雞骨 . 豬骨

Tony says:
這就跟在前幾天在餐廳吃飯，那天在選要吃雞排飯還是排骨飯
Tony says:
可是，想一想，又不是最後一餐
Tony says:
沒必要花那麼多時間想，
Tony says:
想太久了，午餐時間都過了，馬上要晚餐時間了。
Tony says:
別人吃了兩餐，你就吃一餐而已

我喜歡豬排飯。

可雞排飯點了好像比較快可以吃～～（服務生說）

肚子餓啊啊啊！（怒）

最後也只剩骨頭。

Erlang is Erlang

Erlang is so weird. You can accomplish so much over a
couple hundred lines, but so little with one line. It has
infuriating local verbosity. I think the fair thing that
could be said about Erlang is that it’s a crappy
Perl/Ruby/Python, but a great Erlang.

Released

So I was laid off yesterday. It was the kind of job
perfectly suited for a person who doesn’t like his job. Good
pay, flexible schedule (read: non-existent schedule), and
the presumption of good will.

*

I wanted to quit because it’s “uninspiring”.

(But it’s good money for minimal work.)

I wasn’t the best I could be in the best way.

(But I hardly have to go to the office anyhow.)

So I thought I’d stay till June.

*

I wasn’t laid off. I like how the piece of paper I signed
put it: a “release”. I lost the job, and regained my
internal locus of control, my existential self. Released.

I don’t think losing the job is a “problem” for me. Rather,
it’s an answer to something. This sounds like rationalizing
for the loss– but whatever, this is the perfect season to
rationalize: “hey, it’s the economic downturn, not my
bohemian work ethics”.

I was afraid too. I was just becoming healthy. I didn’t think
I was ready for “it” yet. I thought I’d spend more time to
make myself more robust, tougher, harder to kill. Then I’ll
take the plunge.

But this is the nudge.

*

I don’t want another job. I want Real Work.

I will be working like a novelist, yet I will not be writing
a novel. But just as writing a novel, I will project myself
outward, to create a world after our own imagination.

Note to self:

When you want to keep your job, try going to the office more.

A Gaping Hole in THE TOTALITY of Human Knowledge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Castration_anxiety

You might be curious how I ended up in this article.

In that case, may I quickly divert attention by suggesting
a fun hypothetical game to try next time you are bored:
given a random wikipedia article, play 20 questions to figure
out how you got there.

*Kiss* I Don’t Mean It

Fodor’s problems [with intentionality of his language of
thought] arise from treating the combinatorial structures
that constitute meanings/thoughts as symbols for something,
representations of something, information about
something. Instead, I am going to try to take them just as
pure non-intentional structure, as we did with phonology and
syntax. The problem will then be to reconstruct the
intuitions that notion of intentionality is supposed to
account for.

Ray Jackendoff (Foundations of Language p279).

Therefore we should not consider these gestures/expressions as
symbols of love, representations of love, information about
love, but that they ARE love, pure, and non-intentional.