||▍Beauty within|▍

Rachel同学无意间用了小郭的书名做QQ签名。可逆流的不一定都是悲伤（也有可能是鼻血）。比如很多年之前，几年之前，我觉得悲伤的事情，现在拿出来跟别人分享的时候，人家听完说这真是很有趣的故事。然而在多年前，我能感觉到的却只是悲伤。
《康熙来了》在最近的一期节目搬出了几个娱乐明星尘封的日记。那些泛黄的本子年代久远，甚至追溯到了三十年前。三十年前，实在是很遥远的概念。那个时候我还没有生出来，甚至我爸我妈都还没有谈恋爱。可是人类的发展历程是如此的相似。就在我还不知道漂浮在某个未知的时候，当下的年轻人早在日记里写下许多看起来叛逆幼稚，还有一点想入非非的文字。而很多年后，我长大到有写日记的想法的时候，日记的内容竟然跟叔叔阿姨们的童年如出一辙。有个叔叔喜欢给未来的自己写信。给未来的自己提出问题，数年后，那个长大了的人再去回答那些奇怪的问题。他说这样可以给人生许多回顾，让你发现曾经的负担会随着时间的流逝变得轻松起来。那些你很care的事情，其实并不会对你的生活造成多么致命性的影响。当你长大，你会惊诧的发现，你的掌控能力有着难以预料的扩大和增加。你很难不嘲笑从前那个战战兢兢的小孩，每一步人生的初探都显得如此忧伤。看吧。忧伤其实在最初的时候就已经发生了，却不是时间逆流过来的结果。也许是我们的人生开初必须经历的过程，懵懂的第一步总是会遇到新鲜的阻扰，活跃的伤感。那么，既然我们在那么幼小的时候就已经经历过难过，又还有什么理由回顾的时候再剥开伤口来数。
最近真的无比懒惰。特别是思想上越发的不思进取。不愿意更新博客。不想花太多时间思考严肃的问题。也许是我已经发现，思考对于人生的作用远远小于实践对其的影响。而思考最终只会直接导致失眠的结果。回忆人生中印象深刻的几次失眠，那都是思考埋下的陷阱。所以我还是不要想太多，只要顺其自然的过日子就好。为了更好的顺其自然，打发掉更多的恐怕会浪费在思考上的时间，我买了一部粉红色儿的PSP。我跟老板说，除了粉红色儿的我一概不要。第一家电玩店的老板没有粉红小P，于是挣扎了几下，极力推荐紫色给我。被我断然拒绝。第二家老板是个麻利爽快的阿姨，计算器按烂了之后答应用最低价卖给我。最后我拿着闪着银光的粉红小P拽出小店，摸了半天之后发现不会用。昏倒一次。爬起来回店里找正在锁门的阿姨咨询用法。尴尬。Whatever,我爱粉红小P！

I'M A FAN OF THIS FASHION BRAND FROM HONGKONG WHICH ABSORBS MORE AND MORE JAPANESE STYLE:IZZUE.
IN THIS PICTURE I DRESS UP WITH IT'S T-SHIRTS AND SKIRT.
ONCE I DRESS UP I OUT OF CONTROL.
THEY SAY I'M FAN OF IT.
IT'S BRAND IS IT.

I'll begin my summer holiday next week which means there goes one more week I'll be free from this tired work.Not only the body,but also my spirit.A long semester makes me feel awful.As some people works under a similar circumstance consists that it's not a good idea for universities which be faced with a important evaluation delay their summer holiday and make all fellows stay at school and sit around all day long from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m..Although someone are busy with their preparing mission for evaluation,more colleagues have nothing to do but bless their school.I consider that it's foolish to waste everyone's life doing nothing but wait in name of comity.At least I don't wanna be a fool.Anyway,my inevitable life comes to an timely end before I'm crazy.I'm going to set a plan and enjoy my short holiday.    

I suggest u finishing reading this brilliant speech issued by Bill Gates on Harvard's graduation ceremony.Because of its length,u may be more patient and more concentrate.I'm greatly assure that It's worth to be finished and thought about.I must say that Bill Gates have great amounts of social  responsibilites that deserves ours respects.

I thought there was something wrong with him since I heared about the news that he dicided to leave few of his property to his daughter.But I considered that maybe different culture brought different believes.Till I finished his speech,I find it isn't the bussiness of culture.But the highest human achievement push him keeping working to resolve the problems without his family but all the poverty human beings and people in deep difficulties.Their problems cann't be resolved just deponding on money or foods but a perfect social system.To establish this resonable system need someone who likes Bill Gates.

He's greatest contribution is the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.People all over the world gather together on Internet dissusing the solutions to world's problems.Due to their collective wisdom,there must be better way to apply helps to which one needs.

We talk about social responsibilities all the time but  almost practist it hardly.We need a introspection time to time from now on.We're the future of our country and our world,and what for?   

President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:

I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: "Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree."

I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my resume.

I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me "Harvard’s most successful dropout." I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.

But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the anti-social group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.

Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.

One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.

I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: "We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month," which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.

What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.

But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.

I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.

But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.

I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.

It took me decades to find out.

You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.

Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?

For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.

We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.

If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: "This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving."

So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: "How could the world let these children die?"

The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.

But you and I have both.

We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.

If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.

I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: "Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care." I completely disagree.

I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.

The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.

To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.

Even with the advent of the [url=javascript:;]Internet[/url] and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.

 
But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: "Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent."

The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.

We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.

If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.

Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks "How can I help?," then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.

Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.

The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavīor.

Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.

The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.

You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.

But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.

I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.

What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?

You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.

Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.

The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the [url=javascript:;]computer[/url], the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.

Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: "I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation."

Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.

The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.

The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.

At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion -- smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.

We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.

Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the world.

What for?

There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?

Let me make a request of the deans and the professors – the intellectual leaders here at Harvard: As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine degree requirements, please ask yourselves:

Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?

Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world’s worst inequities? Should Harvard students learn about the depth of global poverty … the prevalence of world hunger … the scarcity of clean water …the girls kept out of school … the children who die from diseases we can cure?

Should the world’s most privileged people learn about the lives of the world’s least privileged?

These are not rhetorical questions – you will answer with your policies.

My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here – never stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding, she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her message, and at the close of the letter she said: "From those to whom much is given, much is expected."

When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given – in talent, privilege, and opportunity – there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to expect from us.

In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal. But you don’t have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through them.

Don’t let complexity stop you. Be activists. Take on the big inequities. It will be one of the great experiences of your lives.

You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little effort. You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and carry on longer.

Knowing what you know, how could you not?

And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.

Good luck. 
 

主动从小烟blog上接过来的问答题。我觉得有既定问题来回顾人生的方式相对容易。 

Q1.10年前に愛していた人を、今でも一番愛していますか？
(10年前曾經喜歡過的人，現在也一樣喜歡嗎？)
初二的时候,内心有强大的小宇宙。充满了学习的欲望。所以似乎没有喜欢谁。

Q2.10年前に頑張っていた仕事を、今も続けていますか？
(10年前曾經努力過的工作，現在也持續著嗎？)
那时还是学生。

Q3.10年前いつも一緒だった友達は、今も一番の親友ですか？
(10年前總是在一起的朋友，是你現在最要好的朋友嗎？)
是我心里仍然看的非常重要的朋友。

Q4.10年前泣いた映画で、今でも泣けますか？
(10年前讓你掉淚的電影，現在也還是一樣會感動？)
我已经不再看令人流泪的电影了，就算看到伤感的片断都会找别的事做敷衍过去。

Q5.10年前楽しみだった誕生日は、今も楽しいものですか？
(10年前充滿期待的生日，現在也很期待？)
我最近发现一个现象。像我这样的女生已经不再希望长大了，而跟我同岁的男生们却巴不得说自己已经老到30了。

Q6.10年前星を数えた夜空を、時には見上げていますか？
(10年前數過星星的夜晚，現在也偶而會抬頭看看嗎？)
我真的记得那些数星星的夜晚。可惜现在偶尔抬头看，却什么也看不见。

Q7.10年前にしていた恋のように、今もときめくことはありますか？
(像10年前談戀愛一般，現在也會感到那分悸動？)
因为10年前没有过，所以无法比较。

Q8.10年前になりたかった自分に、今なっていますか？
(10年前想變成的自己，現在是否已經達到了？)
在更迭了无数次对自己的设想之后，大概在内心中已经完成大部分的蜕变。

Q9.10年前に探していた自分の居場所は、みつけられましたか？
(10年曾經尋找過的，屬於自己的歸屬，現在已經找到了嗎？)
10年前对于归属还没有甚至是模糊的想象。

Q10.10年前の正義感や情熱を、今も持ち続けていますか？
(10年前的正義感跟熱情，現在是否也持續擁有？)
这一点，很让人难过。我总是会反省自己是否还有10年前的纯真和强大。

Q11.この10年間、精一杯生きましたか？
(這10年間，努力地活過來了？)
活着很容易，只是幸福的活着还需要不断的努力。

Q12.10年前の自分に会ったら何と語りかけますか？
(如果遇到10年前的自己，會說些什麼呢？)
也许会说：放轻松你的人生。

Q13..このバトンを回したい５人
(請將問卷傳給五個人。)
没有明确的传递目标。因为我跟看博客的朋友总是缺少交流。我比较内向，习惯默默。哈哈。
有兴趣的家伙就做做吧。记得要通知我看答案。