Today, new my column is released, so I take a day off.
Let's turn the world by "Number"(65) : Extra edition
A doctor writes to an engineer about how a fake coronavirus will save humanity
After receiving the report from Dr. Shibata, it was a rush job involving him and Ms. M from EE Times Japan.
"It's now or never!" I've been immersed in the work, feeling rushed.
Well, this column can be summed up with this phrase on the last page.
Ebata: "Well, to be honest, it was such a huge shock that it instantly wiped out "artificial intelligence," "quantum computers," and other technologies of that level. I'm convinced that it's an innovation worthy of a Nobel Prize 10 years in advance, and a milestone in the history of science.
We are going to survive the worst disaster in human history (COVID-19), this time with the strongest good luck in human history (mRNA vaccine).
After finishing emailing the final draft to EE Times Japan, I went down to the living room and had a cup of instant coffee.
I began to speak to my family.
"This is something I got from a junior colleague of mine..."
"Whatever his qualifications, nobody could deny that the former president of the United States is a 'top-notch gambler'"
Upon hearing this, all the family members seemed to be deeply convinced.
(Continuation from yesterday)
I want to change myself... I've never thought about that in my life.
# When I tell people about this, they seem to be quite taken aback.
There are two reasons for this.
The first reason is because it's "weird".
It seems to me that "I want to change myself" means "I want to exchange myself", which is the same as "I want to become someone else" --so I don't understand it and it's weird.
The second reason is that I believe that we cannot change ourselves in the first place.
I think it is as difficult as changing a material called "wood" to a material called "stone".
Well, it might be possible to change "wood" to "stone".
However, when I think about the energy spent on the conversion, I can't help but think it's irrational or a waste of time and money.
So, back to the topic of "good" and "bad"...
Instead of "changing myself," I think it's better to think about "how to use (operate) myself better.
Probably, "how to utilize" will take less money and time, and it is definitely easier.
"If it were that easy to find a way to utilize myself, I wouldn't have all this trouble!"
I can understand the point of view, but I think the odds are better than the reckless challenge of "changing myself".
Well, when it comes to this kind of talk, I think it sounds like "bragging from the top" from a guy who just happens to have his life in a good way.
So I also think it is "polite" for "people who live with the feeling that something is going well" to keep quiet about it.
I sometimes feel that I must be silent too.
I make a lot of noise in my columns and blogs, but there are many things I keep quiet about.
On the other hand--
When I see people abusing words like "I hate myself" and "I want to change myself" and acting like it's an "exemption" for their life not going well...
Yes, for example, when I listen to teen idol songs full of those kinds of lyrics.
"You also shut up for a minute"
That's what I want to say.
About my works (creating simulations, communication programs), I sometimes use the resources of my personal computer (PC) to the limit.
When the limit is exceeded, the application will stop and the PC will freeze.
In the first place, the Windows and Linux operating systems (OS) manage the resources of the computer to prevent this from happening, but our work can extend beyond the control of the OS.
All the work I have done so far will disappear, so I must avoid such a situation.
In other words, it is (sometimes) necessary to manage and control the inside of the PC world by myself, without leaving it to the OS.
When I'm at my computer, it seems that I am a lonely and un "ultimate isolation".
However, it can be said that it is the "sociable person" that controls multiple tasks at the same time without downing any one of them.
In other words, how you look, and how others see you, is ultimately relative.
"A person who is cheerful, diplomatic, and capable of leadership" -- this is called a "cheerful".
This has been the case for a long time -- at least since the days when I was a teenager, and "cheerful" has continued to reign as a steadfast value.
As antonyms, adjectives such as "dark-hearted," "gloomy," "negative," and "nerd" have been abused as derogatory terms for people.
However, I think that this structure of opposition between "cheerful" and "nerd" can no longer be contrasted as it used to be due to the intrusion of the virtual space of the Internet.
I don't know how to put it into words, but if I had to, I'd say "good" and "bad".
(To be continued)
I remember writing somewhere once that I wondered if a New Year's card with only pictures of the family's children would work.
Well, for me, it's because 'their friend's child is a stranger to me.
I can't help but look at other people's pictures.
My senior daughter once told me that there is a concept called "Nengajo Harassment" these days.
While there are diverse ways of living (DINK, single, partnership), it seems that expressing what they belong to (their mate, family, etc.) is harassment.
I think, "Yes, that's true," and I also think, "Do I really need to worry about it that much?
However, if I admit to "New Year's card harassment," I am the one who carried out "blog harassment" and "column harassment.
If I try to describe anyone other than myself, they will all be "harassment".
While "blogs" and "columns" are pull-type information media that those who do not want to read can avoid reading, "New Year's cards" are push-type information media.
When I think about it, I feel that "New Year's cards" can be included in the list of harassment.
On the other hand, "New Year's cards" have the property that if we stop sending them, they will also stop sending them.
Hence, "New Year's card harassment" may be overthinking it.
The only remaining troublesome issue is how to handle New Year's greeting cards for relatives, bosses, mentors, and other people whose connections are hard to ignore.
Well, I think of New Year's cards as "cards for making a list of attendees for my funeral," so I don't really care.
I told my family not to hold a funeral for me -- "If you have that kind of money, go eat sushi with the family.
I read "Economists on the Outbreak of War between Japan and the United States"
The Shinchosensho was quite a hard book for me to read, but I finished it in four days, walking an hour every day.
In this book,
(1) In the face of an overwhelming disadvantageous power gap (Japan-U.S. power ratio: 1:20-50)
(2) The information in (1) above is not secret information, but is widely disclosed not only to those in power, but also to the public.
(3) Before the start of the war, the simulation of "Japan's inevitable defeat" was completed perfectly, and
(4) The cabinet, the government, and even the military were almost all aware of this reality.
even under the circumstances of (1)～(4), rather because of the circumstances, Japan's entry into the Pacific War.
This is a book that clarifies this fact from the perspective of behavioral economics.
I thought there were many ways to read it, but my biggest thought was,
"The cause of the war was not the military or the government, but rather the people who could not or would not read the numbers"
According to the author's analysis, "a government that is weak and incapable of decision-making" and "an incompetent and crude army" are quite fanciful.
And as I read this book, I was thinking, "If I were in power, could I have turned this around and averted war?
However, I became convinced that it was hopelessly impossible.
In particular, I thought that prospect theory was too strong.
Option A : If the war does not start, Japan will be brought to its knees by the economic blockade of the U.S. and Britain in three years.
Option B : If the war starts, we will almost certainly lose. However,
(1) If Germany defeats the Soviet Union and
(2) If the Germans succeed in landing in England, and
(3) If Japan acquires the resources of Southeast Asia, establishes transportation routes, and
(4) If the British surrender to the Germans
At that time, the U.S. may lose its will to engage in war and accept a peace treaty.
Even if there are four "ifs" and one "might" (which is a near-zero possibility by any measure), according to the prospect theory of behavioral economics, "choice A" < "choice B".
According to the author, if there is a way to avoid this situation, it is
(1) A "dictator who insists on avoiding war" will appear in our country.
(2) Choose option A and wait for the situation to change somewhere in the next three years with "no action".
The author's summation, "These would have been the only two ways," resonated with me.
"If we find ourselves in a situation similar to the Pacific War, we will start the war again, regardless of the lessons of history"
It was a book that gave me a pretty good sense of "desperation".
Lately, I've been seeing a lot of "cross-world reincarnation manga" in web ads.
The reason why such ads appear is because I can read the ads in a disciplined manner.
The content of "reincarnation" is an embodiment of the psychology of escaping from reality -- however, let's not say that it's a bad thing.
Dreaming/showing is the job of the creator and the creations.
"I want to be an elementary school student with the knowledge I have now, and I want to beat up the adults (teachers)"
It is also a form of escapism.
(This is almost the same as what I wrote here.)
I wondered what kind of world I would like to be reincarnated in.
However, I can't seem to visualize this in any concrete way.
I'm thinking in terms of the content of "Reincarnation"
- A world in the past that we know the events of the future.
- A medieval world where medicine and science have not yet developed
- A world where magic and supernatural powers that cannot be used in this world
These worlds often appear. So I think I want to be reincarnated,
"A world where I can use the knowledge and skills I have cultivated through hard work in the current world"
This means that in order to live happily in the world of "otherworld reincarnation", I must continue to face hardships, efforts, and unpleasant experiences in the "present world" (checked).
This means that I want to dream about the "other world" where we don't have to make any effort in order not to have any hardship, not to make any effort, and not to get into any trouble in the "present world", and I want to dream about the "other world" where we don't need to make any effort (checked).
"In this case, religions (including cults) that insist on "doing meritorious deeds in this life for a happy next life" are still better"
I am afraid that I noticed that.
The key missions of telecommuting in Corona disaster are weight control and regular exercise.
Recently, I have come to understand that if I leave the scale in front of the stove, it will show my weight about 200 grams lighter.
So, these days, before weighing myself, I warm up the scale sufficiently on the stove.
By the way, my wife says to me, "I don't know what you're thinking.
I took a sauna at the super public bath in front of the station for the first time in a long time, since I couldn't get rid of the tiredness no matter if I took stabilizers or sleeping pills.
Although we are in the middle of declaring a state of emergency, there were quite a few customers in the public bath.
Well, that's beside the point.
There were about ten people in the sauna, which had a capacity of about twenty, and they were all silently watching the TV screen in front of them.
In one of the variety shows, the topic of jeans in Onomichi came up.
"Making damaged jeans by having people in Onomichi actually wear the jeans"
I was surprised to hear that, and even more surprised to hear that it could be sold for two to three times the cost.
I'm a jeans user who doesn't see even 1mm value in damaged jeans.
"I buy cheap jeans from Amazon, wear them down until they rip, and when they do, I repair them with wood glue"
So, it's impossible for me to share the value of "damaged jeans".
"How much would you pay for a pair of jeans that an IT engineer wore at home for a year while he was at home?"
I was thinking about something trivial in the sauna.
Daughter: "Someone once told me that there are two standards in the world: 'justice and evil' and 'like and dislike'"
Ebata: "That's not true. There is only one standard, 'like and dislike'"
Daughter: "Isn't there a 'Justice and evil'?
Ebata: "'Justice and evil' is just a relative concept. It can be easily turned 180 degrees depending on where we stand, so I don't think it's very important.
Well, I know that many philosophers in the past and the present have thought to death in search of the most 'absolute justice'.
But if it's something we have to think about to death to understand, I think it's terribly tedious and even "dangerous" to put "absolute justice" as a common value standard.
Ebata: "To begin with, do you know how the operation of the rule of law in a country under the rule of law is carried out? Well, the trial is just one example"
Daughter: "To judge a person only on the basis of evidence and law, without 'subjectivity' right?
Ebata: "That's a pretext. This story was taught to me in law seminar, and I myself was astonished...."
Then I started to talk about the process of a trial.
(Step.1) The judge decides on the subjective "likes and dislikes" of the defendant and comes up with a rough idea of guilt/innocence and the amount of the sentence.
(Step.2) The judge then lays out in his or her mind the multiple articles of law from which to derive this guilt/innocence and sentence amount.
(Step.3) The judge considers whether these articles can be applied to the case in question. If it works, they apply it to the judgment.
Ebata: "The above (Step.1) to (Step.3) are shared by not only judges but also prosecutors and defense attorneys.Then, these three parties work together to reach a decision. This is the basic trial approach.
Daughter: "No way..."
Ebata: "Of course, the above is a civil case with clear circumstantial and physical evidence, however, they can add extenuating circumstances, trends in public opinion, and social norms. And finally, the judgment is made based on the subjective standard of "How much can I forgive this defendant?""
Daughter: "'Justice and evil' is not the standard...
Ebata: "'Justice and evil' is a 'tool concept' that exists as a rationale for 'like and dislike'."
Daughter: "Then what is the point of the law's existence?
Ebata: "No, no, the important point is this: 'Even if they start from 'like and dislike', they can't make a judgment based only on 'like and dislike'".
Ebata: "It doesn't matter what kind of law they use, but they must always make a logical (pretend) judgment based on a clearly stated law -- this is the principle of the rule of law, and it is also the last resort."
In that sense, "Toyama no Kin-san" made judgments based on "likes and dislikes" alone, and at his own discretion.
As for me, I think that "Toyama no Kin-san" has definitely functioned as a "false accusation manufacturing system".
That's why I want to watch a TV drama whose title is
"Tozan no Kin-san, the 'False Accusation' Catcher's Notebook"
There is an interesting anime currently airing called "Tenchi Sozo Design Club(Creation Design Department)".
The reason why animals and plants have "evolved" into their current forms, for those who don't believe in the theory of evolution, it's "God's 'design'", is explained in a comedic and logical manner.
This anime has a cool concept.
"God, who created the heavens and the earth, got tired of creating the heavens and the earth and the water, and decided to leave the creation of living things to "subcontractors""
I can't watch this anime without crying, when the client (God) gives a half-hearted, out-of-the-box specification for a creature (e.g., "not cute, but cute animal"), and the client rejects the designs at random.
I also have a great deal of sympathy for Ms. Higuchi(*), who actually makes prototypes of living things according to the design and clearly points out the problems.
(*)The only female engineer in the Prototype Room of the Animal Department.
In my daily life, this concept can be read the following way.
"The general electronics company that created the IT platform got tired of designing APIs and decided to leave the creation of applications and services to "subcontractors"."
Or I can read it this way.
"The executives of the company that came up with the concept for the next generation social infrastructure got tired of the concept once it was announced, and decided to throw the implementation, demonstration tests, and patent applications to the "research department"."
I think I've been both the perpetrator (client) and the victim (host).
Naturally, it's hard to recognize myself as a perpetrator, but there's a lot I can say from a victim's perspective.
For example, I am likely to say that
"If you want me to do a field experiment, you're going to have to take the lead and run around the city on a sub-zero night in the middle of winter to tune the experiment system"