The Economist [Fri, 12 Jun 2020]
As a rule, someone whose failings were subordinate to their claim to greatness should stay, whereas someone whose main contribution to history was baleful should go.
By 2016 more than a fifth of humankind was living in cities of 1m people or more. The largest 300 metropolitan areas now generate half the world’s GDP and two-thirds of that GDP’s growth.
Edward Glaeser, an economist at Harvard University, has shown that urban density increases workers’ productivity and minimises their carbon footprints.
The Economist [Fri, 05 Jun 2020]
The army kills its enemies. Police are supposed to serve and protect Americans without violating their civil rights—and to face consequences for violating those rights.
if today’s protests slide into persistent rioting, as in 1968 after Martin Luther King’s assassination, the harm they cause could be felt most keenly in African-American districts. Those people who can leave will. The left-behind will be worse off, as home values plunge and jobs and shops disappear. The police may withdraw, leading to an increase in crime, which in turn may eventually bring more violent policing. The scars will be visible for decades.
In a presidential election, fear often beats idealism. Law and order helped Richard Nixon beat Hubert Humphrey in 1968. It could work again.
The Economist [Fri, 29 May 2020]
it seems likely that infection by people who have not, or not yet, developed symptoms accounts for about a third to a half of cases.
East Asian countries’ success in controlling the disease argues in favour of masks. In many of their cities, masks have been worn for years to protect against pollution or disease, so people covered their faces as soon as they got wind of covid-19. In the West mask-wearing is alien. And in all of the countries where mask-wearing is common practice, the epidemic was swiftly suppressed.
地摊经济：
“地摊经济”是“全民创业”降维概念和运动，这是有违经济和市场规律的。我作为一名创业者，深知创业成功概率有多大，以及创业需要多大的付出和伴随的副作用有多大。摆地摊只可以起到行为和情绪的纾困，换句话说是一剂安慰剂。
从地摊经济运动，想起一则经济学法则：拇指法则（Rule of thumb）。它的经济学解释是：“拇指规则”是指经济决策者对信息的处理方式不是按照理性预期的方式，把所有获得的信息都引入到决策模型中，他们往往遵循的是：只考虑重要信息，而忽略掉其他信息。管理学，经济学和教育学中经常把“拇指规则”引申为一种试探法、经验法、启发法(heuristics)。
对待中医的理性态度：
也许以后非议“中医”可能会受到处罚，所以趁此说一句。判断事物是否科学唯一的标准是看其是否具有“具体性和可证伪性”。所以，我对中医持怀疑态度，主要是医理。但是要区分两个概念:中医理和中医药，因为中医药的核心成分草药在世界范围内的现代医学上普遍使用，而且是毋容置疑具有科学有效的。所以在和别人辩论探讨中医，或表达自己态度的的时候，不妨问一下：什么是中医？能清晰的说明中医概念和医理的人，一定不是非黑即白的极端态度者，如果说不明白，还是不要妄言为好，那不是科学精神，而是被意识流裹挟的浅层直觉。
如果以后美国不允许中国企业上市，那对国内会有什么影响？
这是一个假设的问题，还没有真的发生。但是，看上去很有可能。这里不讨论经济影响和政治影响，只关注对国内行业环境的影响。说实话，我觉得，这会对国内的 IT 行业和从业人员，产生巨大影响。大家都知道，上市意味着”变现”，创业可以得到回报了。最希望公司上市的，其实不是创业者，而是风险投资家，因为他们原始投资的动机，就是尽快获利退出。由于种种原因，国内的风险投资，目前首选的退出路径，除了被大公司收购，就是去美国上市。万一这条路断了，风险投资家将大受打击，上市只能选择国内或者香港，这两个股票市场不如美国自由，监管和限制比较多，风险投资家未必愿意或者没有能力做到上市。我认为，不能去美国上市，对国内影响最大的领域就是风险投资。 主要的退出路径没了，国内的风险投资可能将会萎缩。
随之而来的影响是：
（1）创业融资将变得困难，创业热会冷却，创业者减少；
（2）程序员的挖角和跳槽也会减少，明星工程师的身价将会下降；
（3）国内上市的创业公司将会增多，风险投资推动的并购也会增多。
对美国言论自由的正确理解：
美国宪法第一修正案保障言论自由，但是只适用于政府机关（不得限制言论），不适用于私人公司。私人公司可以审查其平台上的内容。所以，即使在美国，媒体平台删除你的言论也是合法的。