Notes

财新:

车站虽受国铁集团管理，但作为企业，无论国铁集团还是其下设的卫生监督所，都没有执法权。一名地方铁路系统人士介绍，车站和铁路卫生监督部门均无行政处罚权和罚没权，收缴罚款也无法上缴国家财政。

那么，谁才能开出罚单？华东交通大学铁路法治研究院院长朱新建称，铁路系统内真正有执法权的是铁路公安和铁路监管局。但铁路公安的执法主要集中在《治安管理处罚法》和《铁路安全管理条例》，让他们在站台上针对控烟执法不太现实；铁路监管局的职能是监督铁路运行安全和施工安全，不涉及旅客健康事务。

尽管 2019 年修订后的深圳控烟条例将高铁站台划入禁烟区，但时至今日，深圳北站尚未开出一张罚单。

“我们也提出来，如果你们不干，授权给我们来干。”深圳市控烟办相关负责人称，他们曾与铁路部门多次沟通，希望对方授权控烟办进入深圳北站候车大厅和站台执法，但车站认为涉及人身和铁路运营的安全问题，没有答复。

徐贲：

学术共同体真正应当追究的是责任（responsibility），而不是来源（origin）。因为来源从来都是混合的，而责任必须是明确的。

feeshy:

[Paraphrasing an opinion video] A24 拍的《后室》避开了开源的后室 Wiki，选择了 YouTube 创作者 Kane Parsons 的个人宇宙，以换取独占的商业路径；而社群创作的「SCP 基金会」世界观则受困于其采用的 CC BY-SA 3.0 协议，导致好莱坞资本因合规风险不敢介入，其影视化只能在社群众筹的圈子里艰难推进。[End of paraphrase]

[双重] 授权协议的签订理论上需要全体版权人达成共识，这在实践中几乎不可能，光是联系历史上参与过编辑的每一位作者就是一项浩大的工程，更别提挑战性更高的后续如何分配「蛋糕」的问题了。

在 IP 孵化期（影响力从 0 到 10），传染性授权能依靠共享激发社区协同创作、扩大 IP 的传播范围与影响力；可到了破圈期（影响力从 10 到 100），传染性又反而会在某种程度上阻碍 IP 的进一步扩圈 […]

Jason Snell:

[According to John Norstad, the creator of the definitive free Mac antivirus app,] it’s a practical joke in the ROM code in some third-party keyboards [that if you didn’t type anything for a while they would themselves type “welcome datacomp”.]. The only solution is to get your bad keyboard replaced.

My guess is that this wasn’t a practical joke as much as some sort of firmware test gone awry, but regardless, “welcome datacomp” managed to appear in numerous publications, as Haller’s post details.

Raymond Chen:

In early versions of Word, the Spell Check feature was something that you explicitly invoked, and then you had to sit and wait while the program looked for all your potentially-misspelled words, and then showed them to you one at a time for a decision on what to do for each one. Word did introduce an Auto Spell Check feature to run spell check when the user was idle, so that when you hit the Spell Check button, the results were ready to go. However, the Auto Spell Check was still a blocking operation. As a result, a lot of users turned it off because it always seemed to decide “Now would be a good time to spell-check the document” just as you wanted to do something, forcing you to wait for the spell check pass to complete before you could, say, save and exit.

Tony [Krueger] made the spell checker much more unobtrusive so that it didn’t interfere with your foreground work. And when it found a problem, instead of waiting for you to trigger a spell check, it immediately drew red squiggles under potentially-misspelled words (and later green squiggles under potential grammatical errors).

看看报纸。

Marcin Wichary:

But there’s a trick [to invert black and white while preserving colors]: do a regular invert and then rotate the hue halfway through. Through the magic of math, this is the same as inverting just L in the HSL space, which means the colors are preserved.

…and, more importantly, [this is] available in CSS as a filter: instead of invert(1), use hue-rotate(180deg) invert(1).

就是终端里的 cal 命令了。之所以喜欢用这个首先是因为快：我平时固定是开着终端的（作为 vscodium 的底部面板），码字过程中直接打个 cal（pun intended）就能看当月日历，比打开日历应用或者 menubar item 都要快。其次因为是终端输出，就是纯文本，可以直接复制到笔记里参考或者进一步标注。当然缺点就是比较简陋，不过我本来就喜欢这种野兽派纯文本风格，所以反而是加分项了。

以下是一些常用选项和参数：

# 显示 2025 全年
cal 2025 # shorthand for `cal -y 2025`

# 显示今年 3 月
cal -m 3

# 显示本月和紧邻的前后月份
cal -3

# 旋转行和列（每周为一列）并显示周数
ncal -w # shorthand for `cal -N -w`

更多用法可以看手册页 man cal。如其中的 history 一节所说这也是个上古命令了，从 Version 1 AT&T UNIX (1971) 就有，几十年就是这样下来了（

don’t feel even a bit prepared for homeownership

Henrik Karlsson:

[E]ach time she’d grown and changed, I had felt something open up in myself. Her changes had become prompts that pushed me toward a higher, truer version of myself, just as my changes had been for her. Change answering change, it was a virtuous loop.

With your children, it becomes very clear that the love you feel has little to do with who they are or what they do.

In more superficial relationships […] you assign value to the other person because of what they do. […] But with your children, the value, to a large extent, flows in the other direction.

Adult love isn’t fully unconditional like this. There are things you would never value, even if your lover does, and there are things they could value that would make you stop loving them. But still, there is a sense that to love someone means to extend your care to the things your partner cares about to some degree.

[T]here are […] two levels at which you can extend your values like this. On the first level, you do what I did when I cut down the pines; you do it out of duty and without connecting to the values.

[T]his kind of care that doesn’t come from a deeply felt space can be grating and unpleasant both for you and the person you give it to.

[T]here is a second level at which to approach this, a more transformative level. It is when you actually learn to feel what the other person is feeling. It is when you stretch out with your imagination into the unknown and learn to merge their values and perspective into your worldview. This is one of the most profound experiences that love gifts us.

To aspire is to want to want something before you actually want it.

new findings from m&s

Hairuo Jin:

[Chinese retail investors’ (Sanhu 散户)] attachment [to derive meaning from their past failures, unsatisfactory present, and expected future] can be situated in what scholars have described as a form of political depression, particularly what Lauren Berlant (2011) calls cruel optimism: an attachment to a promise widely recognised as fragile, even illusory, yet difficult to abandon, despite hostile circumstances.

This resolve stems from a larger developmental temporality that has deeply structured life in reform-era China and under which malfunction is often treated as evidence of progress rather than failure. From the 1990s, periods of market turbulence were seen less as structural failure than as moments of adjustment within an evolving, maturing system. Sanhus of older and younger generations continue to describe the stock market as ‘primitive’ and ‘developing’, echoing the vocabulary used by the state to narrate the course of national development.

fireborn:

The YouTube tutorial is the perfect emblem of this rot. Tutorials are not documentation. A tutorial teaches you to perform a specific sequence of steps to achieve a specific outcome. The steps are usually correct for the specific scenario the tutorial covers. If your scenario differs — if something’s changed, if you get an error the tutorial didn’t anticipate, if you’re using a different version — the tutorial has given you no tools to respond. Documentation teaches you to understand a system: what its components are, how they interact, what the configuration options mean and why they exist, what the error messages indicate. One produces people who can follow instructions. The other produces people who understand what they’re doing. The industry has enthusiastically replaced the latter with the former and called it democratization.

Anna Wiener:

The Structure of Adolescence

[Middle school marks] a time when kids begin to pull away from their parents, discard childish pursuits, and pursue, full thrust, the exhausting project of individuation. It is a period of intense, hormonally driven emotional flux. Self-consciousness sets in. The adult world is studied and emulated in a manner that suggests praxis but no theory. There is an aspect of camp to it all: a kind of LARP or drag, as young people transition from play-acting adulthood to inhabiting it. Actual adults are ancillary. Tweens and teens look to each other for clarity and guidance on how to behave and how to feel, all the while gambling with each other’s social confidence and self-esteem. It is natural, and it is psychotic.

The psychoanalyst Erik Erikson described the period between twelve and eighteen as one of essential identity formation: a time of trying on personas and roles. Writing in the mid-twentieth century, Erikson was sensitive to the ways that society could shape personality, but no one could have anticipated the explosion of potential identities, interests, aesthetics, subcultures, and life styles that children would be exposed to by globalization and, later, the internet.

Adolescent anxiety and depression have been on the rise for years, and there is abundant public debate about why: economic inequality, strained family ties, sleep deprivation, smartphones. Childhood has never been easy, but these days the on-ramp to adulthood seems somehow shorter and more perilous.

The Private Room as Self

For any adolescent, a private bedroom is both sanctuary and mood board. It’s a safe haven for experimental selfies, a shelter for incognito-mode Google searches, an internal switchboard for the exchange of secrets and dreams.

Ritual and the Projection of Future Selves

It would be easy, having made it safely past the shores of puberty, to make light of these rituals and ablutions. But the rituals are very important — in fact, they’re everything. They’re experiments with externalizing private self-perceptions, and dalliances with potential selves. They’re a way of projecting into the future: to imagine being noticed, maybe even seen.

atmoio:

So Coinbase laid off a bunch of people last week, and the CEO sent out this letter, and by letter, I mean tweet, a really beautifully written tweet, explaining that the layoffs were not because of mismanagement. No, no, no, no, no. Brian Armstrong was a victim. We’re all victims. The AI was just too damn productive.
上周 Coinbase 裁掉了一大批员工，CEO 发出了一封信——确切地说是一条推文，写得极其「漂亮」。他解释说，裁员并不是因为管理不善。不，不，不。Coinbase 老板也是受害者，我们都是受害者。怪只怪 AI 的生产力实在太 TM 高了。

And I mean, he tried. He got on his knees and he begged the GPUs to slow down. It’s like, please think about the families, but it was no use. The productivity gains were already realized. Now, this isn’t an economics video. This is a survival video. The question is, what do you do to survive? You become the problem.
我是说，他尽力了。他甚至跪下来哀求 GPU 慢一点。他就差没说，「请为那些家庭考虑一下吧！」但没用，生产力的飞跃已经实现了。听着，这不是一段经济学视频，这是一段生存视频。问题是：为了活下去，你该怎么办？答案是：让自己成为那个「问题」。

Philip T Starks:

Endurance is getting through; recovery is getting better. Despite Holling’s distinction [that real ecological resilience wasn’t about snapping back, but about persistence], we have continued to confuse the two, and this confusion has consequences. Whereas endurance can be demanded of someone, recovery requires support. Glorifying endurance shifts attention away from systems and places expectations on to individuals.

You break down, repair, and rebuild something new. The challenge itself doesn’t make you stronger, your response does. No recovery, no gain. In the gym, we understand this. In life, we pretend the damage didn’t happen, and call it strength.

电鸡（nvidia inside）

米家用了两年跪了，换了个不能联网的 dumb 微波炉，神清气爽

美妙

Fabrizio Ferri Benedetti:

Tools created through AIs hurt my brain, I decided, because they’re often devoid of three fundamental qualities of good tools: reach, sociality, and finish.

In a way, thanks to AI, we’re making tools of ourselves (pun intended): much like we do when we create agentic skills out of interesting sessions, we condense our thoughts and intent into code. The resulting tool will carry our cognitive fingerprint: to use it effectively, you must be attuned to the way its creator thought, which is neither ideal nor fair. A tool with reach loosens that grip. It works for people who don’t think the way its maker does, or it grows until it can.

What makes tools social is a subtle combination of affordances, community participation, and the dialectic exchange between users and developers.

The lack of finish also means that tools are not thoughtfully designed, which makes their evolution improbable. A good tool can be refined, expanded, modularized, perhaps even merged with another tool. A thoughtful tool invites its own evolution; a careless one resists it. When you can’t tell where a tool’s boundaries are, it can’t grow.

Some of the best tools in history started as scratches-for-an-itch projects. They became universal because someone cared enough to finish and socialize them. For the stuff we create using LLMs to become tools, a README file and a catchy GitHub project name are not enough: We ought to ask ourselves whether what we’ve made can survive contact with someone else’s problem, and whether we’d trust it enough to maintain it.

Nilay Patel:

[E]veryone in tech understands how much regular people dislike AI. What I think they’re missing is why. They think this is a marketing problem.

[S]oftware brain [is] see[ing] the whole world as a series of databases that can be controlled with the structured language of software code.

Once you start seeing the world as a bunch of databases, it’s a small jump to feeling like you can control everything if you can just control the data.

It turns out software brain has a limit — the government isn’t software. People aren’t computers, and they don’t live in automatable loops that can be neatly captured in databases.

At some point, the database stops matching reality. At that point, we usually end up tweaking the database, not the world. But the AI industry has fully lost sight of this, because AI thrives on data. It’s just software, after all. And so the ask is for more and more of us to conform our lives to the database, not the other way around.

This intoxicating similarity between law and code trips people up all the time. People are constantly trying to issue commands to society at large like it’s a computer that will obey instructions.

But law isn’t actually code, and society and courts aren’t computers. […] You simply cannot take the facts of a case, the law as written, and predict the outcome of that case with any real certainty, even though the formality of the legal system makes people think it works like a computer — that it’s predictable.

But at the end of the day, it’s actually ambiguity that’s at the very heart of our legal system. It’s ambiguity that makes lawyers lawyers. Honestly, it’s ambiguity that makes people hate lawyers because it’s always possible to argue the other side, and it’s always possible to find the gray area in the law.

黑心厂还没倒闭呢