Copies do not exist.

Copyrights are very interesting stuff, until one realizes that for many copyrighted items, there is no perfect copy. Every version based on a previous one is different physically and from an information point of view. So there is no such thing as copying, just producing a seemingly-similar object based on the first, original object.

Of course, there are things which can be copied identically, like program code on a computer. Those things can be copyrighted pretty fine.

The scholar's stone.

---
In HKUST, there is a concrete block right in the middle of the path of the path between the dorm and the academic building. It's called the scholar's stone. Student-myths claim if a student steps on it, he would either fail at his studies or become dean-listed (in direct translation, this also means crazy listed).
While I'm not one for the superstitious beliefs, I believe that it was a special rock because it was a bump in the road.
Either way though, I thought it was beyond the boundaries of conventional standards. I thought if I failed at something, that wouldn't be a bad thing, and if I did brilliantly, then that was something special too.

//
"In the society where mediocrity is too often a standard and too often rewarded, there is intense fascination with men who detest mediocrity who refuse to define themselves in conventional terms and who seek to transcend traditionally recognized human capabilities."
Not-my-quote//

University life chapter 1: the beginning adjustment period

It's been a great long while since I blogged anything, so let's get up to date on what I've been up to.

I've chosen to go to HKUST, because of its relative seclusion, a rather academic feel, as well as its optimum distance from home (2 hours away, fairly direct transportation), so as to achieve balance between family life, academic life and social life. I felt it was impossible to do so if I studied abroad.

I moved in on the 30th August, soon after the halls were open to local freshmen moving in. It was pretty chaotic then, though everyone was pretty friendly and welcoming. I was told by year 2s and 3s that hall 3 is known for its warm atmosphere... probably because this hall has an interesting location... it is the furthest from the academic buildings and library.
The inhabitants of this hall hate rain. It stops us from going home without getting rather soaked. As I am writing this, rain is pouring from the clouds above and fog has engulfed the place. Thunder booms from left and right with the loud ssshhh of rain.

People here get together in a lot of hall culture. Fast food is the norm, as are a host of other unhealthy habits, such as the development of habits such as sleeping very late and then waking up very late. I feel I am just at another stage of life whenever that happens. Sometimes I think I am too young for that, and sometimes I feel I am too mature for that.

Thankfully, there is a lot of diversity in this hall, so we just live. At least for now. Floor committees are to be formed tomorrow. I guess that would bring us all together too.

My roommate is pretty awesome. He like to sleep very late. He's decided to bring in some coffee to cope with the late-nighters-for-random-reasons. He loves playing music in the room, which seems to help me relax and sleep.
He's pretty thoughtful. He gave me a blanket when he saw I wasn't in my sleeping bag at night. He wanted to share bananas because they go bad pretty fast and it wasn't easy to finish them fast enough.

Black Holes

1. I take back what I said about that the singularity being limited in size. However, It could reach a limit.

2. I reckon it is possible to avoid gravitational singularity by pretending that things don't fall in at the same speed or at the same time.

3. Black holes should therefore emit gravitational waves, even though my understanding is not sufficient to show that they exist.

4. If they emit gravitational waves, then this is another energy exit for black holes, other than hawking radiation.

5. Hawking radiation is hardly going to decay those black holes anytime soon. Cosmic background radiation absorbed is typically more than what is emitted.

Mutual Assured Destruction Debate Continued

If the players were really sane, mutual assured destruction would not be considered a reasonable option. It's not even war. It's a "crime against humanity" many orders of ridiculous magnitude worse than all previous cases combined. You cannot assume all players to be sane in this world, because as even economists realized, people are not sane, nor are groups of people. The point of "mutual assured destruction" is not actually to win a war. It is to murder as many human beings as possible, while safe in a deep silo somewhere. Nuclear submarines don't do all that much except for launching more nuclear weapons. The side that destroys more capabilities wins, and it's not going to be equal at all. So everyone is destroyed, but some are more destroyed than others and that's important.

Mutual Assured Destruction

- is beneficial for politicians. It fosters nationalism, raises defense budget spending and maximum death. Politicians have a high chance of survival due to their huge bunkers with supplies to last indefinitely.

- makes no sense whatsoever for all civilians. They pay for weapons to be used to destroy other civilians and escalate nuclear war. The strategy does not pay off for them either.

- makes no sense for the military. Mutual Assured Destruction does not win wars, strategically or tactically.

- does not happen in real life. The destruction of population centers and nuclear weapon facilities will not prevent nuclear retaliation or conventional retaliation, or reduce resistance. One side will emerge with the upper hand.

- is not assuring at all. Killing billions of people does not make the world safer.