老兵征战

自七岁以来征战无数，至今已十七载春秋。年幼时不懂事，只懂听从指令画圈射题；到慢慢学习基础知识，掌握作战技巧，并从战场中累计经验，至今已是沙场老将。身为老将，记忆已不复当年的神通广大，胜利窍门即使难懂也能强背；斗志也每日渐靡，虽然仍需胜利，但只为保住老命，拿下多少土地已不重要，杀敌一百也不能激励。

今年四月，是老兵退役前作战的最后一个月。五场战役，第一战即出师不利，紧接四天内三场恶战。凭着经验和毅力，前两战有惊无险告捷，不料第四天一开战即遭冷箭袭击，两军未交集己方已亡二十五人，苦战两小时后勉强逃生，士气倍受打击。无奈只好偃旗息鼓，稍为休息后卷土重来，为最后的战役、最后的荣誉而战。

后天一点，最后一战。准备已大致妥当，等待的就是杀敌那一刻。只要结果不是战死沙场马革裹尸，能回家乡见父老的话，无论这十七年来胜多胜少，荣多辱多，一切将成为过去。二十四岁了，是时候闯另一片天地了，虚拟战场里的种种，是否公平，是否残忍，是否完整，是否有价值，是否带来启示，都已不重要。

Fear

This is the first time I got so many helps from others in my studies. In wireless, I got a nice prof that offers me re-take of CA; in VHDL I got a nice prof who is very linear; in RF, I got nice friends that lend their CA answers for me to copy; in ENS, I got nice group members to work with; in Embedded, I asked Yip Kuan for favours so many times. But yet, I struggles to motivate myself to study.

Maybe my source of motivation is still there, but it is greatly overshadowed by FEAR. The fear of not doing well in exam. How a person, not attending lectures for whole semester, left with 4 days to study for 3 subjects, still can do well in exam? I don't think I'm that smart. And my last sem's results weren't that encouraging to suggest that I can pass this challenge.

Arsenal's playing now. By right I should be watching. And yet I am not in mood to do anything, not even in mood to slack. I'm terrified now. These few days I don't think I will be sleeping well. The only thing I can rely now, is my fear.

Isn't fear the greatest source of motivation?

Self worth

Life is full of ups and downs. Sometimes your confidence soars sky high, sometimes you doubt your self worth. This fluctuation is greater during life's transitional period, especially at present times that most of us are going to graduate.

Where does one's confidence comes from? I don't have time to find a book and learn about it but I was told before that it comes from two sources:

a) One did something that one feels proud of. So, being the same person, one shall be confident that one could do it again.

b) One improves oneself daily by daily and live as a better person compared to the past.

So long as you are good at something, you will feel positive. How good is good? Better than other person is good, relatively. Everyone compare themselves with others in heart in some aspects, don't you? Thank goodness we have multiple intelligences. It virtually rules out the possibility of a person being worst candidate in every aspects.

I thought of the strong Chinese classic words: 天生我才必有用.


I googled the translation of it and it returns:
i) Heaven has endowed me with talents for eventual use.
ii) All things in their being are good for something.

Nah, both translations sound weak. It doesn't resonate as strong. Does this sound better?


But it's not as strong as "be yourself!" though it means differently. Words are, the shorter the stronger.

Sometimes it's good to ponder and wonder are we really good at something. Because by doing so, we are already better than some people.

Cogito, ergo sum. (Latin)
I think, therefore I am. (English)
我思故我在。

Simple Language

I've noticed that a lot of my recent words are unnecessarily long. Articles are written to be red, so it should be precise and easy to understand. I love "simple language" but I have problems in practising it. It needs more careful attention to write short than to write long. When time allows, I will study on George Well's article "Politics and the English Language" carefully. Before that, let's just get to the summarized six rules for writers mentioned in that article:

• Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
• Never use a long word where a short one will do.
• If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
• Never use the passive voice where you can use the active.
• Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
• Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

And a writing style guide for journalists from the Economist.

The importance of writing article concisely in this knowledge age is obvious since we have many information to absorb everyday.

同样的，用华文写作也应精简，但也许我们不知道自己写得冗长。真感兴趣的，可以读一读下面的文章：

<余光中：论中文之西化>
<余光中：从西而不化到西而化之>
<余光中：论中文的常态与变态>

Examination

A very cool video, can't stop laughing.

More serious stuffs below though. I always have some opinions about exams, so it's time to summarize it before I leaves school's life.

When was the earliest exam in human history? I couldn't find the exact answer though definitely "The Imperial Examination" (科举) in China since Sui dynasty is in my mind. It has been claimed that it is regarded by most historians as the first standardized tests based on merit. (from wiki).


However, modern examination system originated from the West (perhaps UK?) and all-time favourite MCQs (Multiple choice questionnaires) are invented in 1914 by a US guy name Frederick J.Kelly. But then, the Chinese examination system and the bureaucratic system were quite modern, argued by some scholars.

There are so many disputes about examination system (do we as a student aware of that?). I think it is needed but it's importance shouldn't be overvalued. Look at how we pressure student to get good grades. Look at how we look downs on student who get poor grades. Look at how society build its meritocracy based on purely exam. Is exam nowadays a hype? Exams could only test the logical and linguistic forms of intelligence (partially) and there are already numerous arguments that human has multiple intelligences, by Dr. Howard Gardner; Robert J. Sternberg, and ec-cetera.


How accurate exam is in testing these 2 intelligence? Let's look at few forms of assessment presently.

i) MCQs (Close book)
Pros: Fair, objective, time and cost efficient, wide range of questions.
Cons: Element of luck, mastery of random shooting, reflects only shallow understanding.

ii) Structural responses & Essay (Close book)
Pros: Reflects deep understanding, encourages open responses.
Cons: Memory machine, mastery of question spotting, subjective, time-consuming to mark.

iii) Open book exam
Pros: No need to memorize unnecessary formula and stuffs, open responses.
Cons: Not applicable to many subjects.

There are different pros and cons for each form, but I believe that main problems are not the forms (could you think of better method to test?) but how the forms are carried out. At here few constraints are examined to see whether are they reasonable.

a) memory constraint
One thing I like least in taking engineering's test is to memorize bloody formula list which contains unknowns from A to Z. In the first place, why should we memorize that? Do people memorize that in reality? Formula is developed to be used, not to be memorized. Is testing short-term memory more important than testing understanding? There are already so many things need to be put inside memory and brought into exam hall, formula memorizing is a useless burden and doesn't assess anything really. For other subjects that need to test on memory, perhaps a separate test on memory would serve this purpose better?

b) scope constraint
Relating to part a), the scope of the question is somewhat a troublesome issue. Usually we study much more than what we could be examined in a limited test period. So depending on your spotting technique and luck, you can outperform many that have better understanding than you. If exam is about fairness in accessing student's understanding, why shouldn't it prevent spotting?

My suggestion is to tell the students the exact scope (no + or -) before exam. Telling the exact scope is not disclosing the questions. Firstly, it's fair to all and eradicates spotting. Secondly, it really tests student's understanding. This works best if only some materials taught are important. If all chapters are important, I would rather the period be lengthened and all are tested. What's the rationale behind to use random partial contents to test the whole understanding? You may argue that this could make it difficult to grade students, but I think it depends on how you set the questions. There are various questions can be set from the same scope.

c) time constraint
Is how fast can you reason much more important than how logically can you reason? Certainly we cannot afford set the test period to be unreasonably long, but is current period too short until it impede student's logical reasoning? How often we go into exam hall, worrying for lack of time, just cram in whatever we know? How often we couldn't finish the paper? I wonder the test period now is set to be just enough. Will test accesses student's understanding and reasoning better if the period is lengthened?

d) number constraint
Number here means number of tests. Taking into account randomness of questions, luck, state of the mind and other factors, students' performances in similar tests could varied greatly. It's a bit ridiculous to set this number to be 1, or most weight of the score is based on 1. But practicality is another issue.

By including all the factors and constraints, it could be seen that exam's accuracy in testing these 2 intelligences have great tolerance, though it is the best available system.

What the school don't teach us is the correct attitude in taking exam. Exam is only one method of testing knowledge and understanding, in 2 of many aspects of intelligence. It shouldn't shatter students' confidence if their have knowledge and understanding but not doing so well in exams. Though society places great emphasis on exam, exam is only important only for certain period of life. One may be exam smart but doesn't reason well. The real forces that guide all along the way are knowledge and reasoning power.

Fight for exams?

Today morning I will have my first exam for ENS (Engineers and Society) but I have yet to finish my studies. Too many things to be memorized.

My mind is full and so can't intake any more. I went to check my web mail and received an interesting email about my missed CA.

I missed my wireless CA and subject prof wanted to give a re-test for absentee yesterday, provided a valid proof to justify absence is there. I didn't have one (because I overslept after mid-night burning) and I sent an email to ask whether can I take it without proof. The prof sent another email to all, restated the need for valid proof. So I assumed that I weren't eligible for the re-test since he didn't reply my email personally.

After the re-test he noticed I didn't take it and he replied my email and asked me to go for a re-test today. Although without any valid proof, he considers to let me take the re-test with some mark deductions as a penalty. He said :"It's waste for you to get 0 marks for CA2 since you got 10 marks for CA1."

What a nice prof! I really appreciates his efforts and concerns for students. Sadly I will be having exam today. Things took a turn a bit too late. Nonetheless, the boost gave to me from this event couldn't be greater. I am inspired to get the rest of 80 in the final. Haha, the mission of rushing course materials in few days and doing well in exam is quite unlikely but I shall keep the confidence high first.

Alas, let's fight for the first paper first.

Moody

A short recap from HRM - Psychology part.

"Mood", different from "emotions", is less specific and less likely to be triggered by a particular event; but triggered by a series of events. Mood is a relatively lasting affective state.

In short, you get "bad mood" when a series of shits happened. These shits, if does not happen back to back, are immaterial. But when they add up, they become holy shit, and you feel "moody".

Having said so, it's pretty ironical. Why immaterial things add up become material? One possible reason is that they may seem immaterial intuitively but contradict with your beliefs, indirectly or unconsciously. Another reason is that different combination of these shits give rise to a false sense hood of something you fears. So there's no clear escape from this affective state without help from "reason".

These things are called shits because they are undesirable. They are undesirable because they preclude your desire. So either you disassociate them with your desire (trying to persuade yourself that they are not related), or you reduce your desire.

After all, it's a matter of "desire". Somehow an analogy between "Warlord and Lands" and "Human and Desires" appears in my mind. Sometimes warlord expands lands, sometimes warlord concedes lands, depending on situation; but size of the land matters most in warlord's heart. When a warlord no longer cares about land and doesn't control any land, he/she becomes a hermit.

There's no way human can become saint, and so desires will forever remain the central theme of our heart. The question is, which part to expand? which part to concede?

Job

More of contents about career. I label this article with "career" because it's personal, not like "job", which is tied to company. Career can be "job" AND/OR "entrepreneurship" AND/OR "something else".

An interesting article about job by Guy Kawasaki, namely "The Nine Biggest Myths of the Workplace by Penelope Trunk". I found the first point, "you may live happily even you hate your job", very interesting.


Definitely I agrees that optimism level and personal relationships affects happiness much more than job. But how much you correlates your happiness with your job? That's down to your belief.

For me, the first important reason to work is to earn my own living. It couldn't be false, could it? Whether could I find interests in doing it is subjected to circumstances and chances. Of course I will feel great if I am doing a job that I like, but for most of the job, you don't know whether you like or not until you experience it, and after experienced it, you could find something that can fulfil your satisfaction. To get a task done in a style by itself gives much satisfaction.

Because for every job, there's a reason why it exists. Think not of the job itself, but of who might be affected by your job.

Entrepreneurship

I am actually reading materials on the topic of "entrepreneurship" on-line, as part of my preparation for ENS. I've been linking contents from lectures, questions from assignments and pass year papers, and also web sources to predict what sorts of questions could be asked. I've got a flow chart in my mind but I shouldn't bother you too much with it.

"Entrepreneurship" has become a buzz word for new generation like us. We are fascinated by the success stories of Google, Facebook, and bla. We imagine ourself to emulate their success (at least for one second), craving for the "great superb fascinating idea". In fact, quite of a lot of us had at least took some actions. But how many of us will succeed in the future? To answer this question, we need to understanding few things.

Firstly, are entrepreneurs born or made? The same old debate of nature (heredity) and nurture (environment) applies to this context too. Both are essential but which factor is more important? Personally I think environment is way more significant. What you believe now is shaped by what you had experienced from the past.

Secondly, assuming entrepreneurs are bred by circumstances, what is your drive to achieve success and how strong it is? For people with backgrounds like us, that leads to two possible scenarios and reasons behind:

Scenario A: Tried out on few ideas but failed to create big success. Motivation eventually faded off and thus giving up the idea of becoming entrepreneur.

Possible explanations:
- The true reason behind to become an entrepreneur is not strong enough to keep motivation high. Why do you want to an entrepreneur in the first place? Money? Success? Do not want to work for others? Want to help others? Better future for kids? Can benefits from fulfilling this desire exceed all possible costs?

- It's hard to get out from comfort zone. For most of us that are going to finish tertiary education and graduate soon, we didn't grow up in a harsh upbringing. We never experienced famine so we never really appreciates food. We never experienced poverty so we never really appreciates money. We take a lot of things for granted. I am not saying that we are living in a wrong way but that to a certain extent reduces our alertness and weakens our drive.

- "If you have nothing then you have nothing to lose". For many successful entrepreneurs, entrepreneurship is their only opportunity to establish themselves in the society. For us, it's just one of the choice. The difference in mentality, desire and motivation couldn't be greater.

Scenario B: Successful entrepreneurs.

Possible explanation: Needless. Meaningless.

My opinion is that default scenario for us is scenario A. How to reach scenario B? If only we have a burning desire for this, at the expense of other life elements. And then a totally new mind set. Environment that had brought us up may be a curse in disguise if we don't aware of our own weaknesses.

But anyway, be entrepreneur or not, I believe that all of my friends will have a bright future. Cheers.

10 reasons to skip lectures

This Friday was the day where the "last lecture" was conducted, which symbolized the end of a student's life. My "last lecture" is a bit different with others as it was conducted probably one or two months ago.

We usually summarize things towards the end of something. Throughout these 4 years, I think I have improved my consistency. Where was it? In skipping lectures. :)

- First year: Didn't attend 99.99% (can't say 100% though) of lectures in Sem 2 due to dota practices, activities and catching up in studies.

- Second year: Attended 70% of the lectures via lecture recording.

- Third year: Attended 50% of the lectures during exchange programme, of which 80% of time spent fishing.

- Final year: Didn't attend lectures since week X.

Why am I so keen to skip lectures? Here are my top 10 reasons of skipping lectures:

*Please don't read it if you are a good student as it is potentially hazardous to you.

1. Trapped in a dream in early morning unconsciously.

2. Staying up late consciously.

3. There are only morning classes in a day.

4. There are not only morning classes, but it's better to be consistent.

5. Sacrificed for activities, assignments and discussions.

6. It's better away than late.

7. Sleeping in room is better than sleeping in lectures.

8. There are lecture recordings.

9. Lecturers don't know how to teach.

10. Studying notes before going lectures makes you understand no more than what are inside notes, not studying notes before going lectures makes you understand nothing.

Your reason? :)