《盗梦空间》很一般

片子不差，至少能达到让人从头到尾专注看完的程度。但什么上下层啊、意识与现实的相对性啊，这种题材都被好莱乌拍滥了吧。。。黑客帝国在1999年的时候比这个不知道超前到哪里去了。。现在都2010了，盗梦仅有的想象力就是把观众容易认同的梦境感总结出来并视觉化了，除此以外，没有任何开创性。

整个片子也没啥不好懂的，即便有也是牵强出来的装AC。

没有欲望看第二遍。其实我没说这片子不好，但也只是一部做得比较好的快餐电影而已，半年就拍出来了。很多人说不好理解看不懂，我才不懂。。

故事落伍，人物交待突兀陈旧。两大世界顶级公司/势力相争，一定是能源或未来科技行业，财力雄厚无比。为了绝密文档/芯片，一边的老大差点被阴，但他不只是超级有钱有势力的主，他还非常有魄力非常有智慧，成功化解危险，又慧眼识英才，玩起大度，宽恕和接纳了从对手过来整他的男主人公。一定得坐在直升机或者私人游艇上，望着远方说一翻非常有哲理的话，于是男主公为了亲情or爱情or相见恨晚的什么情愫接下一个几乎不可能完成的任务。

男主人公开始深度纠结和思考如何完成这个如此NB的任务，于是回到离开很久的的大学/基地/神秘地下室之类的地方去找一个从前的搭挡/隐退的导师之类的人物（这里兼他的父亲），按照冒险片的惯例，这个人要劝他不要继续下去了，又是一翻非常有深度非常有哲学水平的对话，但还是执拗不过我们帅得掉渣的男主人公，最终答应帮助他并给他找了一个可以解决他的问题的帮手/秘密武器/书/公式之类的玩意。。。

男主人公继续组队，十分钟之内跑出来n个不知道在哪里混的个性十足但精于所长的NB人物————多么俗套的冒险型动作片人物交待方式。。

故事也隐约可见叔侄的权力之争这种已经老得不能再掉牙的模式。。。

这本来是一个极其不道德的任务，怎么能随便安到这么帅得掉渣的莱昂纳多身上呢？凭什么对手公司就比这个公司更该死呢？编剧一笔带过，为了人类的未来，不能让对手公司垄断。。。。就这么白痴地上升到了拯救人类的高度。。。蹩脚地为男主人公的自私与无耻（为了见到自己的亲人而不惜用一个虚假的梦去欺骗对手公司的继承人，注意这已经不是公司之间的间谍战了，而是赤裸裸地侵犯一个自然人的思想，在家庭亲情层面欺骗他）开脱。。

还有片子结尾那个要倒不倒的陀螺。。。又是典型的快餐电影装深沉。。成本极低，又能显得有点深度、引观众思考，无数懒编剧/懒导演都喜欢搞这种。。无非就是"真实的相对性"这么滥的题材了。。。还拿出来当个宝。。。naive得很。。

错不在他们用了老题材，而是老题材并没有拍出新意。。。不懂为啥还有这么多人叫好。。

致zt

。。。。

当你忘记我
我愿变成一只蜂鸟
在你流连忘返的时候
静静地悬在你的掌心
用我的翅膀
写下一个从未寄出的微笑

当你忘记我
那些没有名字的小诗
和我写给你的故事
都变成发黄的纸船
终于放下思念的锚
永远地泊在给你的祝福里

当你忘记我
我会记起你的胡闹
和你烂漫的傻笑
让我怎能想象
一个花花的世界里
没有一个花花痴痴的你

那么那么喜欢你的，
yy

北清两教授炮轰中国科研基金分配体制 - 《Science》撰文：中国科研“潜规则”

China’s Research Culture
Yigong Shi and Yi Rao
GOVERNMENT RESEARCH FUNDS IN CHINA HAVE BEEN GROWING AT AN ANNUAL RATE OF MORE than 20%, exceeding even the expectations of China’s most enthusiastic scientists. In theory, this could allow China to make truly outstanding progress in science and research, complementing the nation’s economic success. In reality, however, rampant problems in research funding—some attributable to the system and others cultural—are slowing down China’s potential pace of innovation.
Although scientific merit may still be the key to the success of smaller research grants, such as those from China’s National Natural Science Foundation, it is much less relevant for the megaproject grants from various government funding agencies, which range from tens to hundreds of millions of Chinese yuan (7 yuan equals approximately 1 U.S. dollar). For the latter, the key is the application guidelines that are issued each year to specify research areas and projects. Their ostensible purpose is to outline “national needs.” But the guidelines are often so narrowly described that they leave little doubt that the “needs” are anything but national; instead, the intended recipients are obvious. Committees appointed by bureaucrats in the funding agencies determine these annual guidelines. For obvious reasons, the chairs of the committees often listen to and usually cooperate with the bureaucrats. “Expert opinions” simply refl ect a mutual understanding between a very small group of bureaucrats and their favorite scientists. This top-down approach stifl es innovation and makes clear to everyone that the connections with bureaucrats and a few powerful scientists are paramount, dictating the entire process of guideline preparation. To obtain major grants in China, it is an open secret that doing good research is not as important as schmoozing with powerful bureaucrats and their favorite experts.
This problematic funding system is frequently ridiculed by the majority of Chinese researchers. And yet it is also, paradoxically, accepted by most of them. Some believe that there is no choice but to accept these conventions. This culture even permeates the minds of those who are new returnees from abroad; they quickly adapt to the local environment and perpetuate the unhealthy culture. A signifi cant proportion of researchers in China spend too much time on building connections and not enough time attending seminars, discussing science, doing research, or training students (instead, using them as laborers in their labora tories). Most are too busy to be found in their own institutions. Some become part of the problem: They use connections to judge grant applicants and undervalue scientific merit.
There is no need to spell out the ethical code for scientifi c research and grants management, as most of the power brokers in Chinese research were educated in industrialized countries. But overhauling the system will be no easy task. Those favored by the existing system resist meaningful reform. Some who oppose the unhealthy culture choose to be silent for fear of losing future grant opportunities. Others who want change take the attitude of “wait and see,” rather than risk a losing battle. Despite the roadblocks, those shaping science policy and those working at the bench clearly recognize the problems with China’s current research culture: It wastes resources, corrupts the spirit, and stymies innovation. The time for China to build a healthy research culture is now, riding the momentum of increasing funding and a growing strong will to break away from damaging conventions. A simple but important start would be to distribute all of the new funds based on merit, without regard to connections. Over time, this new culture could and should become the major pillar of a system that nurtures, rather than squanders, the innovative potential of China.
--
北大清华两教授炮轰科研基金分配体制
中国两大高等学府清华大学与北京大学的两名教授联合撰文炮轰中国科研基金分配体制，指尽管近年来中国研究经费持续以20%的比例增长，但这种增长没有对中国的科学和研究起到应有的强大的促进作用，现行的科研基金分配体制甚至在某种程度上阻碍了中国创新能力的发展。
两名教授认为，目前正是中国打破研究基金管理中各种潜规则、建立健康研究文化的时机，一个简单但重要的起点是所有新的研究基金必须基于学术优劣分配，而不再依赖私人关系。
撰文的两名教授是清华大学生命科学学院院长、医学院常务副院长施一公和北京大学终身讲席教授、生命科学学院院长饶毅，他们都是中国政府海外高层次人才引进计划（简称“千人计划”）下的入选专家，都曾分别在美国著名大学任职，并于近几年正式辞去美国的工作回到中国。他们的文章《讨论目前中国的科研基金分配体制及科研文化问题》上周五（3日）发表在由中国科学院主管，中国科学院、中国工程院和国家自然科学基金委员会主办的《科学时报》上。官方人民网昨天以摘录形式介绍了这篇文章。
研究经费年增20%
文章指出，中国政府投入的研究经费以每年超过20%的比例增加，甚至超过了中国最乐观的科学家们的预期。从理论上讲，它应该能让中国在科学和研究领域取得真正突出的进步、与国家的经济成功相辅相成。而现实中，研究经费分配的严重问题却减缓了中国潜在的创新步伐。而这些问题部分归结于体制，部分归结于文化。
尽管对于一些比如由中国国家自然科学基金委员会资助的小型研究经费来说，科学优劣可能仍然是能否获得经费的关键因素，但是，对来自政府各部门经费从几千万元到几亿元人民币（1000万元人民币约为197万新元）的巨型项目来说，科学优劣的相关性就小多了，关键反而在于每年针对特定研究领域和项目颁发的申请指南。表面上，这些指南的目的是勾画“国家重大需求”；然而，项目的申请指南却常常被具体而狭隘地描述，人们基本上可以毫无悬念地意识到这些“需求”并非国家真正所需；经费预定给谁基本一目了然。政府官员任命的专家委员会负责编写年度申请指南。因为显而易见的原因，专家委员会的主席们常听从官员们的意见，并与他们合作。所谓“专家意见”不过反映了很小部分官员及其赏识的科学家之间的相互理解。
文章说，这种自上而下的方式不仅压抑了创新，也让每个人都很清楚：与个别官员和少数强势科学家搞好关系才最重要，因为他们主宰了经费申请指南制定的全过程。在中国，为了获得重大项目，一个公开的秘密是：作好的研究不如与官员和他们赏识的专家拉关系重要。
文章坦承，中国大多数研究人员常嘲讽这种有缺陷的基金分配体制。然而，一个自相矛盾的现象是，他们中的绝大多数人却也接受了它。部分人认为除了接受这些惯例之外别无选择。这种潜规则文化甚至渗透到那些刚从海外回国学者的意识中：他们很快适应局部环境，并传承和发扬不健康的文化。在中国，相当比率的研究人员花了过多精力拉关系，却没有足够时间参加学术会议、讨论学术问题、作研究或培养学生（甚至不乏将学生当做廉价劳力）。很多人因为太忙而在原单位不见踪影。有些人本身已成为这种问题的一部分：他们更多地是基于关系，而非学术优劣来评审经费申请者。
文章说，绝大多数中国研究界的权势人物都在工业化国家接受过教育，但全面改变这一体制并非易事。现行体制的既得利益者拒绝真正意义上的改革；部分反对不健康文化的人，因为害怕失去未来获得基金的机会，选择了沉默；其他希望有所改变的人们则持“等待和观望”的态度，而不愿承担改革可能失败的风险。
文章指出，科学政策制定者和一线科学家都已清楚地意识到目前的问题：浪费资源、腐蚀精神、阻碍创新。现在正是中国建设健康科研文化的时刻，一个简单但重要的起点是基于学术优劣，而不是靠关系，来分配所有的新基金。只有这样的新文化，才能培育而不再浪费中国的创新潜力。

Running Multiple Websites on a Cloud Server with 1 IP

We have many customers who ask us if they can run multiple websites on a single IP address.

The answer is yes with Cloud Servers!

It’s a simple process and requires an update to your virtual host file during the initial configuration of your Cloud Server. We have explained the process you will need to follow on our blog.

Network World recently ran a series of tests on different cloud storage providers, including Rackspace Cloud Files. According to Network World, “Rackspace delivered the best overall performance, with an average speed 2.57Mbps for uploads and roughly 650Kbps for downloads.”

Security Tips for Private Network Interfaces

Regardless of the type of hosting you're using – dedicated or cloud – it's important to take network interface security seriously. Most often, threats from the internet are the only ones mentioned. However, if you share a private network with other customers, you have just as much risk on that interface.

Many cloud providers, including Rackspace, allow you access to a private network environment where you can exchange data with other instances or other services offered by the provider. The convenience of this access comes with a price: other instances can access your instance on the private network just as easily as they could on the public interface.

Major Hayden, Linux Systems Engineer here at Rackspace has put together some tips for you to consider when using the private network and you can review them online.

Choosing the Right Database: There is No Silver Bullet

Database needs have changed significantly over the last few years. Data sets continue to grow at exponential rates and now tend to be measured in terabytes and petabytes for many applications. There are many new database alternatives that have sprung up in the past few years to help solve this problem.

The question becomes how do you choose which one to use?

There's no perfect solution for every single use case out there, but spending the time analyzing your options ahead of time can save you headaches and frustration down the road.

Bret Piat, Sr. Manager of Technical Alliances here at Rackspace took some time to help explain how you might want to go about considering your next database. Check out his thoughts online.