爱，晴夜的星列，追逐在晚霞和晨曦之间；
爱，雨夜的水珠，跳跃在梦醒之界；
爱，明夜的月娘，穿梭在回忆和思念缘边；
爱，凉夜的清风，抚送着大自然的音节；
爱，静夜的气息，围绕着独处的内心和辽阔的天际。
爱夜，不舍得入眠。
爱，雨夜的水珠，跳跃在梦醒之界；
爱，明夜的月娘，穿梭在回忆和思念缘边；
爱，凉夜的清风，抚送着大自然的音节；
爱，静夜的气息，围绕着独处的内心和辽阔的天际。
爱夜，不舍得入眠。
Aug 27, 2010
Aug 25, 2010
合逻辑一定对吗？
一天从停车场出来，有辆车子从对面的小路口插进来，立刻紧急刹车，然后猛按喇叭，对方也刹住了，并且回按几声喇叭。回家的路上，一直在骂。
知道自己为什么生气，因为对方不守规则，因为自己很有道理，然而对方也显然觉得他很有道理，回敬了几声喇叭。纳闷了一阵后，才意识到他的喇叭回敬，是在抗议。是的，如果人生都是以是非为标准，只要有道理就可以坚持，那真的会很可惜。
记得有律师朋友说过：“合逻辑的事不一定是对的。”
合逻辑不一定是对的，在生活上代表什么意思？
其实只是回想一下，上次自己与另一半吵架的情况，或看到别的夫妇吵架的模样，就会很清楚了。你们吵架是不是因为有道理呢？
一个样样都讲道理，一切都分黑白分明，没弄到水落石出决不罢休的家庭，不一定是幸福的家庭。
你可以对一个抽烟的小孩说一整个晚上的道理，这些道理他多半已经听过很多遍了，而且绝对是很有道理的道理，但他还是会继续抽烟。他不是不明白抽烟对身体有害，有害的事为什么还要做呢？因为人不是逻辑的产物。
人需要被谅解，觉得被接受，受到尊重，觉得有价值。而逻辑，或是把道理讲清楚，很少能提供这些不可或缺的因素。
多少婚姻因为争辩谁对谁错而破裂，多少公司因为“严格要求”而众叛亲离，业务不振。
人的需求并不多，像健康，住家，衣服，车子，还有受到赏识，但不知什么缘故，最后这项却很难得到。
将来我们会发现自己的成就感，常来自于你对他人的关怀与肯定，别人也可能因此而愿意互相配合。
知道自己为什么生气，因为对方不守规则，因为自己很有道理，然而对方也显然觉得他很有道理，回敬了几声喇叭。纳闷了一阵后，才意识到他的喇叭回敬，是在抗议。是的，如果人生都是以是非为标准，只要有道理就可以坚持，那真的会很可惜。
记得有律师朋友说过：“合逻辑的事不一定是对的。”
合逻辑不一定是对的，在生活上代表什么意思？
其实只是回想一下，上次自己与另一半吵架的情况，或看到别的夫妇吵架的模样，就会很清楚了。你们吵架是不是因为有道理呢？
一个样样都讲道理，一切都分黑白分明，没弄到水落石出决不罢休的家庭，不一定是幸福的家庭。
你可以对一个抽烟的小孩说一整个晚上的道理，这些道理他多半已经听过很多遍了，而且绝对是很有道理的道理，但他还是会继续抽烟。他不是不明白抽烟对身体有害，有害的事为什么还要做呢？因为人不是逻辑的产物。
人需要被谅解，觉得被接受，受到尊重，觉得有价值。而逻辑，或是把道理讲清楚，很少能提供这些不可或缺的因素。
多少婚姻因为争辩谁对谁错而破裂，多少公司因为“严格要求”而众叛亲离，业务不振。
人的需求并不多，像健康，住家，衣服，车子，还有受到赏识，但不知什么缘故，最后这项却很难得到。
将来我们会发现自己的成就感，常来自于你对他人的关怀与肯定，别人也可能因此而愿意互相配合。
Aug 24, 2010
胸口永远的痛
深夜里，胸口绞痛，痛得醒来。不是心脏病发，是很沉重的心痛。
在国营的研究所里，林博士是第二把手，一直很不服第一把手陈博士，表面上可以掩饰得很支持陈博士的管理和策略，暗地里却不停有些捣乱的小动作。在研究所里工作过一段时间，和林博士有过直接或间接接触过的人都看得出来。
研究所是由三个大部门组成，每大部门都有它专长的工艺技术。这三大技术可以简单的说是研究所整体专长的前、中、后段工艺，而以前段工艺作为核心，中、后段工艺属于辅助或附加技术。林博士是后段工艺技术出身的，也曾任过其部门经理，所以决策上往往会偏重后段工艺，甚至有时在不合情理的情况下把后段工艺硬生生的塞进一项工程里。有些工程往往因为这样而最终被搞砸了，然而此乃“高层决策”，我等鄙贱人员看在眼里，也不能说什么，说了也白说，还自找麻烦。
当然，林博士能在其位上大玩这样的游戏，没有一支强大的党羽，想必也玩不起。就不提他如何偏袒，保护，和维护那些党羽的利益，这些都还是其次，令人痛心疾首的是他维护自身和党羽的利益，已经到了没有理性的程度。
话说有个部长级的招商团，成功的游说了日本数一数二的某集团，跟咱这唯一的国营研究所合作研究项目。开始洽谈的是一个只有八万五美金，为期六个月的小项目，研究课题定下来只涉及前段工艺。
说实话，人家是国际上知名的庞大集团，要和咱这种小国研究所合作，用小项目来试试咱的研发能力，也是合情合理的。人家肯把他们的技术对咱公开，以方便项目的开发和改进，况且他们是付费让咱作研究，要求拥有研究结果的知识产权，也是很自然和合情合理的。然而没有想到这些合情合理的事，也可以被拿来大做文章，说成是不平等，是剥削。
研发合约洽谈到最后阶段，需要林博士签名时，他就是不肯签，然后就挑一些无关痛痒的事项，要我们继续跟进洽谈。我们都了解这个项目的重要性，因为它是未来重大项目的前奏，所以就尽量去满足双方任何合约上的要求。然而，博士却不这样认为，一个无关痛痒的事项经过协商谈妥后，他又会再提出另一个无关痛痒的事项要我们去摆平。这样的事情来来回回了好多次，有些事项的不平等要求，我们都觉得对方很配合我们的工作，作出了很大的让步妥协。
经过一年半的洽谈，有问题的事项都被一一摆平了，到了最后关头，林博士已经挑到再也找不到任何借口时，他竟然毫无理性的说：“我不会签，因为我不想签，打从开始我就不想签。”被我们追问缘由以便向客户解释时，他才说是因为课题只涉及前段工艺，不能反映研究所的整体能力。此话一出，个中端倪，不言而喻。
我们向客户传达这消息时，其反映让我们很尴尬。他们说还好没有签成，要是签成的话还不知道我们以后会有什么出尔反尔，出乎意料的举动。我觉得这已经很客气的了，但他们说了，以后再也不想跟任何新加坡公司谈合作事宜。
这事之后，时常在半夜里胸口绞痛惊醒，想到国家的唯一研究所，被这样的博士在糟蹋；纳税人的钱，就这样的被浪费了，寒气从心里寒出来，难以舒展。
这是多年前沉痛，偶尔想起仍然隐隐作痛。
在国营的研究所里，林博士是第二把手，一直很不服第一把手陈博士，表面上可以掩饰得很支持陈博士的管理和策略，暗地里却不停有些捣乱的小动作。在研究所里工作过一段时间，和林博士有过直接或间接接触过的人都看得出来。
研究所是由三个大部门组成，每大部门都有它专长的工艺技术。这三大技术可以简单的说是研究所整体专长的前、中、后段工艺，而以前段工艺作为核心，中、后段工艺属于辅助或附加技术。林博士是后段工艺技术出身的，也曾任过其部门经理，所以决策上往往会偏重后段工艺，甚至有时在不合情理的情况下把后段工艺硬生生的塞进一项工程里。有些工程往往因为这样而最终被搞砸了，然而此乃“高层决策”，我等鄙贱人员看在眼里，也不能说什么，说了也白说，还自找麻烦。
当然，林博士能在其位上大玩这样的游戏，没有一支强大的党羽，想必也玩不起。就不提他如何偏袒，保护，和维护那些党羽的利益，这些都还是其次，令人痛心疾首的是他维护自身和党羽的利益，已经到了没有理性的程度。
话说有个部长级的招商团，成功的游说了日本数一数二的某集团，跟咱这唯一的国营研究所合作研究项目。开始洽谈的是一个只有八万五美金，为期六个月的小项目，研究课题定下来只涉及前段工艺。
说实话，人家是国际上知名的庞大集团，要和咱这种小国研究所合作，用小项目来试试咱的研发能力，也是合情合理的。人家肯把他们的技术对咱公开，以方便项目的开发和改进，况且他们是付费让咱作研究，要求拥有研究结果的知识产权，也是很自然和合情合理的。然而没有想到这些合情合理的事，也可以被拿来大做文章，说成是不平等，是剥削。
研发合约洽谈到最后阶段，需要林博士签名时，他就是不肯签，然后就挑一些无关痛痒的事项，要我们继续跟进洽谈。我们都了解这个项目的重要性，因为它是未来重大项目的前奏，所以就尽量去满足双方任何合约上的要求。然而，博士却不这样认为，一个无关痛痒的事项经过协商谈妥后，他又会再提出另一个无关痛痒的事项要我们去摆平。这样的事情来来回回了好多次，有些事项的不平等要求，我们都觉得对方很配合我们的工作，作出了很大的让步妥协。
经过一年半的洽谈，有问题的事项都被一一摆平了，到了最后关头，林博士已经挑到再也找不到任何借口时，他竟然毫无理性的说：“我不会签，因为我不想签，打从开始我就不想签。”被我们追问缘由以便向客户解释时，他才说是因为课题只涉及前段工艺，不能反映研究所的整体能力。此话一出，个中端倪，不言而喻。
我们向客户传达这消息时，其反映让我们很尴尬。他们说还好没有签成，要是签成的话还不知道我们以后会有什么出尔反尔，出乎意料的举动。我觉得这已经很客气的了，但他们说了，以后再也不想跟任何新加坡公司谈合作事宜。
这事之后，时常在半夜里胸口绞痛惊醒，想到国家的唯一研究所，被这样的博士在糟蹋；纳税人的钱，就这样的被浪费了，寒气从心里寒出来，难以舒展。
这是多年前沉痛，偶尔想起仍然隐隐作痛。
Aug 8, 2010
Law -- As it should be
One evening after attending the theatre, two cowboys were walking down the avenue when they observed a rather well-dressed and attractive lady just ahead of them. One of them turned to the other and remarked, "I'd give $50 to spend the night with that woman." To their surprise, the young lady overheard the remark and, turning around, said, "I'll take you up on that." She had a neat appearance and a pleasant voice so after bidding his companion adieu, the man accompanied the lady to her apartment where they immediately went to bed.
The following morning he presented her with $25 as he prepared to go. She demanded the rest of the money, stating, "If you don't give me the rest of the $50, I'll sue you for it." He laughed, "I'd like to see you get it on these grounds." The next day he was surprised when he received a summons ordering his appearance in court. The defendant's lawyer said, "She can't possibly get a judgment against you on such grounds, but it will be interesting to see how her case will be presented after the usual preliminaries." The lady's lawyer addressed the court as follows:
"Your Honor, my client, this lady, is the owner of a piece of property, a colorful garden spot with ideal temperatures, conditions for social activity surrounded by a profuse growth of shrubbery, which property she agreed to rent to the defendant for a specified length of time for the sum of $50. The defendant took possession of the property, used it extensively for the purpose for which it was rented, but on vacating the premises he paid her only $25, one half of the amount agreed upon. The rent was not expensive, but it was restricted property in a private zone, and we ask judgment to be granted against the defendant to assure payment of the balance."
The defendant's lawyer was impressed and amused at the way his opponent had prepared and presented the case. His defense, therefore, was somewhat altered from the way he had originally planned to present it.
"Your Honor," he said, "my client agrees that the young lady had a fine piece of property, that he did rent the property for a time, and a degree of pleasure was received from the transaction; however, my client found a well on the property around which he placed his own stones, sunk a shaft, erected a pump, and initiated pumping operations personally performed by him, which produced results mutually beneficial. We claim these improvements to the property and the mutual benefit resulting adequately compensate for the rental of said property. We will, therefore, ask the judgment not be granted."
Then the young lady's lawyer came back:
"Your Honor, my client agrees that the defendant did find a well on her property, that he did make improvements, and did produce favorable results such as my opponent describes; however, had the defendant not known the well existed, he would never have rented the property. Also, upon vacating the premises the defendant removed his stones, pulled out the shaft, and took his pump with him. In doing so, he not only dragged his equipment through the shrubbery, but also left the hole much larger than it was prior to his occupancy, requiring extensive mop up operations and making it easily accessible to little children. We therefore ask judgment be granted."
AND SHE WON THE CASE!
The following morning he presented her with $25 as he prepared to go. She demanded the rest of the money, stating, "If you don't give me the rest of the $50, I'll sue you for it." He laughed, "I'd like to see you get it on these grounds." The next day he was surprised when he received a summons ordering his appearance in court. The defendant's lawyer said, "She can't possibly get a judgment against you on such grounds, but it will be interesting to see how her case will be presented after the usual preliminaries." The lady's lawyer addressed the court as follows:
"Your Honor, my client, this lady, is the owner of a piece of property, a colorful garden spot with ideal temperatures, conditions for social activity surrounded by a profuse growth of shrubbery, which property she agreed to rent to the defendant for a specified length of time for the sum of $50. The defendant took possession of the property, used it extensively for the purpose for which it was rented, but on vacating the premises he paid her only $25, one half of the amount agreed upon. The rent was not expensive, but it was restricted property in a private zone, and we ask judgment to be granted against the defendant to assure payment of the balance."
The defendant's lawyer was impressed and amused at the way his opponent had prepared and presented the case. His defense, therefore, was somewhat altered from the way he had originally planned to present it.
"Your Honor," he said, "my client agrees that the young lady had a fine piece of property, that he did rent the property for a time, and a degree of pleasure was received from the transaction; however, my client found a well on the property around which he placed his own stones, sunk a shaft, erected a pump, and initiated pumping operations personally performed by him, which produced results mutually beneficial. We claim these improvements to the property and the mutual benefit resulting adequately compensate for the rental of said property. We will, therefore, ask the judgment not be granted."
Then the young lady's lawyer came back:
"Your Honor, my client agrees that the defendant did find a well on her property, that he did make improvements, and did produce favorable results such as my opponent describes; however, had the defendant not known the well existed, he would never have rented the property. Also, upon vacating the premises the defendant removed his stones, pulled out the shaft, and took his pump with him. In doing so, he not only dragged his equipment through the shrubbery, but also left the hole much larger than it was prior to his occupancy, requiring extensive mop up operations and making it easily accessible to little children. We therefore ask judgment be granted."
AND SHE WON THE CASE!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)