香港新浪網 MySinaBlog
燦榮 | 14th Oct 2011 | 通識--香港 | (156 Reads)

黃毓民:主席,昨日行政長官講政治倫理,他認為有一些反對派在議會內,稍為有一些粗魯不文就是違背政治倫理。政治倫理是政治學的一個最重要部分,東方有孔子、孟子;西方有康德、亞里士多德、柏拉圖,我不知道你說的是哪一項。

最沒有政治倫理的就是你,所謂「不賢者而居高位,是播其惡於眾也」,「雞鳴狗盜出其門,士所以不至也」。一個民望最低的局長,你委任他做政務司司長,公然與民為敵,請問政治何理?政治倫理何在?你解釋給我聽。

林瑞麟搞了一個替補方案天怒人怨,你竟然夠膽在你的任期最後幾個月委任這樣的一個人,公然與香港人為敵,請你解釋為甚麼。

立法會主席曾鈺成:黃毓民議員,你的意見已經提出來,請你坐下。

黃毓民:我現在正在問他問題,主席。他講政治倫理,他是「亂倫」,他是違反政治倫理,搞亂政治倫理,我現在要他回答。

曾鈺成:黃毓民議員,你立即坐下。

黃毓民:為甚麼他要委任一位民望這麼低的局長做政務司司長?

曾鈺成:黃毓民議員,你坐下。

梁國雄:林瑞麟可恥。

曾鈺成:請議員遵守《議事規則》。行政長官。

曾蔭權:無論是孔子或是亞里士多德,或是現在的政治家,現在的政治體制,都不會認為講粗口、粗暴語言、粗暴動作是市民合適的政治倫理,就是這麼簡單。

黃毓民:政治倫理呀!特首。政治倫理是一門社會科學,你不認識的話,我可以為你上課。我所講的亞里士多德、柏拉圖、孔夫子、孟子,孟子兩千多年前已經講過:「聞誅一夫紂矣,未聞弒君也」,你懂得解釋嗎?

曾鈺成:黃毓民議員。

黃毓民:在議會裏粗暴,這就叫做「粗暴」嗎?有多粗暴?議會暴力是否粗暴?政府的行政暴力是否粗暴?我現在問你一個問題,你沒有回答我。為甚麼一位民望這麼低的局長,你委任他做政務司司司長,公然與香港市民為敵?你解釋給我聽,你並沒有回答。

曾蔭權:這根本好像十足是「爛仔」所為,不單是粗暴。你看看,現在(這裏)並不是黑社會地方,黃先生,你(到底)發生甚麼事?

黃毓民:我現在問你,為甚麼委任一位民望這麼低的局長做政務司司長?你不回答嘛!

曾鈺成:黃毓民議員、梁國雄議員。

黃毓民:主席,他有沒有回答我的問題?我的問題是否清楚?清楚我的問題嗎?

曾鈺成:兩位議員,我認為黃毓民議員、梁國雄議員,你們兩位的行為已經使到我們這個答問會無法順利進行,我要求你們兩位現在立即離開會議廳。


燦榮 | 6th Oct 2011 | 通識--個人成長 | (79 Reads)

A student at one of my talks on the nonprofit sector asked if I could name a for-profit company that was making a difference on the scale that nonprofits do. I said I'd be hard-pressed to name one that wasn't.

Our youth are growing up with the strange notion that the only way to make a big difference in this world, or to be of service, is to work for a nonprofit organization, or become the next Bill Gates and establish a private foundation, or to start some kind of "social enterprise," often without any understanding of what that means.

The word philanthropy comes from the Greek philanthropos which comes from philein for "to love" and anthropos for "human being." Philanthropy means love of humanity.
 
Which brings me to Steve Jobs.

Shortly after he returned to Apple in 1997 Jobs allegedly ended all of the company's corporate philanthropy programs to cut expenses until the nearly bankrupt enterprise regained its footing. Some have claimed the programs were never reinstated.

A 2006 Wired article on Jobs, "Great Wealth Does Not Make a Great Man," reported that even though his wealth was estimated at $3.3 billion, Jobs's name did not appear on Giving USA's list of gifts of $5 million or more for the previous four years, nor on another that list showing gifts of $1 million or more. (The article acknowledged that he could have been giving anonymously.)

The article took a cheap shot: "Jobs can't even get behind causes that would seem to carry deep personal meaning...he is a cancer survivor. But unlike [Lance] Armstrong, Jobs has so far done little publicly to raise money or awareness for the disease." It went on, "...he's nothing more than a greedy capitalist who's amassed an obscene fortune. It's shameful...[Bill] Gates is much more deserving of Jobs' rock star exaltation. In the same way, I admire Bono over Mick Jagger, and John Lennon over Elvis, because they spoke up about things bigger than their own celebrity." Yes, but in part their own celebrity was connected to the things they spoke up about.

In a 1985 Playboy interview, Jobs acknowledged that it takes enormous time to give money away, and stated that, "in order to learn how to do something well, you have to fail sometimes...the problem with most philanthropy-there's no measurement system.. you can really never measure whether you failed or succeeded...So...it's really hard to get better." He added that, "When I have some time, I'm going to start a public foundation."

In 1986, he did, but closed it after 15 months. According to the man he hired to run it, "He clearly didn't have the time." Jobs's friends told one reporter, "he figures he can do more good by expanding Apple." And thank God for that.

What a loss to humanity it would have been if Jobs had dedicated the last 25 years of his life to figuring out how to give his billions away, instead of doing what he does best.

We'd still be waiting for a cell phone on which we could actually read e-mail and surf the web. "We" includes students, doctors, nurses, aid workers, charity leaders, social workers, and so on. It helps the blind read text and identify currency. It helps physicians improve their performance and surgeons improve their practice. It even helps charities raise money.

We'd be a decade or more away from the iPad, which has ushered in an era of reading electronically that promises to save a Sherwood Forest worth of trees and all of the energy associated with trucking them around. That's just the beginning. Doctors are using the iPad to improve healthcare. It's being used to lessen the symptoms of autism, to improve kids' creativity, and to revolutionize medical training.

And you can't say someone else would have developed these things. No one until Jobs did, and the competitive devices that have come since have taken the entirety of their inspiration from his creation.

Without Steve Jobs we'd be years away from a user-friendly mechanism for getting digital music without stealing it, which means we'd still be producing hundreds of millions of CDs with plastic cases.

We would be without Pixar. There's a sentence with an import inversely correlated to its length.

We would be without the 34,000 full-time jobs Apple has created, just within Apple, not to mention all of the manufacturing jobs it has created for those who would otherwise live in poverty.

We would be without the wealth it has created for millions of Americans who have invested in the company.

We would be without video conferencing for the masses that actually works. Computers that don't keep crashing. Who can estimate the value of the wasted time that didn't get wasted?

We would be without a whole new way of thinking. About computers. Leadership. Business. Our very potential.

Last year Change.org wrote of Steve Jobs, "It's high time the minimalist CEO became a magnanimous philanthropist."

I've got news for you. He has been. What's important is how we use our time on this earth, not how conspicuously we give our money away. What's important is the energy and courage we are willing to expend reversing entropy, battling cynicism, suffering and challenging mediocre minds, staring down those who would trample our dreams, taking a stand for magic, and advancing the potential of the human race.

On these scores, the world has no greater philanthropist than Steve Jobs. If ever a man contributed to humanity, here he is. And he has done it while battling cancer.

In a statement Bono defended Jobs, noting that Apple has been Product (RED's) "largest contributor to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria -- giving tens of millions." More important, Bono stated that, "Just because he's been extremely busy, that doesn't mean that he [has] not been thinking about these things." Steve Jobs has traded his time for human progress. Not for personal pleasures. This is not a man who spent his time building homes or custom yachts or who otherwise obsessed with how to spend his billions on himself. And no one would say of him that he ever seemed to have a lot of spare time on his hands.

Werner Erhard used to say that he wanted his gravestone to say, "Burned out." By all appearances, Jobs has burned out just about every ounce of fuel he was given trying to bring new possibilities into this world. God willing, he has more fuel in reserve. If so, he should expend a little of it on himself. To do more than he has done for humanity already, no human could ever be asked.


燦榮 | 6th Oct 2011 | 通識--個人成長 | (282 Reads)
作死不離三兄弟的啓示:1)    印度片原來好有水平,三個小時,根本不覺長。2)    印度原來有好多地方好靚。3)    片中一幕,教授拒絶收卷,說三個學生遲交,結果學生們用智謀,逼教授就範,解決了這個困境。妙絶!一切來自生活體驗。4)    舊生玩新生,男主角拒絶被玩,使出一招電擊尿尿男,笑中有科學。5)    印度自殺率高,片中帶中起碼三段令人深思的個案。6)    大學教授對國際排名的爭逐,視之為傲,何嘗不是香港的寫照。7)    女主角幾乎下嫁賤男,賤男賤得有型格,日常生活隨處可見。8)    男主角之一面試,企業要求調教做人態度,學生拒絶,太開心,今天還有這樣的橋段9)    太空人用盡錢財,設計可在太空書寫的筆,何不用鉛筆,男主角有絶妙提問,教授臨尾也答得得體。10)  我們人生花了不少年,為的是笑? 還是甚麼? 這套戲,三小時給你笑,給你哭,給你對愛情的幻想。夫復何求? 

燦榮 | 5th Oct 2011 | 通識--個人成長 | (41 Reads)
訪問今年(2011)登上珠峰的香港人羅啓義,學了很多:1) 留力: 上山用三分一氣力,落山用三分一氣力,三分一預留應變。2) 百分之七十死亡個案,在落山時發生,因為上山容易落山難是真實的。3) 雪花可以傷眼角膜,十小時才恢復正常視力。4) 珠峰有8844米,香港的所謂高山,不及一個零頭。5) 攻珠峰,要有策略,上六千多米,重回四千多米,再上六千多米,等時機。6) 有個別人失敗,因為擔心簽證過期!7) 羅啓義平日心落只每分五十下左右,但到了山上,平卧心跳也達百一百二下。8) 飲水太快會作嘔?!9) 領隊必然分開,方便理性指示10) 到達最高峰,即要準備離開,否則太遲!啓示:1)    人生也要留力2)    生死無常,人極渺少3)    登高峰不易,落高峰更難。4)    相信其他人的理性意見。5)    成功靠策略,靠前人經驗。  

燦榮 | 4th Oct 2011 | 聲明 | (126 Reads)

唐英年和太太透過公關公司的聲明如下:

就傳媒今天對一項周刋報道的查詢,唐英年先生及唐太太有下列回應:

唐英年:我過去在個人感情上曾經有過缺失,我深感悔疚。我非常感激太太對我的諒解,並且原諒了我;特別在我人生重要的階段,全力支持我,並鼓勵我。如今我們的感情很好,我肯定她是我的終生伴侶。多謝大家關心。

唐太太郭妤淺女士:我九歲認識我丈夫。結婚以來,確實有過艱難的時刻。他不是沒有缺點,但是我更欣賞他的優點。我內心肯定,他是我最佳的人生伴侶。我兩人更加珍惜共同度過的歲月,珍惜我們互相扶持之下共建的家。我們在私人感情問題上早已決心不再往後看,相信大家會體諒。謝謝。