主题：比尔.盖茨/沃伦.巴菲特：答商学院学生问 -- 万年看客

and this is a tough world, and if your (meaning most of us) brain is full of 感性, most likely you will end up working as a piece of 乾電池, for the profit of whomever.

1.

logically, this society (everywhere) is more of dissipative system, meaning 剥削有功, kind of 1 reasons why Marxist economics has a lot of fundamental issues, and as a political economics, it naturally leverages on 道德 stuff, fitting right into the "core" of Chinese traditional social science.

kind of why Chinese like 中国特色社会主义, in general: it supposedly has both logic and 道德.

although more likely, it is too good to be true.

2.

now in a dissipative system where 剥削有功, information system is naturally non-linear, meaning: the right information, right logic, right model are not "normally" distributed as in a linear system, as an analogy;

that is why 精英 is more organized among themselves than otherwise, while the social mass is often not organized at all.

3.

compared to 比尔.盖茨, 沃伦.巴菲特 is more of social scientist, and his comments seems much more valuable, & I would think (guessing of course) that he actually could have spoken much more regarding the points as mentioned in the above, although unlikely in that kind of situation. he has to be somehow politically correct.

4.

"我的诀窍是理性":理性是別人帶出來的,自己=充滿了感性

that is kind of my understanding of his comments, really insightful;

now, in a non-linear & dissipative social system, one tries to be a winner in this 剥削有功 society(should one prepare for the worst anyway(:)? ) by his instinct, without 理性( unless he already has 理性) more likely, then more likely he is playing game with 感性: he works very hard, wants to win, only to lose even more (:), then he will become even more irrational, etc

5.

now, back to the system level: knowing all the above points and if they hold, should a system at least try to distribute information as freely and widely as possible? and a system design would also encourage full mobility of social members in general, as free as possible.

because, at system level, you don't care who 剥削 whom, who is winner or loser, what you really care is: information is distributed to as many members as possible in a society, so some smart guy picks it up, run with it, & produces value out of it, helping the society to progress and move forward.

6.

套利

obviously, in a more realistic world, information is often not distributed the way as designed by system, there are "gaps" all over the places, and here 套利 folks come over, taking advantage of those gaps, making profit into their own back accounts, without really contributing much "real" value to the society.

in addition to information, we also need logic/model as well, to process data into information, to make value out of information, etc;

and where to get that logic/model? again, at system level, you have an ideal model to benefit society (not so much of 道德經, much more of productivity), vs in reality as we know: nothing is free, & even you have the money, you have to know where to buy that the money-making "logic/model".

and obviously, at system level, you as a system designer, you want to open up as many exchange channels as possible, so the buyer of "logic/model" can find the seller fast, economical, and in a competitive way. you want to them to "date each other, have sex, produce kids for the society", of course, producing smart kids who can innovate and produce something such as IPhone, etc.

7.

so, here we are talking about the system level model, and in an academic world, this is supposed to be a system design thing for the benefit of society;

as a player (individual or group), what we care is how to "buy low and sell high", and the hell with 道德經, whatever it may be.

obviously, in china, TG kind of plays both roles, in many situation, with its 中国特色社会主义 model.

8.

as a disclaimer, I talk about TG often in terms of "comparative modeling", I don't really care about "right" or "wrong" stuff, with no intention to offend anybody, be aware(:).

obviously, there is 套利 model in china, and there is 套利 model in US. is that what we really care about?

---------

"我的诀窍是理性。我始终认为人的智力与才能就好比汽车引擎的马力，但是最终的动力输出效率是要由理性决定的。很多人一开始都具备四百马力，但是只输出了二百马力。那还不如一开始只有二百马力但是完全输出。为什么很多聪明人都喜欢跟自己过不去，以至于发挥不出应有的本领呢？这取决于习惯、性格与脾气，取决于采取理性行为，不要自己跟自己作对。在座的同学们绝对全都有能力取得与我相当乃至于远远超过我的成就，日后你们有些人会走到这一步，有些人则不会。对于没有走到这一步的同学们来说，问题并不在于这个世界与你作对，而是你与你自己作对。我有一个小建议：你们可以写下班级里你最仰慕的人的名字，再写下此人之所以令你仰慕的特质——这一回就不要自己写自己了（笑声），然后再找出全班当中你最讨厌的人，也写下此人之所以令你讨厌的特质。再然后只要一点用心练习就能使你趋向前者并且回避后者。习惯养成时悄然不觉，而养成之后则坚不可摧。我现在的习惯已经改不了了，但是你们可以从今天开始养成二十年之后足以受用的习惯。将别人的特质转变成自己的习惯。本杰明.富兰克林两百年前就是这么做的。今天你依然能通过这种做法把所有的马力都释放出来。下面该比尔发言，他说完了咱们就开始现场问答。