This is what I call failure

And it is outrageous!

Zhong, Li, and Peng, “Analysis on the Status of Farmers, Agriculture and Countryside, and Development Strategies and Measures in Tibet Autonomous Region,” Journal of Mountain Science 1, no. 2 (2004): 175--182.

One of the worst research articles I have ever read. People doing research on Tibet should never be an armchair researcher. There are always needs to go into the field. However, this article is a typical armchair work. Everything the authors have is but statistical data. And merely from this they can pretend to make "scientific decisions" for people who really have to make a living in Tibet. These workers (I am very reluctant to call them "scientists") are irresponsible and do not know Tibet at all.

For example, they do not know what kind of agriculture the ecosystem in Tibet can support. They naively think that Tibetan chicken eggs and pork "ha[ve] a good market" in the competition with products from outside. And they think they can improve grassland productivity in Tibet just by thinking.

Anyone with ideas about how northern Tibet agriculture system works will not put the problem so lightly. And these researchers are supposed to know.

The cause of the problem seems to be the inadequate pressure to publish, as well as the ill-formed evaluation system which is based on the quantity of publications rather than quality. Of course the lame peer review system of the journal also helped.

This, I am afraid, is the state of China's Tibetan studies.

Wake up, you lazy bones. You have the privilege to study in Tibet, without so much fuss as I and my foreign colleagues had. You should really go down there and hear what the people and the land have to say!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Follow-up: biofuel debate

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Biofuels 'crime against humanity'

There is yet another voice to express the concerns behind the large scale adoption of biofuel crops, especially corn.  It has been pointed out by Mr Ziegler that plantation of biofuel crops has already led to decrease of available arable land, and the increase of food price.

This seems to be one thing that market cannot solve satisfyingly.  If we rely solely on price and demand to adjust the production of food and biofuel, it can be expected that farmers will always have incentives to plant corn to produce ethanol before the price of biofuel is the same as fossil fuel.  At the same time food price will also rise and leave more people in hunger.  But farmers will not turn to food production until food price (combined with subsidies, maybe) is high enough to provide revenue as good as fuel.  By then millions would have starved.

A threshold should be determined which states the maximum land and other resources allocated to biofuel production and should be enforced as a law.  If we cannot determine the threshold yet, I think it is another time to apply precaution principle and set a safe limit.  At the same time attempts to reduce fuel consumption and improve fuel efficiency should always be encouraged.

On the other hand, Food and Agriculture Organization in 2005 considered biofuel as a key to fight against hunger, as it reduces the import bill as well as brings investments and jobs.  But that argument seems to miss the resource part, ignoring food production while it examines hunger.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Bio-fuel and resilience

Today I attended a lecture given by Alan Bullin with the topic ``Biofuels in the Asia-Pacific'', which is just a general review of the situation of biofuel legislation, adoption and application in developed and developing world. But my question would be, how biofuel crops affect the resilience of farmers who adopted them out of economic interest?

I asked this because I thought of farmers in China. If they know this is going to make money you can bet they will begin to plant sugarcanes overnight. However, their relatively slow rate to access relevant information means they are very likely to encounter market failures and have losses. On the other hand, the question is also about long-term perspectives. If one day we suddenly do not need biofuel and fossil fuels anymore (invention of safe and cheap hydrogen/nuclear/solar/you-name-it energy technologies), will the farmers be able to quickly and easily turn to other income sources?

Dr. Bullin's answer to the questions, as I perceived, is that the market will determine what the farmers plant, the adoption of new energy will not be sudden, but a gradual process. The competition between various biofuel crops means the farmers will not be trapped in one crop and cannot get themselves out. They can always turn to another kind of biofuel. Of course, in the market, there is always risk.

I did not mention resilience or China's immature market in my question, which may change his answer a bit. On a second thought, the farmers may not always have alternatives due to climate and hydrology restrictions. I still would like to know whether farmers can turn their sugar cane field into, say, potato garden quickly enough. There have already been some studies on biofuels and resilience. Many of them expressed optimistic evaluation of this new technology concerning long-term gains and resilience, stating their positive role in the conservation of forest and reduction of carbon. However, I do think there is some negative issues that should be scrutinised carefully, for example, increased food price [1], changed land use and threat to natural area/food production [2], and Fairtrade concerns.

1. [Kill king corn](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/449637a). Nature 449, 637 doi: 10.1038/449637a (2007).
2. [Fuelling controversy -- can biofuels slow the speed of climate change?](http://www.panos.org.uk/PDF/reports/climatetoolkit1.pdf)

Preliminary Image Availability Survey

I am looking for satellite images over Anduo County, Tibet Autonomous Region, China.

• AVHRR： Search at EarthExplorer gives 11577 images in daylight condition, most focus on Indian subcontinent, but should be enough for me.  Dates are from 1980 to 2000s.
• Declassified Satellite Imagery-1: Low and medium images taken in 1960s, earliest 1961, from CORONA, ARGON and LANYARD satellites.  Most are medium to low resolution (15-30 m).  A large portion are cloudy.  $30 per frame.
  
• Declassified Satellite Imagery-2: Much higher camera resolution at 2 to 4 feet and 20 to 30 feet, from KH-7 and KH-9.  Taken in 1964-1965 and 1973.  Large swath, relatively lower cloud mask.  $30 per frame.
• EO-1: no images.
• Landsat 1-5 MSS: From 1972 to 1992.  Some scan line can be seen.  Less cloud.  $200 per frame.
• Landsat 4-5 TM: July 1982 to Present.  Good resolution, less cloud.  $425 per frame.
• Landsat 7 ETM+ International Ground Stations: No reviews available.  No uniform price.
• Landsat 7 ETM+: From 1999 to 2003, some are a bit cloudy.  Most are usable.  $475-600 per frame.
• Landsat 7 ETH+ SLC-off: More difficult to process and probably data loss. From 2003 to Present.  Can be downloaded with ordering.  $200-275 per frame. 
  Landsat 7 ETM+ scenes acquired from 5/31/03 - 7/14/03 and 9/3/03 - 9/17/03 are not available.
• SPOT: no image from USGS.
  

Powered by ScribeFire.

再看 Contact

Contact (1997)

首先表示对小p同学的感谢，感谢他从 Sheffield 把 DVD 带给我。

不太记得上次看这个片子是什么时候了，不过可以确定的是那时候我已经有了电脑，同时还没有从高中毕业，因为我看完电影以后不久就下载了 SETI@Home 的客户端，然后问我的一位同学有没有看这个片子。那位同学高中毕业后就很少联系，直到不久以前才在北京又见到。这样算来，我上次看 Contact 已经是至少6-7年前的事了。

对于这部电影，我想我这样一个工科生的语言并不能表达它是怎样带给我兴奋和长期的激励──关于科学和理想主义的激励。借用女主角的一句话：“Poetry....They should send a poet!”它提醒了我们，习惯于在家购物，网上冲浪，足不出户的现代人，还有一些东西是“out there”，有一些东西是“above us”的。我们所受的关于科学的教育告诉我们，不要好高鹜远，要在前人的基础上慢慢前进，但这部影片对我的作用，无异于在泥沼中缓慢前行时头顶的星空，它提醒我，在单调重复的科学研究背后，永远都有值得追求的美丽的“Truth”。

六七年过去了，我电脑里运行的分布式计算程序已经从 SETI@Home 变成了更加 practical，也许甚至更加 profitable 的 Folding@Home，我身上的理想主义色彩也早已淡去不少。但是重新看到 Ellie 这个角色，仍然让我兴奋。电影里她也面临着寻求经费的压力，同行的排挤，来自社会各界的怀疑和反对，她缺少的是其他电影里科学家都有的先进的设备，花不完的经费，还有聪明又性感的助手──当然她的助手是很聪明的──而她的理想主义，或者说她的信念，始终支撑着她。我们在老一辈科学家的故事里也常能看到这种理想主义的存在，而科学界的现实也许是排斥这种理想主义的，但我确实相信科学发现的背后，必须要有独立于 Practicality 和 Profitability 之外的动机。所以我喜欢 Ellie 这个角色，喜欢她代表的理想主义精神。

除了“信念”，影片的第二个主题，关于科学与宗教的关系，几乎每篇关于 Contact 的影评都会提到。我在这里不想深入。当看到电影里 Ellie 被问到是否相信上帝时，我也试图帮她回答。做为一个受科学教育长大的人，我不相信人造的宗教，也不相信做为人类创造物而反过来主宰宇宙命运的上帝──那只是一种人类沙文主义的 delusion。但我确实相信这个复杂的世界是被一些更高的原则所决定的，为了方便理解，我们可以称其为上帝，但它肯定不是我们所创造出来用来膜拜的偶像，住在九天之上俯瞰众生。相反，它可能只是一些可以从量子力学方向试图理解的“弦”，或者其他更渺小而基本的东西，组成了我们，组成了世界。但是，纯粹地从科学的角度理解这些原则可能也是危险的，至少从我们现在的认识，我们知道像“爱”“信仰”这样的东西不能被分析，不能被量化，所以我们在科学之外还需要 humanity 来帮助我们更好地理解自己。对于影片的这个主题，我认为与其说它是科学与宗教的共存与和解，不如说是科学与人性的共存与和解。可能唯有如此，我们才能认识自己和宇宙，成为宇宙大家庭中成熟的一员。

生活的压力让我们需要面对现实，对于科学家来说也是如此，但 Contact 在生动地刻画了科学家所面临的现实的同时，也提醒了我们还存在着一个广袤而美丽的宇宙，我们每一个普通人都是它的 small and trivial, yet unique and precious 的一分子，这足以引起我们的许多思考。也许有人认为这不过是畅销小说改编的好莱坞科幻片，但在我看来，它是一些真正有创造力的人对于人类的自省，是我们走向启蒙的一小步，也许这一小步会引领我们去接触智慧，接触未来。

Powered by ScribeFire.

Trying to choose a plotting package

During the process of writing my review, I meet the problem of plotting. For now I can copy figures from other people's work but I think there will be times when I need to draw my own plot.

There are a number of plotting software packages out there. Some are used by a lot while some have a relatively small user base. For one who want to get some help from the community, it is important to choose one that has a friendly syntax/interface and a larger user base. For now I am looking at [Asymptote](http://asymptote.sourceforge.net/) and [gnuplot](www.gnuplot.info). They are both powerful packages with extensive features, both support LaTeX well. Both have good documentation, which make the choice even harder to make.

In terms of language they use, Asymptote seems to be more formal, using structures more like those of C++ and Java. gnuplot seems to be more similar to (Bourne Again) shell scripts. If I have C++ programming experience it should be easier to pick Asymptote, but in fact I am more familiar with shell scripts and a little bit Fortran.

Taking a closer look, I think gnuplot is better at plotting data and non-parameter functions, as it is easy to do so in a sequential way, and it can read inputs from standard output (Asymptote seems cannot). But for more complicated graphic, the language used by Asymptote really boost it to a higher level.

The best way seems to be to learn both packages, as they have different advantages. But learning both at the same time seems to be very challenging. Without much drawing at hand, perhaps I'll start with gnuplot.

迁移工作基本完成

随着 blog entry 数量的增加，迁移也越发费时费力了……
不过 MT 的表现从目前来看很值得。

目前暂时开放匿名 comment，如果垃圾评论太多的话就要考虑只允许登录的人评论了。

What you know, you don't know, and you thought you know about resilience

Today I stumped on [this article](http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art13/main.html) on [Google Scholar](http://www.google.com/). I think it is a good one for people just beginning to study resilience (with all due respect; those people include me).

I haven't got time to read it slowly but from my skimming I think it is good in terms of clarifying some concepts and methodology issues. Return to it from time to time we may save ourselves considerable energy and do more sound research.

The article has no access restriction as long as you have Internet connection.

Computation, modelling and resilience

I just attended a (poorly organised) seminar on my university's computer cluster system. Presumably it can facilitate computation in my study, if any. It is easy to think about using it in some resilience models, I can add a lot of factors and agents in the model so the result would be ... so what?

Given enough time and opportunities to collect data I will be able to produce a reasonably good model for the dynamics of grasslands in Tibet. But to convince myself that this model can be actually used to describe the resilience difference between different management styles, I need to validate it. But how?

Usually we would put data from 200 years ago into the model, let the model simulate what happened in 100 years after that, then compare the output with what was actually there 100 years ago. If the comparison shows enough similarity between simulation and reality, suppose the key things determining the system's behaviour haven't changed, we can use the model to predict next 100 years from now on. But this is not always the case for resilience modelling. Itself tries to predict what would happen if key variables and system behaviour changes.

Therefore I think modelling should not be the end but a means in resilience study. Modelling helps us find key agents, variables, and behaviours in the system. God-willing, it would be easier to define domains of attraction and therefore resilience in the system.

For now, it seems plausible trying to build a model based on the findings up-to-date and see how management styles and environmental changes affect the system, thus identify the key variable.

I am considering using spatial or agent-based model to tackle this problem.

Firefox 的杀手级扩展── Zotero

嗯，我也标题党一回。Zotero 对我来说确实是杀手级的一个应用，不过对于没有这方面需求的人来说它也就是一个普通的扩展。那么具体是什么样的需求呢？大量文献信息的组织，文献的有序保存，以及按需调用。

不错，这正是许多文献管理软件，比如[Endnote](http://www.endnote.com)，[RefWorks](http://www.refworks.com)，以及 [jabref](http://jabref.sourceforge.net) 都具有的功能。但是回忆一下我们在使用这些软件时的行为：看到一篇文献，点击输出参考文献的链接，选择格式，然后等待软件启动，导入文件后我们再把焦点重新放回到浏览器继续浏览。在看文献的过程中我们还要找个东西记笔记，笔记如果不能很好地组织起来，又怕将来忘记，所以每篇笔记还得加上有关文献的链接。这样是无法建立一个有效率的个人[工作流](http://www.answers.com/topic/workflow)的。

Zotero 就不同，它把我们进行文献研究时的主要活动──搜集，整理，阅读和引用都很好地集成到了一个界面之内，就在浏览器的一角，唾手可得，而且没有 Endnote 那种复杂的下拉式菜单，一切都可以用快捷按钮和上下文菜单解决（[这里](http://www.zotero.org/images/quick_start/zoteropane_800x635.png)是界面的截图，版权归原所有人）。在 [Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com) 和 [Web of Knowledge](http://www.isiknowledge.com) 之类搜索引擎和 Elsevier、Springer 等出版商的网站上还可以利用自动发现功能一键添加文献数据。

大多数情况下，使用 Zotero 的流程可以归纳为：在互联网上发现文献──（利用 [SFX](http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/sfx.htm) 等文献服务发现全文）──利用导入功能得到文件信息和有关附件（pdf 等）──做笔记、tag、与相关文件链接──搜索文献──输出有关文献为其他软件格式──在 TeX 或字处理软件中引用。除最后一步外都不需要打开任何其他软件。

此外，Zotero 的相关文献功能允许我们把关键词和标题上看不出任何联系的文章放在一起，这在我们进行某些跨学科研究时非常方便──比如讨论航海技术和全球化的联系。Zotero 的其他特色功能还包括对 pdf 文件进行索引，通过搜索创建类似于 MacOS X 的智能文件夹，对多种文献来源和格式的支持，在文献快照上进行批注（仅限于文本和 html 文件），以及文献时间线的创建（对于写 review 非常有用）。在 [Zotero 官方网站](http://www.zotero.org)上有对这些功能的[详细介绍和教程](http://www.zotero.org/documentation/)。

据说将来 Zotero 也会引入类似 RefWorks 的线上文献库功能，但是现在使用本地 sqlite 数据库的好处是可以方便地脱机使用，也可以用备份和版本控制工具管理。我倒是希望 Zotero 将来能有这些功能：

- 单独搜索笔记和批注
- 界面上对搜索词高亮
- 记录文献库中项目的访问时间，并可用它作为条件搜索最近看过的文献
- 增加对更多文献数据库的自动发现功能，或者允许用户自己添加自动发现网站和信息提取语法（更新：Zotero 的[开发网站](http://dev.zotero.org/scaffold/)上提供了扩展的下载，用于“高级”用户自行添加 site translator）

总地说来 Zotero 是我目前遇到的用得最顺手舒心的文献管理和笔记软件，向任何看到这篇 blog，平时上网不仅仅是看 YouTube 的人推荐。

\[再更新：如果你是大学内的用户，可以把默认的 OpenURL 解析器（Resolver）改成自己的 sfx 或者其他类似服务的解析器。各学校的解析器 url 可能不太一样，但你自己用 sfx 搜索一次以后就应该知道是怎么构成的了，在设置中填上，用 Locate/定位功能实验一下即可。\]

Defining and studying complexity in ecosystems

There are some new projects relating to complexity studies in some UK Universities (e.g. [University of Bristol](http://bccs.bris.ac.uk/), [University of Warwick](http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/comcom/)). Although I doubt how many enrolled in these programs would know what are complexities in complex systems (in contrast to "simple" systems such as computers). At least I don't understand.

One interesting definition of complexity is the length of the shortest description of a series of the system's regularities. This definition can only be used in comparisons because it is not possible to cover all classes of regularities in a system. For ecosystems there may be a defined set of regularities that can be used to describe the complexity of the system.

For the moment we cannot tell how complexity of a system is linked to its unpredictability and surprises. We only know that a complex system may have these features: emergence, surprises, chaos, and paradoxum. Some tools are being developed to get a grasp of complex systems, but the success is still limited. These tools may be only suitable for a limited range of applications.

Can we at last deal with complexity in a scientific way? Possibly we can deal with it with more certainty as science develops. But a more likely scenario is that we incorporate uncertainty and complexity into the existing science system, just like what quantum mechanics did. Ecology and sociology recognising complexity may have a complete shift in the coming decades.

Annual presentation

I received the notice that I am going to do the presentation today when I was in China, busy packing my luggage to go back to England. So it was quite a fuss. Luckily I was preparing a presentation knowing that I will need it some time.

The most difficult thing is to introduce the concept of resilience to an audience of human geography background. Sometimes I wonder why I do such a ``biological'' project at school of Geography. However, things turned not so bad. Resilience has become a more widely accepted metaphor and method nowadays.

The slide I made lack a bit of consistency I am afraid. It may left the audience trying to grab the topic. It would be better if there are some links between the different parts.

Next week there will be another group of PhD students doing presentation, I think I'd better learn from them about how to make more understandable presentations....

Bourne 走出谍影

原以为我9月底回到小岛后，没有机会再看已经上映一个多月的 Bourne Ultimatum，得等 DVD 了。没想到影院里还有场次，更没想到入场之前还需要排队。

Bourne 系列拍到现在，再翻译成《谍影重重》似乎已经不太恰当了。在第一集里观众可能和 Bourne 一样一头雾水，需要不断寻找真相，而第三集里对于观众来说一切他们关心的真相似乎都已大白，剩下的只是看 Bourne 如何找回自我。在这种条件下，如何保持影片的悬疑色彩就成为对导演的一大挑战。让观众增强对 Bourne 的代入感是最容易想到的一种办法，但是一旦观众不能入戏，就容易觉得不知所云。Paul Greengrass 作为一个以纪录片风格著称的导演，自然也更习惯于用第三人称的视角来拍戏。这一集里他很聪明地没有强求观众体会 Bourne 所感受到的重重迷雾，而更多地把注意力集中在双方的斗智戏上，于是保留了 Bourne 系列中那种旧式间谍影片的剧情张力。

但是这部戏毕竟不是 The Good Shepherd 这样的纯剧情片。大概是为了和暑期档其他的动作影片抗衡，影片的动作场面比上一集增加了不少，而且打戏兼顾了 Identity 中令人眼花缭乱的动作设计和 Supremacy 中拳拳到肉的拍摄风格，可谓三部中最佳的一作。不过追车戏感觉不如 Supremacy 中精彩，主要可能是因为时间太短，而且混乱的街道让 Paul 的拍摄更显混乱。但总的来说，动作戏比上一集精彩许多。

表演方面，女演员比男演员出彩，Julia Stiles 和 Joan Allen 分别饰演 Nicki 和 Pamela，表现不错。Matt Damon 又要演动作戏，又要诠释失忆杀手，基本都比较到位，也够难为他了，不过总觉得他在后半段的表演还是力有不逮。如果有第四部的话，可以想见表演的参照物会越来越少，要演好越来越难，Matt 及早宣布收手应该是个正确的抉择。

当大家都在拿 Bourne 跟 Bond 做比较时，可以说前者也已经成为了一个文化符号，片尾字幕最后的画面更增强了这种感觉。Ultimatum 可以说是这个系列的一个巅峰，但是原作者 Robert Ludlum 提供的这个失忆杀手的概念在这一作也应该是走到了一个尽头，再拍第四第五集的话就只能是榨取剩余价值了。或许 Jason Bourne 会成为像 James Bond 那样长盛不衰的银幕形象，但到目前为止的这个 Bourne 才是最独一无二，最值得记住的。

p.s. 从影片前的片花得知 Hitman: Codename 47 系列也被改编成电影了，既然女主角不好看，我的希望就是它能拍出游戏的深度，不要又是一个狂洒狗血和子弹的感官刺激片。