,稱周瑜鬥曹:”用計策，損兵馬，費錢糧＂他趁虛而入圖了個現成. 再氣周瑜是有名的”賠了夫人又折兵”. 用美人計不成,反賠了個孫權的妹妹孫尚香.最後,諸葛亮識破周瑜”假途滅虢”計,又大敗瑜於荊州.把周瑜氣到巴丘而亡. 成了三分天下.

周瑜如果誠心聯劉破曹,是有成功的機會的. 但他一心想先吃下劉備,壯大東吳後,再攻曹操. 這策略也不能說是錯了. 畢竟聯軍不如自己一國方便. 何況劉備羽翼未成,乘弱先吃也好. 不幸栽在諸葛亮手下,大計不成. “既生瑜,何生亮”,遺憾而亡.

Wow!

Really. Wow. Go get this book and read it. It is that simple. If you are a dog lover, that is an extra bonus.

It entered Oprah’s Book Club in September of 2008 and soon became a bestseller. The story connects three generations of the Sawtelle family. The grandfather started a dog breeding business, probably somewhere in Wisconsin, with about 40 acres of rural land. One of the sons, Gar, stayed to run the family business and the other, Claude, left, but comes back early in the story. Edgar, Gar’s son, is the third generation and practically grew up among dogs.

The Sawtelle dogs, as the grandfather envisioned the new breed, were to be unique, in both breeding methodology and philosophy. He started with seed dogs that matched his imagination. Then the long and tedious process of genetic programming began: culling undesirable traits and enhancing otherwise. By necessity, the Sawtelle family must observe the entire lives of these dogs, and keep meticulous records, since some traits do not show up until late. It also requires vigorous training, else how can one tell the difference between nature and nurture? David Wroblewski portrays those dogs with such vivid characters that he must be a dog lover, even maybe a breeder. The bonding between dogs and human, in the book, is beyond “man’s best friend” by several notches.

The crescendo of the plot was unbearably intense, and getting unreal, and easily ruined, at the end. I made several comments and Kid, good kid, held her tongue and facial expression by not revealing anything. Of course, I “joined the club” and let out a big sigh when I put down the book. Oprah advised not reading the flaps and the publisher dully revised the printing. If you got the wrong copy, heed Oprah’s words.

奇怪. 曹操一世奸雄,才以少勝多,贏了袁紹. 回頭來大兵打劉備,孫權,卻又被他們少勝多打敗. 三國中,赤壁是最精彩的一段鬥智.

首先孔明”舌戰群雄”. 反面,曹操下個”檄文”,逼腦了孫權. 一來一回,促成孫劉聯盟.

第二是中了周瑜計,錯殺了蔡瑁,張允. 曹兵中沒了水戰人才. 這點是他準備不週,要打東吳,怎能沒水將呢? 沒帶一個來,也得練個出來啊.

第三是又中了周瑜的”打黃蓋”苦肉計,加上龐統的”連環計”把船綁在一起,墊下日後被火攻的種子. 這點倒不能怪曹操,冬天不該有東南風,東吳不該有火攻的可能.

所有的成敗,都是一連串的事件,一步步演出來的. 曹操連錯三步,但有十倍兵力. 應該還是穩操勝算的. 赤壁的最後決勝,在孔明的”借東風”. 小說裏寫成如鬼似神. 不論如何,這是決定的關鍵. 但是曹操再意料不到,他為什麼連提防都沒呢? 在江上要滅火應該不難,鐵環連鎖,也應該能解. 但兩步都沒準備.

一語道之,驕兵大意.

The table of contents aims to rouse curiosity. It promises to reveal the prices of life, happiness, and even women! Further, it goes into areas that make you very curious. What’s the price for “free?” Isn’t the answer obviously zero? Eduardo Porter used the word price and cost interchangeably and the answer is therefore anything but.

Eduardo Porter was never going to reveal the prices of those. This is yet another new behavior economy books popularized by Freaknomics. The book tried to explain society through the lens of economy: money, incentive, and returns. Further, Eduardo had a social agenda and, like everyone who has one, he couldn’t get off the soap box either.

There are gems that are just entertaining or controversial:

Robert Kennedy’s 1968 speech:

Gross national product counts air pollution, and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic squall. … It counts Whitman’s rifles and Speck’s Knifes and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet, the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play; it does not include the beauty of our poetry of the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate for the integrity of our public officials. … It measures everything in short except that which makes life worth while. And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.

On the price of women, Eduardo essentially examined traditional social roles and how working has changed everything. When working demands less physical strength and more intelligence, women no longer need man to provide means of lives. The traditional “sex and kids in exchange for foods and shelter” deal broke down, since working women can provide foods and shelter as easily as men, as long as they are equally educated and trained. Working women therefore bear less children. The chic of working also changed the definition of beauty. The body type that favors reproduction capability is now less desirable. This means advanced societies, that value working women instead of baby factories, are less proliferating.

Then there is the Quiverfull movement that women have the “biblically mandated role of as bearers of children and workers in the home under the authority of a husband.”

Psalm 127:3-5:

Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD:
and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man;
so are children of the youth.
Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them:
they shall not be ashamed,
but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

For this belief, many Quiverfull followers practice polygamy that tend to maximize population growth. This parallels another controversial biblical passage (that every rational and reasonably educated modern persons, including Michelle Bachmann, must disagree):

Ephesians 5:22-24:

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Can you imagine the make up of earth population if these trends continue? The world will breed themselves back to the traditional roles, since new working-women-style societies are disadvantaged at natural selection.

There is an interesting passage on intellectual property. When the US first passed its copyright law in 1790, it protected only American authors. The US printing industry, then, simply pirated books published by British authors. This continued until 1986! For all the accusations that the US software companies made against piracy in Asia, the US, after ripping off others for several hundred years, just does not like others to return the same favor. Well, no one ever accused Americans of playing fair.

幾年前就聽人說這是台北最棒的豆漿.

小時住永和,有事沒事就去吃中正橋豆漿,24小時營業,豆漿,燒餅油條,飯糰,都是便宜東西. 吃吃走路,從來不覺得有什麼大不了. 長大了搬去台北,常想起中正橋豆漿,但嫌路遠,不常去. 後來到處都是”永和豆漿大王”,心裏常納悶,一樣嗎? 我們吃的是”四海豆漿”啊.可是沒幾年,中正橋的豆漿也都沒了. 想豆漿變成了個遺憾事.

來美國後,找燒餅油條成了個嗜好. 聽說哪裡有,就得長途去試試. 驚聞Mountain View有家推出了油條,一早開車去,等上一小時,這是什麼油條啊,簡直是炸麵棍.難怪英文叫Chinese Donut. 過了好些年,慢慢有幾家做的像些了.但是總是差上那一點,最常的就是冷了.燒餅油條,冷了就只是油味,吃不下去了.

所以每次回台北,必找家燒餅油條店解解鄉愁.街角的都行,每一家都地道. 久了朋友就開始推薦了.這家如何,那家怎樣,我們變成了品燒餅. 吃來吃去,就是這家阜杭沒吃了. 這次來,反正有時差,一早起來,直奔華山市場(善導寺對面),跟著人潮(六點半!)到了這間燒餅油條店.

厚燒餅是用老式泥爐一張張貼上烤出來的,皮脆裏軟,蔥香有咬勁. 其實不該夾油條,空口吃最過癮. 鹹豆漿花結的剛好,料剛夠沒太多,清的部分有鮮味,結的部分像豆花. 蟹殼黃(焦糖燒餅)皮脆糖甜芝麻香. 我覺得飯團太鬆,蘿蔔絲絣味道太重. 聽說薄燒餅也好吃,但我們實在吃不下了.

七點多吃完,看隊排了十來人.據聞九點時能排到樓下去. 台北人真瘋. 想當年信步走到橋頭,坐下就吃的閒興. 回憶嘍.

常山趙子龍,入千軍萬馬如無人之地. 殺到血染全身,精疲力盡,逃出重圍. 要不是張飛在長坂坡喝退曹兵,他一員虎將,也被蟻兵捉去了. 這仗,是為了救他”主公”劉備的兒子阿斗,後主劉禪. 這是中國的故有美德: 愚忠. “為人臣子”,必須聽話,絕對效忠不二. 如果”忠孝不能兩全”,那只有犧牲孝了. 孔子的倫理,”君臣”第一,”父子”第二.

從老闆的角度看,這太美了. 不論手下人多有能力,市場價多高. 他們一絕對不能”不忠”,也就是不能叛變. 他們還得絕對聽話,所有的能力,判斷力,都只是對外的. 到了老闆面前,每個都是白癡,只有老闆是對的.

而且他們都是”家臣”不是”員工”. 他們存在的目的是保護老闆個人,或家人,的利益. 而非公司或國家. 三國中,劉備是最爛的老闆,曹操,孫權比他強多了. 若非關張趙,及諸葛亮的愚忠,那可能成三國之勢?

忠,當然是個美德. 但不是”忠君”,而是忠於個理念. 美國是第一個把這觀念搞清楚的國家. 所有的政府員工,他們效忠的對象,是美國憲法,而不是任何組織或個人. 三國時期,根本還沒這觀念呢.

當然,趙雲有他的職責,其中之一,就是保護糜甘二夫人及少主.所以他是忠於他的職責. 劉備“故把親兒擲馬前” 換來趙雲的“雖肝腦涂地,不能報也.” 也是不錯的管理手段.

How nice to be sucked into a book, particularly by Orson Scott Card. This is not really a SciFi, but a fantasy. I am not entering any debates on their differences.

The plots and characters are clever and vivid. Orson had a very well-constructed set-up. Gods, as in Olympia, are really aliens from far away planets. We, mortal earthlings, are either their descendants or a version that is inter-breedable. Gods are genetically capable of manipulating elements: water, dirt, wind, plants, or even animals by separating the soul, or outself, as means for control. Everyone has an affinity for specific elements and also a strength of control. The most precious affinity is with space: the ability to create gates, or worm holes, that tunnel two points in space to allow instantaneous travel across distance. The most powerful gatemages can create Great Gate that leads to gods’ planets.

Alas, mysteriously, a Loki closed every gates in the world in 632 a.d. and stranded all those gods who happened to be on earth then. Gradually, probably through genetic diversification, their power weakened. Their only hope is to get back to Olympia via a Great Gate. But factions of those earth-bound gods were at war and would prefer mutual destruction than letting any of them get ahead by having a Great Gate. As a result, they killed all those who showed signs to be able to create gates. This stalemate, an inability to work together for common benefit, guarantees total oblivion: the future generation will become mortals, called drekka by gods, just like the rest of us.

Danny is the first gatemage in 1500 years that survive to teenage. He fled his Amish-like family and became a run-away kid. Like everyone, he was also looking for parental love, friendship, and, of course, girls.

Loki closed those gates to prevent a horrible monster from destroying the world. The year was specifically 632 a.d., when Muhammad died. Hmm…

Orson, I think, wrote this book for young adults, Harry Potter style. He really over-played the prankstering, trickeries, and the teenage verbal jousting. The friendship, parental, and other kinsman emotions were superficial. The training process lacked intensity or any struggle. I actually enjoyed the parallel plot of Wad no less than the main one.

Overall, it is a story masterly told and an easy read.