| jie's profile迷失星空PhotosBlogLists |  Tools  Help |
|
November 18 人生&选择发信人: jinglei(0400新水手刚上路), 信区: Science 标 题: 约翰—霍普金斯大学校长２００６毕业典礼致词 发信站: 瀚海星云 (2006年11月18日20:04:07 星期六) 约翰—霍普金斯大学校长２００６毕业典礼致词 今天是值得庆祝的一天。如果说新一届的毕业生是庆祝时刻的香 槟，那我就是开香槟的瓶盖，有幸在此致词，开启这一庆典。 此刻，在你们即将离开以严肃认真而著称的学府，约翰－霍普金 斯大学之际，应该听到严肃认真的忠告。此时我想起不久前看到的一名小学生的历 史报告。他的作业是写出世界上第一个伟大的乐于给人忠告的学者，他写道：苏格 拉底是一个著名的希腊老师。他喜欢到处给人忠告，人们就杀了他。他因为喝太多 毒药而死亡。 尽管短暂，苏格拉底的一生却是充实而丰硕的。同样发人深思的 是沃尔夫冈.阿玛迪乌斯.莫扎特的一生。这不仅让我想起，在我的年纪，他已经去 世２７年了。他是人类生存的典范：他在短暂的一生完成最伟大的使命；他向世人 证明了，正如林肯所言，生命最重要的并非时间的长短而是在此时间内你真正度过 的生命。 这就是我今天在这里想对新一届的毕业生谈论的话题。正如著名 作家坡.布朗森说的，选择是现代社会给予我们的最大特权。绝大数人都面临着人生 的选择：从事什么工作？是否或怎样回报社会抑或向社会索取？在人类历史上，几 乎所有的社会形态都没有给人这样的选择权利：每个人从出生起就限定于家庭所承 担的职责：出生在农民家庭，你的职责就是种地；出生渔夫家庭，职责就是打鱼； 出生皇室，职责就是权掌天下。你无权选择你要扮演的社会角色。 然而今天我们处处面临选择。这既是宝贵的机遇，同时也是巨大 的挑战。选择的过程不仅仅是选择如何赚钱糊口，而是选择自我，决定自我。这需 要深思熟虑，是艰难的过程。 选择决定人生，布朗森对此深信不疑并花了两年时间，跟踪观察数十人的日常生 活，写成《这辈子，你想做什么？寻找人生意义的真实故事》。暑假若有闲暇，读 这本书将受益匪浅。布朗森所说的最重要一点在于，尽管我们能选择如何安排自己 的人生，但是很多人所做的选择不好，甚至是糟糕的，更有人不能做出选择。他提 出了三个选择陷阱，这些陷阱时时阻碍我们生存，甚至生活，再聪明的人也逃不过。 他们也隐藏在你们即将面临的人生之路上。在此，我想给你们一张地图，提醒你们 在通往未来的航程中能自信满怀，小心谨慎。 第一个忠告，金钱并非万能，实现梦想仅靠金钱是不够
的。五月，你们拿到证书，走出校门去征服世界。六月，世界就开始反击。你们不
得不直面这个世界，而真实世界让你付出很多：房租，汽车贷款，生活开支及偿还
学费贷款。这时，找个赚钱多的工作可能是最现实的，梦想可以搁置一旁。赚钱第
一，梦想其次。因为你必须得生存下去，账单必须得付。然而，陷阱就是你认为在
这种情况下要支付账单就必须得放弃梦想。陷阱就是你认为可以先赚钱，梦想可以
先搁置一会儿，却不知梦想一旦搁置就等于放弃。如何才能两全其美，既工作赚钱
也不放弃梦想？一向被称作“沉闷科学”的政治经济学，却能带来重要的启发，这
就是经济学家的“边际效益递减”原则。简单来说，就是一种物品你拥有的越多，
从中获得的价值就越小，这也包括钱。很多人从未意识到这一原则在日常生活中的
意义。研究表明与有钱人相比，当人极度贫困时，因担心随时可能被赶出家门或为
养家糊口而挣扎，他感到最不幸。这也在预料之中。然而，研究也表明，一旦一个
人达到了一定的经济水平，能满足基本需求，超过那一定点之后，再多的金钱只能
带来很少的幸福感。最终，即使金钱再多，也不会带来幸福感。
这正如校友现任纽约市长迈克尔.布隆伯格所写的，
一旦你拥有了财富，真正的问题就在于，做什么用？整天白日做梦想赢头彩的工薪
族可能会觉得荒谬，而当你拥有相当的财富时这变成很严肃的问题：你只能吃这么
多，用这么多；只能去这么多地方；只能住这么多房间；一次只能睡一张床。布隆
伯格是明智的。挣得“足够多”更实际，更容易实现。在人生的每个阶段所面临的
挑战都是要尽量学会快乐生活。
认为金钱万能只是人生之路的陷阱之一，另一陷阱就是认为聪明就能成功。与金钱一
样，智力的价值往往被过高估价。这可能是由于多数人都希望天上掉馅饼，不付出
就有回报，因此，都认为成功的在于天分，天分是“上天赐予的才能”，是随机的，
个人的，没有原因的。通过艰辛的努力，反复的实践会熟能生巧；但天分，却是上
天赋予的。我们往往把非凡的成就都归因于天分。然而，近来研究人员开始质疑这
一普遍看法。爱迪生—真正了解天分的人—早就坚信天才是百分之一的灵感加百分
之九十九的汗水。许多心理学家都怀疑他是否正确，认为他的看法仍然高估了天分。
天才不是天生的，而是通过纯粹的刻苦锻造的。专业知识，娴熟和天分都不是上天
赋予的，而是通过刻苦的努力，通过长期的学习和实践取得的。但是，这同样也暗
含着梦想的重要性。天才之所以成功因为他们为梦想付出了巨大的努力。他们显示
了要把握研究对象的狂热精神，因为他们敢于追求梦想。
这就引出我要说的最后一点，值得注意的最后一个陷阱。我们的生
活圈子和工作环境决定了我们自身，这一点尤为重要但我们总不愿承认。每个组织
都有其独特的文化，每种文化又由其特定的价值观和偏好所决定。假如你不喜欢假
心假意的赞扬奉承，最好别在好莱坞工作；假如对权力之争、勾心斗角不甘兴趣，
就别呆在华盛顿。你工作环境的价值体系将在很多方面决定你的所见、所闻和所思。
人们最常犯的错误就是忽视这一点。我们总以为可以不受周围环境
的影响，能做真正的自己。然而实际上，这根本不可能。我们每天的所见所为不可
避免地影响自身的见解和想法。
欧洲人很不理解为什么美国人习惯于礼貌地问陌生人的职业。但这一习惯却
意味着我们意识到，在一定程度上，职业如其人。
今天，还有将来，你们将不断进步，经历不同的职业，面临许多机
遇，如布朗森所言，你要扪心自问的是：“我将成为什么人”而不是“我将做什么”。
今天，我很荣幸地代表约翰.霍普金斯大学授予你们
荣誉和学位，你们会成为真正的科学家、物理学家、表演者、工程师、作家、教师
、发明家和领导人。证书上没有“梦想家”这个字眼，但我今天最大的希望就是你
们当中的每一个人都能将它深埋在心底。重要的不是你选择的目标，而是到达目标
的过程。
--
People laugh and people cry,
Some give up and some always try.
Some say hi and some say bye.
Others may forget you but never I.
※ 来源:·瀚海星云 bbs.ustc.edu.cn·[FROM: 202.38.70.5]
***************************************************
前两点早就明白的道理，倒是最后一点，大四才似懂非懂了些。不过的确被他
言中了——"这一点尤为重要但我们总不愿承认."
这个社会的community&hierarchy是很严重的。朋友曾说“谁TM说社
会主义没有等级？扫街道的那就是扫街道的，说什么没有等级，只是社会分工
不同。那简直就是操蛋！”这里并没有歧视的味道，反而是为社会底层的人打
抱不平。我喜欢他这种直率的性格，哈。
以前一直想的是“我将做什么”，倒还没想过“我将成为什么人”的问题？
我会成为什么样的人？不知道，我都不知道自己希望自己成为什么样的人:(
一个朋友的space，在我名字链接下写道"...祝你早日实现心中的理想...",
可我都不知道自己的理想是什么了，难道你知道么？为什么没有告诉我?......
唯一可以确定的是，I have never been myself.
以后呢？
唉，一想这种问题就头大
听歌......November 16 郁闷了一下跑了两天的程序居然没有结果输出，怒了。
查不出错，只能把可能有问题的地方修改一下,让它再跑两天看看了:(
决定用这两天好好充实一下自己：
把k-means的方法好好看下；
了解一下统计里的Lindeberg-Feller原理；
读完Alex的Master Thesis；
边做统计的同时，把前面的工作做好总结，写好memo。
加油！
-------------------------------------------------
以后的发展简直可以用一句峰回路转来形容，嘿嘿。
但在这之前需要像所有的美剧一样来个前期回顾，previously on XXX：
从来没有处理过如此大的实际数据，所以刚开始有些手疏。
前期数据处理，系统老是报错，查了一下午都查不出程序问题。
偶然间才发现windows操作系统的一个文件夹里有存放文件数目的限制。
555，分开到两个文件夹写入文件就好了。
另一程序倒是很快被GangYan弄好了。但所有的数据有2个多G，
需要全部都放在内存里跑的话，现有的PC机都不能满足这个要求。
还好程序跟标准C的出入不大，很快就改得能在Unix的服务器上跑了。
但是估算了一下时间，居然需要几十天的机时！ OMG~~
想了另一种算法，稍稍修改了数据结构，量级估算要比以前快一万倍吧。
放到服务器上安安心心地跑起来，跑到中途时又报错了！冷。
跟zico查了半天，发现又是个系统限制，32位机的上限是2^32-1。
没64位机的只能哭了。还好可以从数据类型去降低内存，在可以改的地方，
把int改成short型，double改成float型。谢天谢地，程序顺利跑完了，
而且速度奇快！只要1个小时！后来一查程序，居然是初始化不够，造成
链表的header都是NULL，实际上只跑了部分。。。。重新初始好，开跑。
两天的时间啊~~最后居然啥都没得。5555，都要哭了。
检查输出文件部分，没错。难道又是系统问题？于是临时写个程序检查，发现
服务器的Unix对文件大小有限制，不能超过2G，而我的是3G:( 后来又是google，
又是改fsize=-1，无效。 太绝望了，只能修改model了，555，不是我的错。
但余下的发展简直可以用峰回路转来形容，zico说了句，干脆我们传到系里的
服务器上去跑吧。哈哈，系里的服务器就是比自家的好。
什么问题都没有了，最关键的是，以前的要跑整整两天。这回，我们刚吃完晚饭
的功夫回来，结果就出来了。 太不可思议了，再跑一下:)，半个小时，finish！
嗷嗷，决定放自己一晚上的假，好好玩玩。周六陪shajia买冰刀，嗷嗷:)
PS：整个事情耗了我一周的时间，都是非程序的系统问题，这块都不熟，郁闷得不行。
不晓得后面还会有什么难题:( 怕怕
November 08 Don't Become a Scientist!JingJing发过来的，虽然Old了，但读了一下，又感触良多，还是想把它贴出来:)
----------------------------------------------------------
Don't Become a Scientist!
Jonathan I. Katz
Professor of Physics
Washington University, St. Louis, Mo.
Are you thinking of becoming a scientist? Do you want to uncover the
mysteries of nature, perform experiments or carry out calculations to learn how the world works? Forget it! Science is fun and exciting. The thrill of discovery is unique. If you
are smart, ambitious and hard working you should major in science as an undergraduate. But that is as far as you should take it. After graduation, you will have to deal with the real world. That means that you should not even consider going to graduate school in science. Do something else instead: medical school, law school, computers or engineering, or something else which appeals to you. Why am I (a tenured professor of physics) trying to discourage you from
following a career path which was successful for me? Because times have changed (I received my Ph.D. in 1973, and tenure in 1976). American science no longer offers a reasonable career path. If you go to graduate school in science it is in the expectation of spending your working life doing scientific research, using your ingenuity and curiosity to solve important and interesting problems. You will almost certainly be disappointed, probably when it is too late to choose another career. American universities train roughly twice as many Ph.D.s as there are
jobs for them. When something, or someone, is a glut on the market, the price drops. In the case of Ph.D. scientists, the reduction in price takes the form of many years spent in ``holding pattern'' postdoctoral jobs. Permanent jobs don't pay much less than they used to, but instead of obtaining a real job two years after the Ph.D. (as was typical 25 years ago) most young scientists spend five, ten, or more years as postdocs. They have no prospect of permanent employment and often must obtain a new postdoctoral position and move every two years. For many more details consult the Young Scientists' Network or read the account in the May, 2001 issue of the Washington Monthly. As examples, consider two of the leading candidates for a recent
Assistant Professorship in my department. One was 37, ten years out of graduate school (he didn't get the job). The leading candidate, whom everyone thinks is brilliant, was 35, seven years out of graduate school. Only then was he offered his first permanent job (that's not tenure, just the possibility of it six years later, and a step off the treadmill of looking for a new job every two years). The latest example is a 39 year old candidate for another Assistant Professorship; he has published 35 papers. In contrast, a doctor typically enters private practice at 29, a lawyer at 25 and makes partner at 31, and a computer scientist with a Ph.D. has a very good job at 27 (computer science and engineering are the few fields in which industrial demand makes it sensible to get a Ph.D.). Anyone with the intelligence, ambition and willingness to work hard to succeed in science can also succeed in any of these other professions. Typical postdoctoral salaries begin at $27,000 annually in the
biological sciences and about $35,000 in the physical sciences (graduate student stipends are less than half these figures). Can you support a family on that income? It suffices for a young couple in a small apartment, though I know of one physicist whose wife left him because she was tired of repeatedly moving with little prospect of settling down. When you are in your thirties you will need more: a house in a good school district and all the other necessities of ordinary middle class life. Science is a profession, not a religious vocation, and does not justify an oath of poverty or celibacy. Of course, you don't go into science to get rich. So you choose not to
go to medical or law school, even though a doctor or lawyer typically earns two to three times as much as a scientist (one lucky enough to have a good senior-level job). I made that choice too. I became a scientist in order to have the freedom to work on problems which interest me. But you probably won't get that freedom. As a postdoc you will work on someone else's ideas, and may be treated as a technician rather than as an independent collaborator. Eventually, you will probably be squeezed out of science entirely. You can get a fine job as a computer programmer, but why not do this at 22, rather than putting up with a decade of misery in the scientific job market first? The longer you spend in science the harder you will find it to leave, and the less attractive you will be to prospective employers in other fields. Perhaps you are so talented that you can beat the postdoc trap; some
university (there are hardly any industrial jobs in the physical sciences) will be so impressed with you that you will be hired into a tenure track position two years out of graduate school. Maybe. But the general cheapening of scientific labor means that even the most talented stay on the postdoctoral treadmill for a very long time; consider the job candidates described above. And many who appear to be very talented, with grades and recommendations to match, later find that the competition of research is more difficult, or at least different, and that they must struggle with the rest. Suppose you do eventually obtain a permanent job, perhaps a tenured
professorship. The struggle for a job is now replaced by a struggle for grant support, and again there is a glut of scientists. Now you spend your time writing proposals rather than doing research. Worse, because your proposals are judged by your competitors you cannot follow your curiosity, but must spend your effort and talents on anticipating and deflecting criticism rather than on solving the important scientific problems. They're not the same thing: you cannot put your past successes in a proposal, because they are finished work, and your new ideas, however original and clever, are still unproven. It is proverbial that original ideas are the kiss of death for a proposal; because they have not yet been proved to work (after all, that is what you are proposing to do) they can be, and will be, rated poorly. Having achieved the promised land, you find that it is not what you wanted after all. What can be done? The first thing for any young person (which means
anyone who does not have a permanent job in science) to do is to pursue another career. This will spare you the misery of disappointed expectations. Young Americans have generally woken up to the bad prospects and absence of a reasonable middle class career path in science and are deserting it. If you haven't yet, then join them. Leave graduate school to people from India and China, for whom the prospects at home are even worse. I have known more people whose lives have been ruined by getting a Ph.D. in physics than by drugs. If you are in a position of leadership in science then you should try to persuade the funding agencies to train fewer Ph.D.s. The glut of scientists is entirely the consequence of funding policies (almost all graduate education is paid for by federal grants). The funding agencies are bemoaning the scarcity of young people interested in science when they themselves caused this scarcity by destroying science as a career. They could reverse this situation by matching the number trained to the demand, but they refuse to do so, or even to discuss the problem seriously (for many years the NSF propagated a dishonest prediction of a coming shortage of scientists, and most funding agencies still act as if this were true). The result is that the best young people, who should go into science, sensibly refuse to do so, and the graduate schools are filled with weak American students and with foreigners lured by the American student visa. November 02 哼哼无聊中，把Timme那篇从随机矩阵论讲同步的文献拿来翻翻，很是敬仰的把它给看完掉了。
德国人做东西就是细，数学物理功底又扎实。想想前段时间才收到的Goettingen的据信，虽然是申请的
另外的group，但居然就是Timme发给我的。
哼哼，亏我平时看了你这么多文献，却一点面子都不给，太可恶了。
虽然不care这种事了，但也觉得不爽。于是决定不再看Timme的文献，以是惩罚。
嗷嗷！
PS：找不到代理，苦恼中，谁能给我一个端口下文献啊:( |
|
|
