The memory of the day of destiny is like the eternal torture of the burning Abyss. It was the day that I was choosing the accomodation in a cafe, before boarding on a ferry.
Remember...remember the sight we saw, my soul? that beautiful soft summer morning...round a turning in the path...a disgusting carcass on a bed scattered with stones, its legs in the air like a woman in heat...burning and sweating poisons...like a fountain with its rhythmical sobs.
I can hear it clearly flowing with a long, murmuring sound, but I touch my body in vain to find the wound...I am the vampire of my own heart. One of the great outcasts condemned to eternal laughter, who can no longer smile...
Am I dead? No.
One day or another, I will end such disgusting journey myself once and for all.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Thursday, October 06, 2005
Distant Worlds
Sitting by in the evening sand—
Twilight, the song of peace;
Clouds dance up with the heavens' stars,
Chanting the name of joyous bliss.
Water fades back from wood to jade,
Gliding on rainbows high;
Flowers bloom into brazen whites,
Reaching our hearts when they're entwined.
Angels chained by a beast locked in slumber;
Sin washed away by the swift flow of time.
I may know the answers,
Though one question I still hear:
What twisted fate has brought us
To worlds that run so near?
Distant worlds together,
Nearer 'cause when once we are,
When I find words inside me
To sing to you this song—
To sing with you this song;
To sing to you, your song.
Monday, September 26, 2005
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Lover's Dilemma
1. Introduction
John Louis von Neumann was a mathematician who got a first degree in chemistry and yet wrote a book on quantum physics and participated in the development of hydrogen bomb, though his most significant contribution in history was of computer science. This paper, however, is about his idea that revolutionized economics [1][2].
Von Neumann once thought that the Cold War was just a simple two person game [3]. That is, the total benefit to the US and USSR in this game, for every combination of strategies, always adds to zero. More specifically, one side benefits only at the expense of the other. (He was wrong in some sense. It was actually a non-zero-sum game that neither side dared to push the button and eventually achieved a win-win situation)
"If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is."
-- John Louis von Neumann
As a scholar, I spent almost 10 years researching the economical behavior of love. I was surprised to discover that the game of love itself is actually economics; and it is not about paying dinner or buying LV for your girlfriends. I thus write this paper as a conclusion of my 10 year research work and present the concepts of the Lover's Dilemma.
Love is a simple two person game. In this game, as in chess or many others, it is assumed that each individual player is trying to maximize his or her own advantage, without concern for the well-being of the other player. The equilibrium for this type of game does not lead to optimums. Even though they may cooperate to achieve a better overall result of the game, they would still choose to act individually. This is the heart of the dilemma.
2. The Dilemma
The Lover's Dilemma is as follows: The lovers, A and B, are in a trouble relationship. It is not necessary to assume that both players in this game are completely selfish and that their only goal is to maximize their own satisfaction. They want the relationship continues without losing their personal pride and emotional dignity. One may ask for break-up, strategically, and thus showing one-sided influence towards the relationship. Nevertheless, such request might end up being fulfilled and they would lose their lover.
Table 1: The Lover's Dilemma in "Win-Win" Terminology
It can be summarized thus: If one asks for break-up and the other begs for continuing the relationship, the beggar loses his pride but is able to get back to his lover. If both agree to continue, they stay together still but lose the chance of showing one-sided influence towards each other. If they both ask for break-up, the relationship ends but they can still maintain their pride and dignity. To most of the players, self satisfaction is more important than the relationship itself. Therefore being a beggar is the worst case which they would try very hard to avoid.
3. Discussion
It is not difficult to realize that this is a non-zero-sum two person game. Specifically, a gain by one player does not necessarily correspond with a loss by another. If only they could both agree to continue the relationship, they would both be better off; however, from a game theorist's point of view, their best play is to request break-up. I am going to discuss the details in this section.
Each player has two options. The outcome of each choice depends on the choice of the other player. However, neither player knows the choice of his or her lover. Even if they were able to talk to each other, neither could be sure that they could trust the other. Assuming the player A is rationally working out his best move. If his partner wants to continue, according to the above table, his best move is to make a strategical break-up request as he then is able to achieve maximum advantage instead of actually ending the relationship. If his partner asks for break-up, his best move is still to break up, as by doing so he receives a relatively better situation than being a beggar. At the same time, player B thinking rationally would also have arrived at the same conclusion and therefore will request for break-up. Thus in a game of love played once by two rational players both will request for ending the relationship.
If reasoned from the perspective of the optimal interest of the group of the couple, the correct outcome would be for both players to continue their relationship, as this would minimize total lost of the group. Any other decision would be worse for the two lovers considered together. However by each following their selfish interests, the players each receive a bad result.
4. Conclusions
If only a player could sacrifice the personal pride and emotional dignity for his or her lover, if only each of them could be sure that the other player would make the same sacrifice, if only they could concern each others, they would both agree to continue their relationship and achieve a better overall result. However, such a sacrifice cannot exist, as it is vulnerable to the treachery of selfish individuals, which we assumed our players to be. Therein lays the true beauty and the maddening paradox of this game of love.
Von Neumann once said: "If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is." I realized, through mathematics, that life is fairly simple, too. At least to many people, the game of love itself is actually as simple as school level calculation.
5. Future Work
I am currently working on the Iterated Lover's Dilemma which means that the game is played repeatedly. Thus each player has an opportunity to "punish" the other player for previous selfish play. Mutual cooperation in the game may then arise as an equilibrium outcome. The incentive to be selfish may then overcome by the threat of punishment, leading to the possibility of a cooperative outcome.
6. Acknowledgements
This work is with help of many people. In particular, I would like to express my greatest gratitude towards my ex girlfriends. Without the invaluable lessons they taught me, this paper would not have been possible. Through the rest of my days, I shall remember their support with greatest appreciation.
7. References
[1] J. von Neumann, "Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele", Mathematicsche Annalen, Vol. 100, No. 1, Pages 295-320, 1928
[2] J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern, "Theory of Games and Economic Behavior", Princeton University Press, 1944
[3] W. Poundstone, "Prisoner's Dilemma: John Von Neumann, Game Theory and the Puzzle of the Bomb", Anchor Books, 1993
John Louis von Neumann was a mathematician who got a first degree in chemistry and yet wrote a book on quantum physics and participated in the development of hydrogen bomb, though his most significant contribution in history was of computer science. This paper, however, is about his idea that revolutionized economics [1][2].
Von Neumann once thought that the Cold War was just a simple two person game [3]. That is, the total benefit to the US and USSR in this game, for every combination of strategies, always adds to zero. More specifically, one side benefits only at the expense of the other. (He was wrong in some sense. It was actually a non-zero-sum game that neither side dared to push the button and eventually achieved a win-win situation)
"If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is."
-- John Louis von Neumann
As a scholar, I spent almost 10 years researching the economical behavior of love. I was surprised to discover that the game of love itself is actually economics; and it is not about paying dinner or buying LV for your girlfriends. I thus write this paper as a conclusion of my 10 year research work and present the concepts of the Lover's Dilemma.
Love is a simple two person game. In this game, as in chess or many others, it is assumed that each individual player is trying to maximize his or her own advantage, without concern for the well-being of the other player. The equilibrium for this type of game does not lead to optimums. Even though they may cooperate to achieve a better overall result of the game, they would still choose to act individually. This is the heart of the dilemma.
2. The Dilemma
The Lover's Dilemma is as follows: The lovers, A and B, are in a trouble relationship. It is not necessary to assume that both players in this game are completely selfish and that their only goal is to maximize their own satisfaction. They want the relationship continues without losing their personal pride and emotional dignity. One may ask for break-up, strategically, and thus showing one-sided influence towards the relationship. Nevertheless, such request might end up being fulfilled and they would lose their lover.
Table 1: The Lover's Dilemma in "Win-Win" Terminology
It can be summarized thus: If one asks for break-up and the other begs for continuing the relationship, the beggar loses his pride but is able to get back to his lover. If both agree to continue, they stay together still but lose the chance of showing one-sided influence towards each other. If they both ask for break-up, the relationship ends but they can still maintain their pride and dignity. To most of the players, self satisfaction is more important than the relationship itself. Therefore being a beggar is the worst case which they would try very hard to avoid.
3. Discussion
It is not difficult to realize that this is a non-zero-sum two person game. Specifically, a gain by one player does not necessarily correspond with a loss by another. If only they could both agree to continue the relationship, they would both be better off; however, from a game theorist's point of view, their best play is to request break-up. I am going to discuss the details in this section.
Each player has two options. The outcome of each choice depends on the choice of the other player. However, neither player knows the choice of his or her lover. Even if they were able to talk to each other, neither could be sure that they could trust the other. Assuming the player A is rationally working out his best move. If his partner wants to continue, according to the above table, his best move is to make a strategical break-up request as he then is able to achieve maximum advantage instead of actually ending the relationship. If his partner asks for break-up, his best move is still to break up, as by doing so he receives a relatively better situation than being a beggar. At the same time, player B thinking rationally would also have arrived at the same conclusion and therefore will request for break-up. Thus in a game of love played once by two rational players both will request for ending the relationship.
If reasoned from the perspective of the optimal interest of the group of the couple, the correct outcome would be for both players to continue their relationship, as this would minimize total lost of the group. Any other decision would be worse for the two lovers considered together. However by each following their selfish interests, the players each receive a bad result.
4. Conclusions
If only a player could sacrifice the personal pride and emotional dignity for his or her lover, if only each of them could be sure that the other player would make the same sacrifice, if only they could concern each others, they would both agree to continue their relationship and achieve a better overall result. However, such a sacrifice cannot exist, as it is vulnerable to the treachery of selfish individuals, which we assumed our players to be. Therein lays the true beauty and the maddening paradox of this game of love.
Von Neumann once said: "If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is." I realized, through mathematics, that life is fairly simple, too. At least to many people, the game of love itself is actually as simple as school level calculation.
5. Future Work
I am currently working on the Iterated Lover's Dilemma which means that the game is played repeatedly. Thus each player has an opportunity to "punish" the other player for previous selfish play. Mutual cooperation in the game may then arise as an equilibrium outcome. The incentive to be selfish may then overcome by the threat of punishment, leading to the possibility of a cooperative outcome.
6. Acknowledgements
This work is with help of many people. In particular, I would like to express my greatest gratitude towards my ex girlfriends. Without the invaluable lessons they taught me, this paper would not have been possible. Through the rest of my days, I shall remember their support with greatest appreciation.
7. References
[1] J. von Neumann, "Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele", Mathematicsche Annalen, Vol. 100, No. 1, Pages 295-320, 1928
[2] J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern, "Theory of Games and Economic Behavior", Princeton University Press, 1944
[3] W. Poundstone, "Prisoner's Dilemma: John Von Neumann, Game Theory and the Puzzle of the Bomb", Anchor Books, 1993
Saturday, July 16, 2005
Dear Osama
They priced 25 million USD on your head so the terror will stop. Well I wouldn't know about that I mean rock & roll didn't stop when Elvis died yet things just got worse.
Don't lose sleep on my account Osama, I won't turn you in since I don't know how to spend 25 million USD. But after you blew up London, things just got a bit different here. Though London is not a very nice place in a lot of ways, I have been living there for a long period of time. You know, when you blew London up, it has become something personal here. Well you have nothing to worry about since I really won't turn you in, instead, I will do things in my own way.
In the way that you will never want to know.
Don't lose sleep on my account Osama, I won't turn you in since I don't know how to spend 25 million USD. But after you blew up London, things just got a bit different here. Though London is not a very nice place in a lot of ways, I have been living there for a long period of time. You know, when you blew London up, it has become something personal here. Well you have nothing to worry about since I really won't turn you in, instead, I will do things in my own way.
In the way that you will never want to know.
The school girl
I never thought I would meet her again. I mean if it has not been my old computer, or we didn't come back HK, our path may never cross again. It has been four years, or five, since the last time that we got together. I still remember the morning when she slept on my shoulder, I dared not move an inch for afraid of waking her up. Many years have passed since then, and she has become a nice lady.
Some things never change, and some things do.
Some things never change, and some things do.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Walk on, folks! Walk on!
A nice holiday again.
It was the day we were heading towards a glorious summer like the ones we had in the last few years. It was the day that most of the people were busy to make plans for spending their useless time. It was also the day when they were going boat trips, driving Skylines, messing in love affairs, fucking girls, watching AVs, clubbing in LKF or shopping in Langham like crazy. But there exists some people, who have decided to do things a bit differently. They chose to walk through the land of darkness and despair. They walked forth with knowledge that their efforts may well be in vain, despite what others might think, that no one would sing silver songs for them. Yet they walked still, with their heads holding up high. No matter how bitter the day might seem, neither rain, nor storm, nor extreme heat can truly keep them from walking, like no others, with hope and love in their hearts.
They sang the sweet silver songs themselves.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
“When you walk through a storm
hold your head up high
And don’t be afraid of the dark.
At the end of a storm is a golden sky
And the sweet silver song of a lark.
Walk on through the wing,
Walk on through the rain,
Tho’ your dreams be tossed and blown.
Walk on, walk on with hope in your heart
And you’ll never walk alone,
You’ll never, ever walk alone.
Walk on, walk on with hope in your heart
And you’ll never walk alone,
You’ll never, ever walk alone.”
-- R. Rodgers and O. Hammerstein II, Musical Carousel, 1956
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Road to Monterey
It is a small town with just some 30,000 residents, located on a peninsula two and a half hours south of San Francisco, California. It has been called the greatest meeting of land, sea and sky and is recognized as an ideal vacation destination. Its world class golf courses, unique variety of shops and galleries and a spectacular assortment of parks and natural areas combine to provide a truly unrivalled place for upper-class inhabitants. Monterey, though a few of you may know, is also the Jerusalem of the virtual reality research community.
The Modelling and Simulation Institute of the Naval Postgraduate School at Monterey has been an internationally respected centre of teaching and research in VR since it was established. It provides a fertile setting for research that has spawned a host of scientific breakthroughs and technological advances. It is, however, the place that I would never be allowed to study for it only accepts students who are military officers from Uncle Sam or his friends. As most of you may know, that neither I have a military background nor is my country quite friendly to him. Nevertheless, it is the place where I am going in this winter. I am not going there as a mere pilgrim. I am not going to smell their advance or taste their success. I, NJ the Owl, BSc, MPhil, MCS, CITP, MBCS, MIEEE, although without a PhD, am going to present a paper there. I am going there to tell the Americans something new, something that no one on this planet has ever done before. This is the true meaning of what fideles Sancti Petri or milites Christi saw themselves as undertaking an iter.
Well. Aftermath.
“……Frederick drowned in Cilicia where most of what remained of the Germans was killed off by a bout of Black Plague, leaving only the English and the French. Philip left the alliance after they arrived Acre. Richard and his men headed down the coast of the Mediterranean Sea and were once in the sight of the holy land. But Saladin poisoned the wells and destroyed the crops which made Richard decided to retreat in the following year. On his way home his ship was wrecked leading him to Austria."
---- P.M. Holt, The Near East from the Eleventh Century, 1986
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Friday, April 22, 2005
El Derby de Italia
Bianconeri 0 – 1 Nerazzurri
"Winning the Derby de Italia at Turin was not enough to keep the Nerazzurri from losing Lo Scudetto 16 times in a row."
-- NJ, tifoso di Internazionale, 22nd April 2005
"Winning the Derby de Italia at Turin was not enough to keep the Nerazzurri from losing Lo Scudetto 16 times in a row."
-- NJ, tifoso di Internazionale, 22nd April 2005
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Everything has a beginning has an end
So this is the beginning, I guess.
Welcome aboard, ladies and gentlemen. This journey is to walk a life's path with an owl through its screeches. You don't have to fasten your seatbelt or check your lifebuoy. No rule is required in this blog but I have to give you an advice before you start, that you should better abandon your logic here. Owls are not rational thinking birds, nor are they logical. They raise alarm when there is no threat, they protect themselves when there is no attacker, they are predators but they are often harassed by smaller birds. You would better save your logic when you hang around with them.
Almost 10 years ago I have constructed my first and also my last personal homepage for a girl. I expressd my feeling on her through the homepage everyday for which many people have visited it at the time. She never had the chance to come however, because I had never given her the link till the fall of the site.
Sooner or later this will come to an end, too. Because logically everything has a beginning has an end. However, since you came here, you have already abandoned your logic to have faith in me therefore it takes illogical thinking to believe that this can ever be here and never end. At least the day is not today.
Nor is it tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
