2010年06月13日

转贴.

我以前就很关心以色列与犹太人,也曾经在十多年中以民调追踪中国人对犹太人与以色列的印象,这次有机会造访以色列,对于犹太人和犹太人的国家有了一些新的认识,我尝试选择其中的几点,说说犹太人与华人的一些特质的比较。

1. 很多人都说犹太人与华人都比较有群体观念,都比较强调族群意识,也比较强调群体利益的优先性,但我的感觉犹太人更有一致的组织行动力,甚至能形成我们曾追求而不曾能持续的公社(基布兹)生活,而华人需要克服集体中的小群体与个体中心观,内耗程度要大得多。

2. 我曾听我们公司的一位犹太裔的同事说犹太人与华人都重视教育的价值,对于孩子的教育都比较愿意投入,我感觉区别在于犹太人的教育比较注意精神信仰、族群理念与技能的教育,而华人更重视家族、个人前途与出人头地的进取意识的教育。

3.不难理解犹太人与华人均重视历史观,强调历史传承的价值,也同时均有很强的前瞻性,区别在于犹太人的前瞻性更表现为在与历史原则一致的前提下,寻找系统的发展方法,而华人的前瞻性更可能表现为达到目的而轻视对于手段的道德性要求,或者表现为灵活性更强。

4.犹太人与华人都比较辛勤劳动,是创造性的群体。区别在于犹太人更多的是在危机感与资源缺乏下的持续创造性,而且大部分个体的创造性都比较强,而华人则多有吃地大物博与历史悠久老本的感觉,尽管人多之下,不乏有创造性者,但是大部分个体的创造性并不突出。

5.犹太人年轻人普遍服兵役的要求,使得他们在年轻最血气方刚的时候收到了起码的约束教育、群体协调与意志锻炼,而且长期如此,相对而言,我们的独生代年轻人虽然物质条件有所改善,但在耐受力、集体意识与意志力方面有显著的弱化。

6.犹太人重视实质的价值,华人在讲究实惠的同事,也非常讲究面子,有的时候面子甚至比里子还重要,这在对比犹太人与华人的会议方式就看出来了:犹太人的很多会议很有内容却不怎么讲排场,而华人的很多会议排场很大却基本没啥内容。华人在说问题的时候比较圆滑,而犹太人则比较直接与直率。

7.犹太人对于超然力量的信仰与华人对于世俗利益的追求形成鲜明的对比,纵然我们知道犹太人是非常会赚钱的,但是他们赚钱时对于信仰的讲究与我们赚钱时可能无所忌惮形成比较大的反差,以色列人知道众人之外还有神圣的上帝,因而就是家财万贯总有所谦卑,不似华人中的成功群体容易骄傲。在访问以色列时,我们看到这些风景点主要为宗教信仰场所占据,并成为面向公众的场所,而我们的风景点则要么是权势机构的休假场所,要么是财富个体的私人别墅,用处之别一目了然。

2010年05月16日

http://ganxc.blog.hexun.com/48498330_d.html

2010年04月08日

 

http://news.sina.com.cn/s/2010-04-08/044920027937.shtml
http://www.sina.com.cn  2010年04月08日04:49  大河网

  商报讯 (记者 邢军 通讯员 弓华民 实习生 郭俊杰) 奥巴马承诺不对守约的无核国家使用核武器,这本是一个和平的话题,但郑州俩八旬老人在讨论这个话题时却发生了争执,两人都受了伤,其中一人头部被缝了8针。

  昨日上午11时20分许,郑州市特巡警二大队接到报警,称在桐柏路与伊河路交叉口西北角,有两个老人在打架。接警后,中原巡逻5号民警刘华峰、靳铁桩赶到现场,已经有一个老人被120救护车拉走,另一个人待在现场。

  留在现场的老人姓王,今年81岁。他说,天气比较暖和,很多老人在此休息、下棋、看报。事发前,他正在路口看报纸,有一个新闻吸引了他,说是美国总统奥巴马4月5日表示,美国政府承诺不对遵守《不扩散核武器条约》的无核国家使用核武器。

  看这个新闻时,他很兴奋,就把内容念了出来,并对旁边休息的老人说:“以后,美国的核武器就用不成喽。”

  这句话,让旁边的老李听见了。

  老王说,老李先是骂了一句脏话,说他在“胡呲、吹牛”,他就回骂了一句。

  为此,两个老人言语起了争执,后来就动了手。

  据围观的老人讲,老李的手先被抓伤了,就在后面追着撵老王。老王拎起一个板凳,一下子砸在了老李的头上,顿时血就流了下来。本来是讨论好事儿,结果却出了坏事。

  见事态不可收拾了,众人才急忙报了警。

  老李今年82岁了,他被送到郑州市中心医院后,头上清洗出一个6厘米长的口子,缝了8针。他说,自己并不是要骂人,只是和老王争论这个事儿,没想到被打伤。

  目前,此事已被移交到林山寨派出所进行处理。

  来源:河南商报

2010年03月20日

奇迹背后的反思——从军长与夜总会的故事谈起

作者:庶人

不久前,网上流传过一则27军军长怒砸河北金伯帆夜总会的故事。故事的细节难免有所夸张和虚构,但鉴于我们对今日中国人与事之耳闻目睹,可以相信,这种天方夜谭一般的故事是完全有可能发生的。

中国的奇闻怪事之多,之大,之不可思议,当以其“经济奇迹”为首。现在,全世界都对中国的经济发展唱颂膜拜,同时也感到惊恐不安。最近,时代杂志更是刊登了一篇封面文章,题为《应该向中国人学习的五件事》,试图对此一探究竟。

显然,任何“人间奇迹”都不可能凭空发生,其出现必有深层的社会,历史,和制度上的原因。我认为,“中国奇迹”的产生,除了海内外中国人共有的勤奋聪明,吃苦耐劳,尊老扶幼,注重教育,节俭储蓄等天然优势之外,以中国特有的政治和经济现状来分析,还有其它几条原因。

第一,专制政治与市场资本如此大规模地相结合,不仅在中国,在人类发展史上也属首次。这就仿佛是两种强烈的化学剂,在理想的温度和湿度下相遇,产生了最剧烈,最有效的化学反应。携带国际和国内资本的企业,在强大政权的保驾护航之下,可以无所顾忌地,用最苛刻的手段榨取中国工人的剩余价值;而被剥夺了言论自由的工人,尤其是来自偏远农村,无钱无势的农民工,则毫无反抗能力和讨价还价的余地。零星无组织的抗议闹事无关痛痒;组织起来则必然以“颠覆罪”遭到镇压。结果是,专制与资本美妙地相结合,为资本家谋取最大利润扫清了政治和道德上的障碍。

这真是一个无情的讽刺:一个世纪前,保护资本家的是帝国列强的炮舰;一个世纪后,保护资本家的是人民政府的铁拳。

第二,占中国人口50%,将近7亿的处于赤贫的底层农民,让企业拥有取之不尽的廉价劳力来源。对追逐利润最大化的国际资本来说,温顺,勤劳,聪颖,廉价的中国劳工,远比沙特的石油,澳洲的铁矿和巴西的雨林更具利用价值。中国能长期维持国际竞争力的秘诀之一,就是一直保持悬殊的贫富差距,保持数目巨大的贫穷民工群体的长期存在。让这些除了肌肉和双手之外一无所有的人,为求温饱,只能竞相低价出卖自己。

近代历史上,不乏通过奴役和榨取劳工来迅速积累财富,造就一个地区甚至一个国家繁荣的例子。清末民初,从第二次鸦片战争至抗战前夕,上海的十里洋场曾被西方世界誉为“东方的明珠”。那里是洋人大班,工商买办,军阀强人,帮会把头积累和挥霍财富的天堂。这个天堂,完全是用千千万万个“苦力”(多为逃离战乱和天灾的内地流民)的血汗和生命打造起来的。

再举两个国外的例子。南北战争前的美国南方,庄园主把奴隶当作可以任意买卖交换,鞭打驱使的牲口,用来开辟棉花,烟草,稻米种植园,迅速实现了财富的原始积累。他们富可敌国,甚而有能力向主张解放黑奴的北方挑起战争;种族隔离制度垮台前的南非,少数上层白人完全剥夺了占人口大多数的黑人的民权,通过在矿山和牧场实行制度性的残酷而高效的剥削,建立了富裕的白人上流社会及稳定繁荣的国家经济。

今天中国的农民工,虽然不是任由主人买卖的契约奴隶,但多数人实质上除了廉价出卖自己的体力外别无选择。他们在城里无屋可居,回家乡无地可种。改革开放初期的老一代民工,如今大多年老力衰,被年轻人挤下岗位,被业主和城管踢回农村,被高速前进的经济列车抛向路边。除了恶劣工作条件中留下的伤残和疾病,他们没有家产资本,没有学识技能,没有尊严地位,没有健康保险,没有退休福利。回到四壁凋零的农村老家,也只能眼睁睁地看着长大的孩子再度走向城里,去重复自己的悲惨轮回。

第三,政府对土地的绝对的,唯一的拥有权,使大规模经济开发变得轻而易举。公有制为土地开发改造带来的巨大便利,在私有财产不可侵犯的西方国家是不可想象的。欧美商业中心城市,比如伦敦和纽约,一旦发展成型,就几乎不可能再通过政府进行大规模的拆迁改造。举例来说,纽约前市长朱利安尼,以打击黑手党起家,因其在911期间的英勇表现,曾被法国总统希拉克誉为“美国的磐石”。如此一位深孚众望,雷厉风行的铁腕人物,在任时也只能通过扫黄打黑,改善治安,优惠税收等手段,间接地,逐步地促使时代广场周围一带由充满色情和犯罪的危险社区,变成高楼林立,繁华安全的商务和旅游中心。这是一个历时十几年的演变过程,完全由民间市场主导,各届市政府从来不能进行直接的参与或干预。

在中国,开发商可以无视土地上居民和用户的权益,只需买通有关官员,打通有关部门,便能以最小的代价,最低的难度和最快的手段来占有土地。所谓最小代价,包括贿赂成本和政府定价的土地成本,可以远低于土地的真实市场价值;所谓最低难度,运用政府威力对改造区成片地征用,比之于从分散的户主手里一家一家地协商购买,要容易得太多了;所谓最快手段,政府或开发商一纸拆迁公告,就可以将土地的原有住户,商家等马上扫地出门。不举办社区选民公听,不经民选议员同意,不怕与钉子户对簿公堂。推土机所到之处,只剩一片片瓦砾和落荒而逃的百姓的哀鸣。

第四,对资源和环境的疯狂掠夺破坏,也是降低成本,促使经济“繁荣”的一个有利因素。中国环境污染之严重,如今已是举世皆知。为了短期经济效益,达到体现政绩的GDP指标,地方政府,尤其是相对偏远地区的政府部门,竞相敞开大门招商引资,并一再降低排污标准和环保门槛。利用当地百姓的愚昧,涣散和软弱可欺,再买通个别学者做出“科学”评估,政府和开发商一道,可以将反对的声浪压到最低,并用其它借口分割和粉碎零星的抵制。

无论哪个国家,环境污染的历史教训都是长久而惨痛的。六十年代,美国通用电气公司在哈德逊河上游建了一座大型化工厂,多年向河里排放有毒的废水废渣。一经发现,通用电气遭到强烈的民间抗议和巨额的政府罚款,一度面临破产。虽经常年累月的人工清除和自然稀释,沉积在河底的毒素已无法彻底排除。至今,纽约州环保局仍然规定,哈德逊河的某些河段人不可以游泳,鱼不可以食用。

畜牧业发达的纽约上州莫哈河谷地,历史上借助于伊利运河,曾发展为美国著名的皮革产区。由于皮革加工处理过程中污染严重,招致大量抗议索赔,那里的皮革业至今已荡然无存了,只剩几处供游人缅怀的遗址。麻省波士顿近郊的Woburn小镇,早年曾有一批儿童因两口饮水井受污染而离奇死亡,引发二十年法律大战,最终赢得天价赔偿。这个故事1998年拍成电影《公民行动》,由约翰.屈夫塔主演。Woburn镇的水源清污工作今天仍在继续。

然而,发达国家人人喊打的强污染工业,却在第三世界,尤其是中国找到了重生的乐园。曾有报告惊呼,低洼的苏北平原,化工厂林立,排泄不畅,早已变成一片污水横流的沼泽。中国现在还成为世界产量第一的皮革加工和皮制品生产国。夺得第一头衔的助因之一,便是政府对环境污染的宽容和无视,个别案例中甚至是有意的纵容。

第五,全民性的物质崇拜,道德沦丧,也是促使经济奇速发展的的催化剂。民众的心理演变至此,有种种历史和政治上的原因。孙中山辛亥革命至今百年,中国经历过延绵不断的战乱和动荡。清朝覆灭,军阀割据,日本侵华,国共内战,土改合作化,反右和大跃进,文化大革命,直到今日之改革开放。到了文革末年时,中国人不仅物质上一贫如洗,在思想道德上也接近于真空了。孔孟之道被摒弃,伦理尊常被颠倒,宗教信仰被禁止,共产主义学说更没人相信。于是,物质与精神都极度匮乏的民众,对于财富的渴望达到了歇斯底里的程度。

如今,崇拜,索取和炫耀财富不仅成为普遍的生活目的,也是唯一可以免于政治迫害的最安全的“信仰”。巧取豪夺,纸醉金迷,三宅六院,三妻六妾的达官贵人,不仅不受社会谴责和法律制裁,反而受到万众的膜拜和效法。正派老实者,因贫穷而遭人耻笑;歪门邪道者,因有钱而受人尊敬。现代文明人类所应有的是非曲直标准已经完全颠倒,全社会彻底地物质化,庸俗化了。

君不见,每年除夕夜,十几亿中国人围在电视机前,翘首等待那个东北农村二流子出身的“大师“,用俗不可耐的低级笑话来填补人们空虚的心灵。我的家乡,一座曾以人杰地灵为自豪的海滨大城市,只有一个门可罗雀的公共图书馆;而金碧辉煌,灯红酒绿,藏污纳垢的“洗浴中心”,却如雨后春笋般遍布于市区的大街小巷。

说到这里,对于军长砸店,三鹿毒奶,阳澄毒蟹,人造鸡蛋等种种骇人听闻的故事,还有什么值得奇怪的吗?

以上分析中,我认为,污染环境和精神堕落这两点,最令人痛心和担忧。污染环境等同于嫁祸子孙后代,不仅让后代为清除前人的破坏而付出巨大代价,还会让后代面临更加低劣的生存条件,因为我们都清楚,污染的恶果往往是不可逆转的。至于精神堕落这最后一点,一个不顾道德伦理,唯利是图,疯狂造假并无限自我膨胀的庞大国家,很有可能由 “东方的睡狮”,变成一头企图吞噬全世界的猛兽。

中国的“经济奇迹”举世瞩目,值得赞扬,海内外中国人都当引以为豪。但是,对其进行一番冷静,全面的反思,也许才是更加必要的。

庶人 草于纽约

2010年03月09日

http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/stories/2010/03/08/smallb1.html?b=1268024400^2977961

Editor’s Note: After reading about the office coffee conundrum, take our survey: How do you like your coffee?

Nathan Hartland was at Caribou Coffee in downtown Baltimore recently, picking up a cappuccino on his lunch hour. His 3-year-old son had awoken in the middle of the previous night, leaving a sleep-deprived Hartland in need of a serious jolt of caffeine.

“I’m here to make sure I’m awake through the afternoon,” said Hartland, a lawyer at Miles & Stockbridge. He could have had a cup of free coffee at the office, but opted not to.

“I don’t enjoy it — and it also gives me a headache,” said Hartland, who prefers cappuccino because it doesn’t leave his head throbbing like regular or decaf coffee.

Clearly, people have strong preferences when it comes to their java, which can complicate things for employers who offer coffee in the workplace.

We usually don’t think much about that cup of Joe — other than whether to opt for skim milk or cream; sugar or Equal. But workplace experts say that depending on how it is handled, coffee can either be a perk that fuels employee morale or an annoyance that steams up workers to the point where they feel alienated and disgruntled.

Think of the person who consistently gets stuck having to brew a fresh pot because a sneaky co-worker always makes off with the last cupful. Or the decaf drinker who feels left out in an office that offers only regular coffee.

“Variety is very important,” said Deborah Diehl, a partner at law firm Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, which offers several different coffees. “There are certain attorneys who, if the French roast is out, are not going to have a good day.”

Some workers are so dedicated to their favorite brand of coffee, they’d rather dig into their pocket to buy their own coffee than settle for what’s available at the office for free.

On a recent weekday, Cory Stokesberry was heading back to the downtown construction company where he works as a project manager, a Starbucks coffee in hand.

Stokesberry moved to Baltimore from Seattle — the home of Starbucks — five months ago. Coming from the Emerald City, a place where the aroma of coffee pervades the air and there are downtown streets with a coffee shop on every corner, Stokesberry was overjoyed when he finally found a Starbucks in downtown Baltimore.

“It’s not even comparable,” he said of the comparison between Starbucks and his office’s coffee.

Joyce Russell, an industrial and organizational psychologist who consults for private companies and government agencies, said what seems like a trivial matter — such as who cleans the office coffee pot — can loom large these days because workers at many companies may already be feeling frazzled from being overworked.

“If there’s already a collaborative environment, this won’t be much of a stresser,” said Russell, who teaches courses in leadership and organizational behavior at the University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business. “But if people are already feeling stressed, this won’t help.”

Workers tend to view how a company handles the little perks as a symbol of how much they care about their employees, said Filiz Tabak, a professor of management and leadership at Towson University’s College of Business and Economics.

If handled correctly, free coffee and other small benefits can turn into an advantage because it makes workers feel better about their company, reducing employee turnover and making it easier to recruit new workers.

“If I’m in a company where my well-being counts, I’m going to talk about it to my friends and their friends,” Tabak said.

So employers should think twice before deciding arbitrarily to save money by switching to a less expensive brand of coffee or eliminating it altogether, said Russell, the organizational psychologist. If a change needs to be made, workers should be included in the decision-making process, she said.

That’s what Whiteford, Taylor & Preston did when it decided to switch coffee vendors several years ago.

The firm set up an array of coffees from different suppliers in a conference room and let workers have their say about which they liked best. That made workers feel appreciated, said Tracy Canady, a collections specialist who favors French vanilla.

To handle the decaf versus regular conundrum, when the firm redid its downtown Baltimore offices about three years ago, it went from communal coffee pots, one for decaf and one for regular, to single-serve Flavia coffee machines on its employee floors.

Instead of using a coffee pot, the Flavia machines use single-serve coffee packets that are inserted into the machine to make individual cups of coffee.

That means workers get the variety they want without having a coffee pot to clean.

On a recent Wednesday, the offerings included hot chocolate and seven types of coffee ranging from cappuccino latte swirl to house blend decaf.

Coffee is an important part of the social fabric, in the office and elsewhere.

“If you’re talking to clients, it’s the first thing you offer them,” said Alexander Koff, who heads Whiteford, Taylor & Preston’s global practice.

Corby Kummer, a senior editor at the Atlantic Monthly and the author of book “The Joy of Coffee,” is generally no fan of office coffee, however. It tends to be too weak, or too bitter, because it has been left on the burner too long, he said.

“So often you get something that reminds you of what Abraham Lincoln told a waiter,” Kummer said. “ ‘If this is coffee, bring me tea, and if this is tea, bring me coffee.’ ”

2010年03月08日

http://www.wangxiaofeng.net/?p=4913

from 不许联想 by 带三个表

周洋在冬奥会上拿了冠军,她对记者说:“拿了金牌以后会改变很多,更有信心,也可以让我爸我妈生活得更好一点。”这可能是贵国运动员发表获奖感言中最人话的一句话,以往我们听到的都不是人话。但因为这句人话,CCTV在后来重放周洋获得冠军的镜头时,再也没有出现这句话。我想问问,周洋她父母招谁惹谁了?

今天看新闻才知道,这事儿已经被上纲上线了。体育总局的领导于再清开会是点名批评了这种自私自利的行为,必须先感谢国家,然后才能感谢父母,顺序不能变。

照理说,运动员出国参加比赛,都该发一本小册子,以应付外国心存不良的媒体提问,上面有问有答,让运动员都背下来,以免被外国媒体利用。但是这些人光想着攘外了,忽略了安内,没想到周洋迸出这么一句,这在文革的时候估计该打成反革命了吧?

亡“洋”补劳,还来得及,先好好教育周洋,各级领导都要找她谈话,不能让这种自由主义苗头在体育界出现。然后小册子上面要多一条,甚至更多条。最重要的是,CCTV记者在采访运动员谈获奖感言的时候都要像警察录口供一样,只需回答“是”“否”就行了。

比方说:“你拿到世界冠军之后是不是特别想感谢我们的伟大祖国?”“是。”“其次是不是要感谢领导和教练员的培养?”“是。”“再次你是不是想到了要感谢你的父母?”“是。”这样就万无一失了。

看于再清的胡说八道,我觉得挺搞笑,他说:“西方表达方式很好,但是小孩儿有些心里话没有表述出来。”一个家境不好的环境出来的人,她还能想到西方表达方式,她连东方的教育接受的都不完整,还西方呢。但凡能有一个很好的教育环境,学习成绩好一点,谁去做运动员这个工作啊。我不知道周洋为什么去当运动员,但我可以肯定,“西方表达方式”绝对是这位领导自己想出来的,丫想的可真多。就算是西方表达方式,有什么不妥啊?现在高干的子女不都去了西方世界了吗,要不好干吗都弄出去呢?

我觉得,像举重、柔道、摔跤、中长跑以及冰雪项目中的某些项目,好像没有人真愿意天天练这种以体力活为主的项目吧,不都是教练看上一个人有发展前途,可以在比赛中拿金牌,让这种专业的、举国体制制造一些强大幻觉,才把人拉进来的吗,只要有第二种更好的职业选择,没有人去当运动员。专业体育项目绝不是双向选择,很多家境不好的孩子,还不是为了能让日子变得好一点才去玩这个吗。这种项目淘汰率高,搞不好身上全是伤,除非你是刘翔,不然退以后工作都没着落,不是有人为了活下去变卖金牌吗,有人去洗浴中心搓澡,有人到工厂看大门,这时候于再清他们干嘛去了?

多年来,民众一直被这样教化,你获得的一切都是某某给你的,而不是靠你的劳动和努力获得的。就连你在除夕之也过年,你的快乐都是春晚给你的,不是发自你内心的。我操,现在欠房贷就够受的了,还欠你一份人情。

一个人知道对父母感恩,他一定是人;一个人不知道对父母感恩,可能是机器人。

2010年02月27日

五毛党真相—中国制造 终成笑柄(图)

中国一位记者在上网

中国互联网上有“五毛党”一说,这种说法早已有 之。最近,中国媒体报导进一步证明了“五毛党”的存在,也引起了一些辩论。

*官方媒体确认“五毛党”存在*

《环 球时报》2月8日报导:“近日甘肃省宣布组建一支650人的网评员队伍,针对网民关注的热点问题,及时发帖跟帖,正确引导社会舆论。他们被网民谑称为‘五 毛党’,指的是那些为政府说话的人,发一个帖得五毛钱。”

报导说:“各省宣传部开始正式聘用网评员,此举一时间被视为一项政绩工程,被大力 宣传。”“28岁的网评员小宋在湖南省某县级纪委任职,……小宋说全县有100多名通讯员,都在业余时间写稿,而这个县有不到100万人口。这群 人大多是公职人员,而在论坛里,他们是普通网民。他们想尽各种方法拥护政府发布的各项政策方针……。而他们的监督者会布置任务,发布详细的说 明。”“天涯论坛有3000万注册用户,一位不愿透露姓名的编辑说:‘四川地震和新疆暴乱发生时,网评员会迅速行动,能看得出来,很多帖子是他们发 的。’”

中国著名作家韩寒1月21日的一篇博文说:“据甘肃省新闻网报导,甘肃将要组建一支650人的网络评论员队伍,正确引导舆 论。……网络评论员也叫五毛党,乃是地下党。你把成立一支地下党的消息以及名单直接公布了,乃是大忌。……这个新闻直接透露了政府一直不 愿意承认的一个事实,那就是五毛党的存在。如果一个人想要获得赞美和拥护必须要靠花钱收买别人的嘴才可以,那说明这个人肯定够丑的。这条新闻直接摧毁了上 级部门努力营造的假象。”

*对“五毛党”讨伐声高*

韩寒在2月8日的博文中说:“五毛党 还是很好认的,因为出卖灵魂的人,尤其是廉价出卖灵魂的人,他们的言语是没有根基的,他们的高潮是没有前戏的。”

美国之音2月14日的报导 说:“中国自由作家昝爱宗说:‘……他们聘请了网评员,就是五毛党,各个地方的新闻办的官员和一些媒体的记者,他们都匿名作网评员还操控舆论,或 者是引导舆论,就是想把互联网变成人民日报、新华社一样听话。’”

《八小时以外》杂志2月号的一篇文章说:“他们是一个特殊的团 体,……他们的宗旨是偷偷地进去,放枪的不要……。眼下人们叫他们‘五毛党’,……称之为舆论掮客更为合适。总之,网络的讨论区 里哪里有涉及利益的争论话题,哪里就有他们的影子。……他们就像一只只章鱼,把你的小脑袋瓜牢牢地吸住,拖上他们预想的轨道。”

北 京大学法律信息网2月7日刊登的一篇讽刺文章说:“如果有必要的话也可以发展一部分专职‘五毛党’,让他们混进不明真相的网民中去,引导网友理解和支持政 府正确的或看起来不正确,其实还是很正确的许多让人民群众不满意的做法。”“培养一个政治觉悟高和忽悠水平专业的‘五毛党’也不是一件容易的事。”“五毛 党除了在网上充当网监和网评员之外,还有一个最重要也是最基本的任务,那就是政府说煤球是白的,‘五毛党’们就应该义无反顾地说煤球是白的,直到自己相信 并让其他不明真象的网民也相信:煤球真是白的。”

*西方媒体推波助澜了吗?*

对于人们对 “五毛党”的讨伐,北京师范大学政治学与国际关系学院副院长张胜军忿忿不平。他2月8日在《环球时报》的环球网上发表文章说:“经过西方媒体热炒的‘五毛 党’一词,从开始的大帽子,逐渐成为对中国爱国主义挥舞的大棒子。它的实质是要剥夺中国人在互联网上表达真实意见的自由。似乎只有攻击中国、攻击中国政 府,才是真话;只要表达爱国情绪,反对西方的那一套,就一定是‘五毛党’,一定是拿了政府的好处。这是对大量中国网民的羞辱,是话语上的霸权和专制。”

张 胜军指责说:“‘五毛党’一词到底是谁编出来的,笔者不得而知。但这个词的流行,西方媒体起到了推波助澜的作用。西方很多媒体都使用过这个 词……。”

其实,“五毛党”一词主要出现在中文网站上。正规媒体,无论中外,都罕有提到。尤其是西方媒体,但凡提到,一定会特别说 明,生怕读者看不懂。例如:法新社2月17日的报导说:“……五毛党,据说是在网上每贴一条倾向政府的评论就得到五毛钱的公务员。”

《时 代》周刊2月6日的报导说:“五毛党,据说是在网上贴倾向政府的评论可以得到五毛钱的成千上万的年轻人。”

*中国制造 终成笑柄*

实际上,“五毛党”这个词是百分之百的“中国制造”。《环球时报》2月8日的报导说:“一份官方文件透 露,2004年10月开始,长沙市委外宣办选聘网评员,底薪600元,按发贴量加薪,每发一帖,键入‘网络评论员管理系统’进行统计,每帖五角钱。很多人 认为‘五毛’由此而来。”

《八小时以外》杂志2月号的文章说:“这些被称作五毛党的人,最早出现于南京大学的小百合BBS,源于网络评论员 队伍,当时网络评论员每月底薪600元。网评员主要职责是密切监控网络舆情,提供舆情信息,并有针对性地开展网络宣传策划、网络舆情引导工作。由于网评员 实行计件工资制,按发帖量加薪,每发一帖,键入‘网络评论员管理系统’进行统计,一帖五毛钱。五毛党由此得名。”

《环球时报》2月8日的报 导说:“北京大学互联网专家胡泳接受《环球时报》英文版采访时表示,……‘五毛党’成不了气候,只会成为笑柄,‘他们会在某时某地起到混淆视听的 作用,但从长远来讲,并没有杀伤力,反而让大家提高警惕,注意去识别什么叫做“五毛党”的言论。

2010年02月26日

shooting people

(zz from from http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/10/01/29/)

from [daily dose of imagery]

100+ people liked this

mike ||  Canon5D2/EF100f2.8L | 1/2000s | f2.8 | ISO800
Seen on King street east. Artist extraordinaire Mike Brown (we work together), clearly not happy to see me!

I get asked all the time; how do you go about shooting people? As you might have already noticed I don’t have many shots with people as main subjects but here are a few thoughts from my experience shooting people on the street. Every case is different. Shooting on the street is an adventure and you just have to experience it and see what happens. You have to be ready for anything, and be very aware of where you are. Here are a few scenarios from past photos.

guitar hero
I shot this while he was passing the street. In a situation like this there is no way to ask if it’s OK to take his photo. You lose the moment and it won’t look real anymore anyway.
Later when I posted the image his father sent me an email saying he liked the photo.

girl watching obama
She was watching Obama’s inauguration speech and was very emotional. She clearly noticed I’m taking her photo and I wasn’t trying to hide. We exchanged looks that it was OK but I already had my shot. It’s usually better to ask after anyway because if you ask first the moment is gone and most people will pose, even unintentionally.

rain runner
Another tough situation. Capturing the moment was key here and it was impossible to catch up with him after. t was pouring and he was running very fast! And I’m shooting with a long lens. Later when I posted, he sent me an email asking for a high res copy for himself.

crystal jumper
She was jupming for her friends so they can take her picture in the air (off frame here). They had a P&S camera and it’s very tough to freeze the moment with a camera with shutter lag so she was jumping again and again! Everyone including her sees I’m taking the photo. No need to get permission.

brian
Saw him from across the street and noticed he had a great face. Went and talked to him. He was happy to pose for me and I gave him a $5 or $10 bill, I can’t remember exactly.

tractor man
We went on a photo shoot and ended up somewhere we weren’t supposed to be. It was white everywhere and we didn’t notice we were in a no trespassing area. He saw us and didn’t say anything. Then we went to the car and found all 4 tires are flat! I took this from the hip while he was passing after flattening our tires! We paid the price for our mistake, waited for 6 hours in freezing cold until help arrived.

bush man
Obviously he saw me taking the photo and didn’t say anything. I still can’t tell if he’s pissed or proud!

dark knight in day
I still have a hard time sleeping at night, thinking what will happen to me if I’ve seriously pissed off the dark knight.

snowy at bookstore
On days like this I take the camera and walk for hours. I end up with hundreds of shots and it’s pretty much impossible to ask everybody’s permission when you take the shots. I’m not even sure if I got any interesting shots until I see them at home. The result is a photo that I can’t use for commercial purposes (like selling as stock image) but might be a decent street photo.

not that into you || Canon5D2/EF24-105L | 1/30s | f4 |  ISO1000
Photo from yesterday’s post, another situation that I didn’t know I had a good shot until weeks later when I was going through the shots. When I took this I was almost certain that I didn’t even have a sharp photo. But when i saw it later I liked it. So no way to ask her now. I won’t be selling this image for stock use. And if she ever contacts me and tells me she’s unhappy about it I’ll take it off the site. Street photography is all about the fractions of a second. You have to take the shot when you think you have it (to be precise, you take the shot just before the moment. Good photographers can see the future, like Joe McNally!)

brad pitt

kate beckinsale
It was impossible to get close to ask permission for these, too many screaming people in the middle. They’re famous or something. But I suspect they’ll forgive me.

red roses
Noticed her at Toronto Zombie Walk, asked her permission and she posed for me. Later she contacted me and got a print for her portfolio (professional makeup artist). We ended up doing a few projects together. Sometimes it pays to ask.

sleeping on train
I was taking many photos during the trip and he saw me taking them. I assume if he didn’t want his photo taken he would have said something. I could have cropped him out but it would have ruined the shot.

sandra in rain
There is a good story for this. Basically she was a visitor of this site and contacted me to take her photo as a surprise birthday gift for her friend who was also a daily visitor. Read the whole story here. This photo ended up being published many times. Now I have to contact her and ask her to sign a model release form for Getty Images.

homeless and DKNY
Took this photo first and then went over and showed him the photo. He was OK with it. And I gave him some money.

… To conclude, every photographer is different and so is every subject. If you’re shooting people on the street hoping you will some day sell the images to stock sites, you need to carry copies of model release forms all the time and ask people to sign them. Getty is interested in some of my images but I can’t sell them because I don’t have release forms and no access to subjects. But if you are a street/document photographer, by law you’re free to shoot in public places (depending on where you live). That’s why paparazzi can get away with pretty much anything. It really depends on your own comfort level. I have friends who are excellent documentary photographers but have lost gear and been injured (beer bottles thrown at them, cameras kicked,…)
I don’t shoot people often, and if I feel people are uncomfortable in front of my camera I respect that and don’t take the shot. But what I learned is you have to shoot first and think later. Or in the case of people, you may want to shoot first and ask later, hoping that it’s not too late.

Happy shooting.

2010年01月19日

最近,Google针对Gmail被攻击事件, 全面默认启用了始终以https访问Gmail的方式了。但是,对于可以动用整个国家力量的黑客来说,从网络通讯数据中(在此不讨论对用户电脑种木马破解 https的情况,只讨论在网络通讯数据中破解https的方法)破解https除了暴力破解(暴力破解https即使按照现在的集群计算能力仍旧需要几 百至几万年不等)之外真的别无他法了吗?事实并非如此。

  我们知道,https的安全性主要是由SSL证书中的公钥和私钥来保证的。浏览器与服务器经过https建立通讯的时候(不考虑SSL代理方式需要用户提交证书的情况,因为我们现在讨论的是浏览器访问网站,和SSL代理无关)会按照以下步骤保证通讯的安全性:

  1、浏览器连接服务器,服务器把SSL证书的公钥发送给浏览器

  2、浏览器验证此证书中的域是否和访问的域一致(比如用户访问https://mail.google.com/时,浏览器验证服务器发送过来的SSL证书的公钥中的域是否为mail.google.com或*.google.com)并没有过期

  3、如果浏览器验证失败,浏览器通知用户证书有问题,让用户选择是否继续

  4、如果浏览器验证成功,那么浏览器随机生成一个对称密钥并使用接收到的SSL证书的公钥进行加密并发送给服务器

  5、服务器通过SSL证书的私钥对收到的信息进行解密并得到浏览器随机生成的对称密钥

  6、最后服务器和浏览器都通过这个对称密钥进行通讯了(为什么不直接使用公钥和私钥进行通讯?因为非对称加密比对称加密效率低)

  这个方案看似完美,却无法抵御中间人攻击,攻击者可以按以下步骤实施攻击截取https通讯中的所有数据:

  1、攻击者伪造一个Gmail的SSL证书,使其中的域为mail.google.com或*.google.com,并设置合适的证书过期时间

  2、攻击者等待访问者的浏览器访问Gmail时,通过DNS劫持或IP伪造(对于有路由器控制权限的黑客来说简直轻而易举)的方法使其访问到攻击者的服务器上

  3、攻击者把伪造的SSL证书公钥发送给浏览器

  4、浏览器验证SSL证书的域和过期时间都没错,认为访问到的就是Gmail本身,从而把对称密钥发送给黑客服务器

  5、黑客服务器把伪造的Gmail网页通过收到的对称密钥加密后发送给浏览器

  6、访问者通过浏览器输入Gmail帐户,发送给黑客服务器,黑客服务器通过收到的对称密钥解密后成功获得访问者的Gmail密码

   为了抵御这种中间人攻击,SSL证书需要由可信的SSL证书颁发机构颁发,形成一个证书链(比如Gmail的证书链为:最底层为网域 mail.google.com,上一层为Thawte SGC CA证书颁发机构,最顶层为很有名的VeriSign证书颁发机构)。那么,浏览器除了需要验证域和有效期外,还要检查证书链中的上级证书公钥是否有效, 上级的上级证书公钥是否有效,直至根证书公钥为止。这样就可以有效避免中间人攻击了,因为根证书公钥都是预装在操作系统中的,黑客如果不是暴力破解,无法 得到根证书的私钥,如果黑客自己生成一个私钥,浏览器验证根证书公钥的时候发现无法通过操作系统中预装的公钥加密数据后使用这个私钥进行解密,从而判定这 个公钥是无效的。这个方案也是现在https通讯通常的方案。

  那么,这个现在所有的浏览器正在使用的https通讯方案就无懈可击了 吗?答案仍是否定的。我们可以看到,在后一个方案中,https的安全性需要在证书颁发机构公信力的强有力保障前提下才能发挥作用。如果证书颁发机构在没 有验证黑客为mail.google.com的持游者的情况下,给黑客颁发了网域为mail.google.com的证书,那么黑客的中间人攻击又可以顺 利实施:

  1、攻击者从一家不验证mail.google.com持有者的SSL证书颁发机构WoSign那里得到了网域为 mail.google.com的证书,此证书的证书链为:最底层为网域mail.google.com,上一层证书颁发机构为WoSign,顶层证书颁 发机构为VeriSign

  2/3、第二、第三个步骤同上一个方案的中间人攻击的第二、第三个步骤

  4、浏览器验证SSL证书的域和过期时间都没错,继续验证证书链:

    4.1、最底层的网域mail.google.com证书公钥不在操作系统中,无法验证其访问到的就是Gmail本身,继续验证上一层证书颁发机构

    4.2、上一层证书颁发机构WoSign的公钥也不在操作系统中,仍旧无法验证其有效性,继续验证上一层证书颁发机构

    4.3、浏览器看到顶层证书颁发机构VeriSign的公钥在操作系统中,认为证书链有效,从而把对称密钥发送给黑客服务器

  5/6、第五、第六个步骤同上一个方案的中间人攻击的第五、第六个步骤。黑客成功获得访问者的Gmail密码

   然而,不验证域名持有者就颁发证书的情况在国外几乎不会发生,但是在国内就不一定了。针对破解目标,国内证书颁发机构WoSign(在此只是举例国内比 较有名的证书颁发机构WoSign,并不代表WoSign今后一定会这么做)很有可能为了上级要求颁发了证书给非域名持有者的黑客,从而使得破解目标的 Gmail密码被黑客截取。

  那么,国内的破解目标是不是使用https的Gmail也无法保证安全了呢?欢迎与我进行探讨。

  来源:读者lehui99投稿,投稿人Email为:lehui99@gmail.com,Google Wave为:lehui99@googlewave.com。

原创文章如转载,请注明:转载自月光博客 [ http://www.williamlong.info/ ]

本文链接地址:http://www.williamlong.info/archives/2058.html

2010年01月13日
A new approach to China
1/12/2010 03:00:00 PM
Like many other well-known organizations, we face cyber attacks of varying degrees on a regular basis. In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google. However, it soon became clear that what at first appeared to be solely a security incident–albeit a significant one–was something quite different.

First, this attack was not just on Google. As part of our investigation we have discovered that at least twenty other large companies from a wide range of businesses–including the Internet, finance, technology, media and chemical sectors–have been similarly targeted. We are currently in the process of notifying those companies, and we are also working with the relevant U.S. authorities.

Second, we have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. Based on our investigation to date we believe their attack did not achieve that objective. Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves.

Third, as part of this investigation but independent of the attack on Google, we have discovered that the accounts of dozens of U.S.-, China- and Europe-based Gmail users who are advocates of human rights in China appear to have been routinely accessed by third parties. These accounts have not been accessed through any security breach at Google, but most likely via phishing scams or malware placed on the users’ computers.

We have already used information gained from this attack to make infrastructure and architectural improvements that enhance security for Google and for our users. In terms of individual users, we would advise people to deploy reputable anti-virus and anti-spyware programs on their computers, to install patches for their operating systems and to update their web browsers. Always be cautious when clicking on links appearing in instant messages and emails, or when asked to share personal information like passwords online. You can read more here about our cyber-security recommendations. People wanting to learn more about these kinds of attacks can read this U.S. government report (PDF), Nart Villeneuve’s blog and this presentation on the GhostNet spying incident.

We have taken the unusual step of sharing information about these attacks with a broad audience not just because of the security and human rights implications of what we have unearthed, but also because this information goes to the heart of a much bigger global debate about freedom of speech. In the last two decades, China’s economic reform programs and its citizens’ entrepreneurial flair have lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese people out of poverty. Indeed, this great nation is at the heart of much economic progress and development in the world today.

We launched Google.cn in January 2006 in the belief that the benefits of increased access to information for people in China and a more open Internet outweighed our discomfort in agreeing to censor some results. At the time we made clear that "we will carefully monitor conditions in China, including new laws and other restrictions on our services. If we determine that we are unable to achieve the objectives outlined we will not hesitate to reconsider our approach to China."

These attacks and the surveillance they have uncovered–combined with the attempts over the past year to further limit free speech on the web–have led us to conclude that we should review the feasibility of our business operations in China. We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.

The decision to review our business operations in China has been incredibly hard, and we know that it will have potentially far-reaching consequences. We want to make clear that this move was driven by our executives in the United States, without the knowledge or involvement of our employees in China who have worked incredibly hard to make Google.cn the success it is today. We are committed to working responsibly to resolve the very difficult issues raised.

Posted by David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer