太疲劳，希望有充足优质的睡眠。一旦第二天可以不上班不学习，做的并不是早点休息。呆坐电脑前上网到凌晨；在夜店喝酒到头晕眼花；在KTV声嘶力竭到天亮。你真的在乎自己的身体吗？

     太孤寂，希望可以交到更多的朋友。每到节假日，只是转发别人转发来的短信，已经懒得打个电话？更别说见面了。你知道他们只是一瞥，就像你收到他们转发来的短信时一样；你知道这只能把你和他们拉得更远，你还是不断重复地为网络运营商增收。你真的在乎你的朋友吗？

     太空虚，希望可以静下心读书。你有很多很多时间，你只是用它们来看电视；你也有很多很多借口，你只是用它们来对自己说。你真的在乎自己脑子里想什么吗？

     如果你不在乎自己的身体，不在乎自己的朋友，不在乎自己在想什么

The Interphone study
Mobile madness 移动的癫狂
Sep 25th 2008
From The Economist print edition
The threat to human health from mobile phones, if any, is much disputed. A shame, then, that a massive multinational study on the question has ended in chaos

对移动电话是否危害人体健康这一问题争论得面红耳赤之后，大规模跨国研究在喧嚣中仓促落幕，这真是科学的耻辱。

Science Photo Library

“LONG-TERM mobile-phone use increases risk of benign tumours!” “Clean bill of health for the mobile!” “Mobile phone-cancer link not proven!” Those who have followed the saga of whether or not mobile phones are damaging people’s brains are used to contradictory headlines. A decade of coverage has left readers and viewers more confused than enlightened, with news reports alternating between alarming claims and soothing reassurances. Yet even by the standards of modern news, it is unusual to see such contradictory headlines about the same piece of research. Which is why a study, called Interphone, provides a cautionary tale.

“长期使用移动电话增加患癌症的风险！”“要求手机贴上健康证明！”“使用时机与患癌症之间的关系没有得到科学证实！”这些话被分别用于相互对立的报道中，延续了为时已久的争论。十余年的报道一会儿让人警惕手机的危害，一会儿又说大可放心，不仅没有令读者搞明白，反而对这一问题更加迷惑。甚至以现代新闻报道的标准来看，对于同一项研究却产生如此水火不容的对立报道也是不同寻常的。名为Interphone的这项研究令人深思。

Interphone began in 2000, ended in 2006, cost $30m and involved around 50 scientists working in 13 countries on 14,000 people. It has, however, still to come to a settled conclusion. A draft of its supposed findings was circulated in June, and Elisabeth Cardis of the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, who led it, thought until recently that a final paper would be submitted this month. Now, though, it looks as if that will not even happen this year.

Interphone的研究开始于2000年，结束于2006年。研究花费3000万美元，50名科学家对13个国家的14000名参与者进行了相关研究。然而研究结果依然不明朗。巴塞罗那环境流行病学研究中心的Elisabeth Cardis 在六月透露了一份初步研究结果并于近期认为最终研究结论将于本月递交。然而目前看来，年内都难以兑现。

The contradictory headlines are the result of national research teams releasing single-country reports, despite the fact that these inevitably involve smaller samples. The results from nine of the 13 singlecountry studies have been made available in this way, and the consequence is a farrago of misinformation. Many of the national reports suggest, for example, that ever having been a regular mobile-phone user offers statistically significant protection against some brain tumours. This finding is so counter-intuitive that it has led most of the people involved to acknowledge serious flaws in the study’s design.

相互矛盾的报道源于国家研究小组公布的单一国家的研究报告，不可避免，这些报告所基于的样本很少。13个国家中的9个以这种形式被公布，结果造成了信息的混乱。例如，很多国家的报告显示曾有普通手机用户对某些脑部癌症有明显的抑制作用。这一与直觉相反的发现导致很多人对这项研究设计上的严重缺陷有了认识。

Please press “recall”  请按“回忆”键
One problem was what statisticians call selection bias. Interphone began by gathering a group of people who had had the cancers of interest (glioma, meningioma, acoustic neurinoma and parotid gland tumour) and questioning them about their past use of mobile phones. The researchers then approached a number of healthy people in order to compare them with the cancer patients, and find out if there was a systematic difference in mobile-phone use between the two groups. Some of those approached agreed, and some declined. Of those who agreed to take part, 59% were regular mobile-phone users as defined Science Photo Library by the study’s protocol. Later on, those who had declined were recontacted and asked about their mobile use. Among this group, only 34% were regular users. That meant those in the control group were more likely than average to be regular users, and therefore were not representative of the population at large.

一个问题被统计学家称作选择偏见。Interphone的研究始自汇聚一组曾经有过某种特定癌症（神经胶质瘤，脑(脊)膜瘤，听觉神经炎和腮腺肿瘤）并问他们一些有关曾经使用手机的经历。随后研究者对一些健康人进行研究于癌症患者进行比对，以图找出两组人群在手机的使用上是否存在系统性的差异。这些人中有人同意参与实验，有些则婉拒。同意参与的人中，59%是常规手机用户按照研究的协议被列入科学图库。随后，那些婉拒的人又被进行了联系并被问及使用手机的情况。在这一组中，只有34%是常规用户。这意味着参与实验的人群比普通人使用手机更频繁，因此他们并不具有代表性。

Moreover, the definition of “regular mobile-phone use” was itself questionable. Anyone who had used a phone just once a week for at least six months qualified. That is a pretty low rate of usage. If phones really do cause cancer, but only at high exposure, employing such a generous definition of regular use means that the effect might be diluted into undetectability.

此外，“常规的手机使用”这个定义本身就有问题。每周使用手机一次持续至少半年的人才符合条件。这是一个相当低的使用频率。如果手机真的引发癌症，但只有在高频率使用才能致病。应用这样一个定义作为常规使用意味着这种影响被冲淡到无可检测的地步。

Another potentially serious flaw is that participants asked in 2001-02 about their mobile use a decade earlier will have been using analogue, not digital, handsets. That would lead to a different pattern of exposure and therefore of potential risk.

另一个潜在的严重问题是参与者在2001年至2002年被问及他们十年前使用移动模拟设备的情况，而不是数字设备。研究内容变为对在另一个完全不同的辐射模式下导致不同潜在危险的情况进行分析。

How the shift from analogue to digital phones might have changed things is anybody’s guess. But both the selection bias and regular-phone-use definition might be expected to mask any adverse effect of phones. The most serious flaw in the study, however, is generally reckoned to be recall bias, which would tend to work in the opposite direction, by suggesting problems with phones that do not, in fact, exist.

到底从模拟电话到数字电话的转变对实验结果产生了怎样的影响每个人心里都没有底。但是选择偏见和常规手机使用的定义可能会掩盖了手机的众多影响。然而，普遍认为研究中最严重的缺陷是回忆偏见，这会有可能将研究引到反向，宣称手机不会造成伤害，而实际上这种伤害确实存在。

Recall bias happened because the study was retrospective rather than prospective. In other words it looked at what people had done in the past rather than following their behaviour into the future. In practice, that meant asking them about past behaviour, and relying on the accuracy of their memories.

回忆偏见的发生由于这项研究是回顾性的而不是前瞻性的。换句话说，它研究的是人们过去的使用习惯而不是追踪他们现在的使用对将来产生何种影响。这实际上意味着询问他们过去的行为并依赖于他们记忆的准确性。

Even a healthy person would probably have difficulty recalling exactly how often he used his mobile phone a decade ago, and which ear he routinely held it to. Someone subsequently diagnosed with a brain tumour might easily be biased, consciously or unconsciously, to exaggerate the former and misstate the latter. And that would be enough to account for the fact that several of the single-country studies found that ten years’ mobile use was associated with an increased risk of brain tumours on the side of the head that people said was exposed to their handsets. It would also—more significantly—account for the studies’ weird suggestion that the same amount of use stops tumours developing on the other side of the head.

即使一个健康的人也可能很难准确地回忆起十年前使用手机的频率和用哪只耳朵接听电话。随后某人被诊断患有脑部肿瘤的例子很容易被有意无意地误读，夸大前面使用的影响和误报后面的病症。这足以解释那么多单个国家的研究表明十年的手机使用增加了听话一侧脑部暴露在辐射下而患癌症的几率。也更能解释那些认为同样频率的使用阻止了另一侧脑部肿瘤恶化的奇怪结论。

The scientists involved in Interphone are, it must be said, well aware of these biases, and efforts to work out their effects and adjust for them were always part of the plan. In May Dr Cardis and her colleagues published a validation study in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology. This compared the recollections of about 500 Interphone subjects with their actual mobile use according to the records of the network operators. The researchers found a high level of recall errors. Participants underestimated the number of calls they had made by an average of about 20%, and overestimated call
duration by 40%. Ominously for the statisticians, the recall errors of those with tumours increased with time.

必须说明的是，参与Interphone项目的科学家非常清楚这些偏见的存在，努力避免这些偏见而进行调整一直是计划的一部分。Cardis博士和她的同事五月份在放射科学与环境流行病学杂志上发表了一份验证性研究的报告。这项研究将500份试验者提供的材料与网络操作记录进行了比对。研究者发现了大量的记忆错误。参与者把自己的电话使用频率平均低估了20%，将通话时长平均低估了40%。对统计学家更不利的是，时间越久记忆错误越多。

Suitable (and legitimate) statistical massaging of all the data may be able to offset these biases in a way that could not so easily be done for the smaller data sets from individual countries. Nevertheless Dr Cardis admits the delays in releasing the report have been due to “the difficulty of interpreting the findings due to potential biases” and to the “conducting of additional analyses to try and disentangle the potential impacts of selection and recall errors on the risk estimates”.

合适的（并合理的）统计纠偏可以在整体上校正这些偏见，但对于来自不同国家的子数据集合就不是一件容易的事了。不过Cardis博士承认推迟发布研究报告源于“解释这些潜在偏见导致的结果相当困难”和“试图消除选择偏见和记忆错误引起的潜在影响而实施的额外风险评估分析”。

The Interphone researchers are split into three camps. One believes any increased incidence of tumours shown in the study is purely the result of the biases. Another thinks it really has found increased risks of certain tumours and wants to call for precautionary measures. A third group is just keeping quiet. One person who knows many of the scientists, but prefers not to be named, describes the relations between members of the three groups as “strained”—harsh language in the world of scientific research.

Interphone项目的研究人员分为三个阵营。其中一方认为研究中显现的癌症增加的情况完全出于偏见的影响。而另一方认为确实找到了癌症增加的证据并想要发布预警措施。第三方只想保持沉默。一个认识其中很多科学家的匿名者描述使用“焦灼”来形容这三方的关系-这在科学界是个很刺耳的词汇了。

Regardless of what eventually gets published, some people have already decided the findings warrant action. Ronald Herberman, the director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, made headlines in July with a memo to 3,000 members of his staff urging them to limit their use of mobile phones, to refrain from keeping their handsets near their bodies at night and to avoid using them when reception is weak as a phone will then boost the strength of its signal in order that the network can hear it. He based his warnings on “early unpublished data”, and is believed to have been referring to Interphone.

不管最终发布什么样的报告，一些人已经决定根据研究结果付诸行动。7月份匹兹堡大学癌症研究所的主任Ronald Herberman在撰文给自己3000名下属的备忘录中敦促他们限制使用手机，不要在睡觉时把手机放在身旁，不要在信号不好时使用手机，因为手机会加大功率搜索网络。他的警告基于“早前未被发布的数据”，也被认为和Interphone有过沟通。

Whatever the outcome, though, at least one lesson has been learnt. Follow-up studies now in the planning stage are expected to use prospective as well as retrospective data. In other words they will pick people at random and see what happens to them. That method takes longer to come to a conclusion—but it is more likely to be one you can trust.

无论什么样的结果出来，至少已经学到了一个教训。希望目前筹备中的跟踪调查采用前瞻性的而不是回顾性的数据。换句话说，他们会随机挑选试验者并观察有什么发生。这种方法花费更长的时间才能得出结论，确是更令人信服的方法。

     This week, the Economist focusses on the mooncake and the specific social phenomenon in China. We can have a look at what are they thinking about us and our culture. Although it's difficult for them to talk issues about China without prejudice, we can still get some points from their attempt to understand China. From this article, you can find that they did do a lot of work studying our country and our people.

China’s mid-autumn festival 中国的中秋节
More than they can chew 吃到的不仅仅是月饼
Sep 18th 2008 | BEIJING
From The Economist print edition
One derivatives market still thrives  衍生市场依然兴旺

     FOR the first time, China’s citizens enjoyed an official day off on September 14th to celebrate one of their best-loved traditions, the mid-autumn festival. As usual the occasion was marked by gifts of stodgy pastries known as mooncakes, often containing a solid yolk representing that day’s full moon. But mooncakes have come to mean much more.

     中国公民在九月十四日首次享受了官方假日来庆祝他们的传统节日——中秋节。这个当口依旧以称作“月饼”的油皮糕点为标志，月饼里面常包含一个蛋黄来代表当天的满月。但是月饼所代表的含义越来越多了。
     Gift-giving in China is often about showing off status and storing up goodwill that might one day produce favours. With the rapid growth of an urban middle class, mooncakes have become a form of currency, not so much to be eaten (some Chinese confess to disliking them) as to be given with careful thought as to the cost of their ingredients and the lavishness of their packaging. This is especially true if the recipient is a potential favour-giver. The higher a person’s status, the more mooncakes he is likely to receive and the more exotic they will be. So rich are the sweet and salty delicacies that few would eat their way through an entire gift pack on their own. Unwanted packages are often discreetly handed on to others, creating a cascade of calories and goodwill.

     送礼在中国常常有炫耀地位和积蓄善意以防将来有事相求。随着城市中产阶级的迅速崛起，月饼凭其成本和奢华的包装来表达诚意，因此成了一种通货而不是用来食用（有些中国人承认不喜欢吃月饼）。这种现象对于那些有可能为别人提供“便利”的收礼者尤其准确。一个人越有地位，他收到的月饼就越多也越特别。有钱人吃惯了山珍海味，很少有人自己消化这么多月饼。因此这些过度包装的礼盒就一个接一个地传下去，形成了一条卡路里和祝福的瀑布。
     In recent years officials have repeatedly called on manufacturers to use less elaborate packaging in order to cut down on waste and make mooncakes more affordable. A survey cited by China’s official news agency, Xinhua, said 78.8% of those polled disapproved of the fancy packaging (sometimes a bottle of wine or spirits is wrapped up with the cakes), and 69.3% said it infringed their rights because it made mooncakes too expensive. But mooncake-makers, knowing where the profits are, have paid little heed. Fortunately there is hope for consumers in the form of a market in mooncake derivatives. Mooncake coupons are often given out by companies to employees, to exchange for the real thing. Or they can sell them to others at a discount to the mooncakes’ market price. The trading season is short and frenetic: the coupons are nearly worthless once the holiday is over. Like Christmas cake, mooncakes are rarely consumed out of season.

     近些年来官方多次要求制造商简化月饼包装以减少浪费并降低月饼价格。一条引自中国官方媒体新华社的调查显示，78.8%的受访者反对过度包装（有时一瓶葡萄酒随同月饼被包装在一起），69.3%的受访者认为这种现象造成月饼过于昂贵而损害了他们的权利。然而制造商清楚地知道利润的由来，对此不置可否。值得庆幸的是，消费者有望从月饼衍生市场中获利。员工常常从公司获得月饼券来换取实物，或者他们可以按市场价的一定折扣将其销售出去。月饼销售期非常短但火爆，这些月饼券在中秋过后几乎一文不值。和圣诞节蛋糕一样，很少有人在中秋节以外的时间购买月饼。
     Such is liquidity in this market that a cash-strapped hotel in the central city of Wuhan reportedly decided to use the coupons as part-payment for a decorating job. The unamused contractor, it is said, refused to bite.

     据报道称，武汉城区一家资金周转困难的旅馆决定使用月饼券来抵消装修队的部分工资，结果被不苟言笑的承包人拒绝，月饼券的流通性可见一斑。

三鹿承认700吨奶粉受污染 召回8月6日以前产品

     新华网北京9月11日电石家庄三鹿集团股份有限公司11日晚发布产品召回声明，称经公司自检发现2008年8月6日前出厂的部分批次三鹿婴幼儿奶粉受到三聚氰胺的污染，市场上大约有700吨。卫生部专家指出，三聚氰胺是一种化工原料，可导致人体泌尿系统产生结石。近期，甘肃等地报告多例婴幼儿泌尿系统结石病例，调查发现患儿多有食用三鹿婴幼儿配方奶粉的历史。

评论：中华民族没有理由不发展，每一位老百姓都要成为理工农医全能选手才能生存。必须学会各类专业知识才能保障自己的生命安全，因为我们只能信任自己。中华民族也没有理由不强大，我们都在慢性中毒中进化了物种，面对日益恶化的地球环境，时刻注重生命健康的娇气西方人怎么能适应未来。

用脏字形容中国人 铜牌选手引发风波

　　据环球时报报道，作为以色列在北京奥运会上唯一的奖牌获得者，刚满22岁的以色列帆板选手沙哈里•祖巴里回国受到了英雄般的欢迎。或许是被巨大荣誉冲昏了头脑，他在接受媒体采访谈起对东道主中国的印象时，接连乱言，甚至用“狗屎(shits)”来形容中国人。祖巴里说，“中国人的习俗奇特，他们大都不懂外语，举止怪异，连口音都怪怪的”，“我不吃猪肉，也不喜欢中国食品。我喜欢吃家乡菜，特别是胡姆斯豆酱。我离不开胡姆斯酱，但是在中国吃不到，到处也买不到。只有当一位朋友带来家乡菜胡姆斯酱时，我才感到高兴。”在发了这一连串的牢骚之后，纳塔夫让他用一个词来形容中国人，祖巴里竟脱口而出：“shits”。他还补充道，在中国待了1个半月，再也不想看到中国人了。这让很多对中国怀着友好情感的以色列人感到震惊，纷纷谴责。以色列总统佩雷斯10日上午会见中国驻以大使赵军时第一句话就是表示道歉。

评论：不用诊断也知道这位选手患有严重的脑部问题，需要以色列加强国民的精神卫生建设，不要总花钱在刀枪上跟邻居武斗。苏东坡当年也干过这样的丑事，但最终明白了一个道理：“你所看到的外部世界，不过是你心灵的镜像。所以，当你内心宁静，充满友善时，你看到的便是一个和平美好的世界；当你内心浮躁，充满怨恨时，你所看到的便是一个丑陋凶险的世界。自己看和尚是大粪证明自己心里有大粪。”以色列的教科书应该加上这一课。

佩林称不排除与俄罗斯开战可能

     中国网9月12日讯，据美联社报道，美国共和党副总统候选人佩林11日在接受采访时称，如果俄罗斯入侵已成为北约成员国的格鲁吉亚，那么美国不排除与俄罗斯开战的可能性。这是佩林在成为共和党总统候选人麦凯恩副手后首次接受媒体采访。佩林称：“我们不会重复冷战。”她对美国广播公司的查尔斯-吉布森称，她赞成让格鲁吉亚和乌克兰加入北约，虽然俄罗斯总理普京对此持反对态度。当被问及当俄罗斯入侵已成为北约成员国的格鲁吉亚时，美国是否会与俄罗斯开战时，佩林回答说：“可能是这样的。我的意思是，根据协议，当你是北约成员国时，如果另外一个成员国遭到攻击，你应当预计到那个遇到攻击的国家将向你求助，你应当向那个遭到攻击的国家提供帮助。”在其它事项上，佩林称，当麦凯恩邀请她成为自己的副手时，她没有迟疑。她已作好了出任副总统的准备，如果72岁的麦凯恩发生不侧，她甚至作好了出任总统的准备。麦凯恩选择佩林作为副手使许多人感到意外，也使竞选形势发生了有利于麦凯恩的变化。

评论：谁说让女人领导世界会更和平？还没当上副总统就大放厥词实在不像一个成熟政治家所为，美国人需要好好考虑一下能否放心把国家交给她。要想打仗就自己去前线看看，有种面对血肉横飞不尿裤子再大胆放话，别轻易让别人家的孩子白白送死。这位年轻姑娘表现出来的思维能力和政治经验不知会不会让麦凯恩后悔，居然自己还健在副手就已经计划接班了。

     IT News will become very interesting when both of the Microsoft and Google are involved. The new web browser published by Google could lead to a fierce battle between the two companies, but definitely it will be beneficial to all of the users. One article published at Economist.com made comments on it last week, I translated this paper and welcome any volunteers to join in. you can try this link to have a look http://www.google.com/chrome

The world wide web

The second browser war

Sep 4th 2008 | SAN FRANCISCO
From The Economist print edition

     Google’s new web browser is its most direct attack on Microsoft yet

     谷歌以新发布的网络浏览器对微软进行了最直接的一次攻击

     SEVERAL years ago, Silicon Valley was rife with rumours that Google, then primarily a search engine, might be building a new web browser to rival that of Microsoft, called Internet Explorer, or even an operating system to rival Microsoft’s Windows. Google mocked those rumours and they died down. But if Sergey Brin, Google’s co-founder, is to be believed, the speculation itself made him think that “maybe it’s not a bad idea”. And so this week Google did launch a new browser, called Chrome, that is also, in effect, a new operating system. The rumours, says Mr Brin cheekily, “just happened to migrate from being false to being true”.

     多年以前，硅谷盛传流言蜚语说搜索引擎的龙头谷歌公司将会推出新的网络浏览器甚或操作系统来挑战微软的IE和Windows。谷歌的否认使得传言渐渐平息。但也许谷歌的联合创始人Sergey Brin的话可以被相信，这种推测促使他思索“也许这也不是一个坏主意”。本周谷歌的确发布了一款新的浏览器，命名为铬元素，同时也是一种新的操作系统。Brin先生后者脸皮说，传言刚刚由假变成了真。

Google Inc., under the Creative Commons License

Chrome-plated

     Chrome amounts to a declaration of war—albeit a pre-emptive one, in Google’s mind—against Microsoft. So far, Google has been coy about admitting the rivalry (whereas Microsoft, especially its boss, Steve Ballmer, is obsessed with it). In web search and advertising, Google dominates—roughly as Microsoft does in operating systems and office applications. To the extent that Google has challenged Microsoft’s core business, it is through Google Docs, its online word-processing, spreadsheet and presentation applications. But these, so far, have few users.

     铬元素表明了对微软的宣战-在谷歌看来是先发制人的战争。目前为止，谷歌羞羞答答地不肯承认，微软的老板Steve Ballmer已经焦头烂额。就像在操作系统和办公软件微软独领风骚一样，谷歌统治着网络搜索和广告领域。在这个意义上来说，推出Google Docs谷歌已经在微软的核心商业领域发起了挑战，这是一种在线的文档编辑、制表和展示应用软件。尽管这种软件目前的用户依然很少。

     Google’s fear has always been that Microsoft might use its grip on people’s computers and browsers to tweak the default settings so that Google’s search engine and other services were disadvantaged. This, after all, is how Microsoft behaved in the 1990s, when it crushed Netscape, an early pacesetter in the browser business.

     谷歌担心的是微软利用它在个人电脑和浏览器的统治地位使用默认设置将谷歌搜索引擎和其他服务至于不利地位。毕竟微软在九十年代已经使用这一策略击垮了浏览器前辈网景公司。

     Microsoft’s fear, by contrast, has always been that computing might move from having the operating system as a platform for applications to running on the web (or “cloud”). This is why it attacked—also pre-emptively, in its mind—Netscape and landed in antitrust court.

     与此相反，微软害怕的是计算将会从操作系统上转移到网上（云计算）。这就是为什么它先发制人地攻击网景而自己置身反托拉斯官司之中。

     As Google rose to dominate the web during this decade, it therefore invested a lot of energy in a rival web browser to Explorer, called Firefox. An open-source project (ie, one whose code can be altered by anybody), Firefox comes from a foundation, across the street from Google’s offices, that happens to be based on the remnants of the old Netscape. Google’s engineers contribute code to Firefox and pay the foundation a share of advertising when people search Google in the browser’s toolbar. Thus Firefox rose to become the second-largest browser after Explorer, with almost 20% of the market.

     就在谷歌逐渐获得网络主宰地位的十年间，它为了对付IE浏览器而对名为火狐的浏览器进行了投资。火狐是一种开源的软件（它的源代码可以被任何人修改），它来自于谷歌对街的一家建立在老网景公司基础上的基金会。谷歌的工程师为火狐贡献代码，当用户使用浏览器工具条进行搜索时会分给这个基金会一些广告费。火狐占领了百分制二十的市场份额从而成为仅次于IE浏览器的第二大浏览器。

     But Google concluded that even Firefox could not protect it against Microsoft. It began to define its business as “search, ads and apps”, where the apps, with a few exceptions, run on the web and are reached through a browser. So Google decided to build a browser from scratch, explicitly for those fledgling services, from word processing to snazzy virtual worlds.

     然而谷歌发现即便是火狐也不能与微软抗衡。它将它的经营定义为“搜索，广告和应用”，除特例外，应用是需要从浏览器才能调用。因此谷歌决定自己白手起家制造浏览器，专为从字处理到时尚虚拟世界等新服务而设计。

     Chrome, which it launched with an oh-so-Google comic book instead of a press release, is the result. It is based on tabs, each of which runs independently of the others for security, speed and stability. If one app goes down, it takes only that tab with it, not the whole browser or surfing session. Chrome even works offline. And with few menus and little visual clutter, it is simple.

     铬元素随同oh-so-Google连环画发售，而不是通过发布会。它基于标签栏，每一个标签栏独立运行以保证安全性、速度和稳定性。如果一个应用出现问题只会影响那个相关的标签栏，而不会危及整个浏览器进程或网上冲浪进程。铬元素也可以离线运行，有一些菜单，看上去有些乱，有些简单。

     This is, in short, the scenario that Microsoft has dreaded ever since Netscape. As Arnaud Weber, a Google engineer and one of the characters in the comic book, says in a speech bubble: “We’re applying the same kind of process isolation you find in modern operating systems.” It is a geek’s way of saying that developers and consumers may soon stop caring about the operating system on their own hard drive altogether.

     简而言之，自从干掉网景之后，这是微软最惧怕的难关。正如漫画中的人物谷歌工程师Arnaud Weber在对话框中所说：我们应用的正是现代操作系统中采用的独立进程方法。这正如电脑高人所说的开发者和消费者很快都将不再关心他们电脑上运行的操作系统了。

     Ingeniously, Chrome itself need not take a lot of market share to fulfil Google’s objectives. Google does not expect to sell or otherwise turn Chrome directly into money. Like Firefox’s, Chrome’s source code is free for anybody to change and improve, and even for rival browser-makers to incorporate. That could even include Microsoft. As Mr Brin says, “we would consider it a success” if the next version of IE were “built on Chrome, or even if it were just a lot better as a result of Chrome.” All Google wants is ever more people doing ever more things on the web—preferably using its own apps—and peace of mind that nobody can interrupt this. Not even Microsoft.

     非常明智，谷歌不需要铬元素占有市场来实现自己的目标。谷歌没有卖掉它来变现的愿望。就像火狐一样，铬元素也是开源的，任何人都可以修改和改进它，甚至可以和对手合作。这也包括微软。像Brin先生所说，如果下一代IE浏览器是基于铬元素或因为铬元素而变得更好，我们把它看做是一种成功。谷歌期望的是通过使用他们的应用软件，越来越多的人把越来越多的事放在网上来做，任何人都不能干扰心中的平静。即使是微软也不行。

     After the fantastic Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, we heard a lot of compliments from other countries. When we wake up from the wonderful Olympic dream, Chinese people have to face the real life. I reprint a piece of article from one of my favorite magazines Economist here, which is about such kind of anxiety. Although there has political prejudice to China in western media, I believe that you have the sense to judge and also could get the beneficial information. I translated it into Chinese and I also welcome every enthusiastic friend to join in to correct my mistakes in the translation, I will really appreciate your help.

     在精彩的北京2008奥运会过后，我们听到了很多外国的赞誉。当我们从奇幻的奥运梦想中醒来的时候，中国人还要面对现实生活。我从自己最喜欢杂志之一的《经济学家》中转载了一篇文章，这篇文章表达了这样的一些忧虑。尽管西方媒体一贯对中国存在政治偏见，相信列位拥有足够的辨别能力。我尝试着将其翻译成了中文，也欢迎热心的朋友帮我改正其中的翻译错误，我将不胜感激。

The Beijing Olympics
Our revels now are ended 狂欢结束
Aug 28th 2008 | BEIJING
From The Economist print edition
     A substantial pageant, but its fading leaves not a wrack behind

     一场盛大庆典的落幕后什么也没有留下
     IT ALL went much as China’s leaders had hoped. The ceremonies were spectacular, the stadiums as good as any in the world and China won far more gold medals than any other country. The world’s most important politicians showed up and no one, bar a handful of vexatious foreigners, staged protests. But after spending tens of billions of dollars and huge political energy, China’s leaders might be wondering whether it was all worth it.

     所有都如中国领导期待的那样进行。庆典非常壮观，运动场可与世界上任何场馆媲美，中国队也获得了最多的金牌。世界上最重要的政治家悉数出席，令人头疼的某些外国人和筹备的抗议被挡在门外。但在花费了数百亿美元和巨大的政治能量之后，中国的领袖们应该想想这些是否值得。

     The occasional glimpses on national television of their wooden expressions as they watched the closing spectacular of the Olympic games on August 24th revealed little of what they felt. This was a show they had helped to choreograph, sometimes in minute detail. But they have suppressed almost all public discussion about the choices they made and the expense involved.

     从八月二十四日的奥运会闭幕式上领导人们木讷的表情上很难判断他们的真实感受。这是一场他们设计的表演，甚至有时具体指导其中的微小细节。但他们却压制了关于其所做抉择及其花费的公共讨论。

     Officially the games cost $2.2 billion, compared with an original estimate of $1.6 billion. Beijing also spent $40 billion on preparing its infrastructure and cleaning up the environment. But China’s secretive budgeting system makes it impossible to verify these figures. Chinese officials say the infrastructure had to be built anyway and that spending was in line with that of previous host cities. But the impression given was of little expense spared.

     官方宣布奥运会花费了二十二亿美元，超出了原来的十六亿美元的预算。北京还花费四百亿美元用于基础设施建设和环境治理。但是中国预算系统不够透明，使得无法证实这些数字的准确性。中国官方表示这些基础设施早晚都要建设，这些花费与往届主办城市的花费基本持平。给人的印象是没有造成浪费。

     Vice-President Xi Jinping, at least, has reason to celebrate. The games were his first big political test since he emerged as China’s leader-in-waiting after a Communist Party congress in October last year. Mr Xi took charge of preparations for the games, a move apparently aimed at demonstrating the importance the party attached to them (officially a lower-ranking Politburo member, Beijing’s party chief, Liu Qi, remained the top organiser). Organisationally the games went well.

     至少习近平副主席有理由去庆祝。本届奥运会是他自从去年十月中共十七大上当选副主席以来的首次重大政治考验。习先生负责奥运会的准备工作（官方上由低一级别的政治委员，北京市委书记刘淇担任最高的组织者），明显的意图当然是表明党赋予奥运会的重要性。从组织上来说，奥运会运行良好。

     Less clear is whether the games will pay the kind of political dividends that China had hoped for domestically and abroad. The gold-medal haul (51 compared with America’s 36 and 23 for Russia) will boost national pride. But many complain about the impact that stringent security precautions and tightened visa restrictions for foreigners have had on business. Security has been particularly intense in Tibet and neighbouring Xinjiang. This may well worsen grievances among their inhabitants and strengthen pro-independence sentiment in both regions.

     奥运会能否回报中国以期待的国内外正面政治效应目前还不明朗。夺得的金牌数量（以51枚的数量超过美国的36枚和俄罗斯的26枚）将提升民族的自豪感。但是很多人抱怨严格的安保措施所带来的不便和对外国商人紧缩的签证限制。西藏和新疆的安保措施尤其被加强。这可能会激化当地人的不满和希望独立的情绪。

     For all the good cheer generated by the gold medals, the party is clearly nervous of the slightest challenge to its authority. Having named three Beijing parks where protests would be allowed during the Olympics, the police turned down all of at least 77 applications for permission to hold demonstrations. Among those who applied were two women in their 70s who wanted to complain about inadequate compensation for being relocated from their homes. The authorities responded to their request by sentencing both to a year in labour camp, though the sentences are suspended as long as they behave well.

     所有正面的欢呼来自于对金牌的渴望，中国共产党对最轻微的挑战也感到了紧张。北京指定了三个公园作为奥运会期间的抗议场所，警方驳回了至少的七十七个示威游行申请。其中有两名年过七旬的老妪要申诉她们过低的拆迁补偿款问题。政府回应她们的方式是判处一年劳动改造，如果表现良好可以提前释放。

     Officials made strenuous efforts to keep disaffected citizens from other provinces away from the capital during the games. But security is likely to be relaxed after the Paralympics, which will be held in Beijing between September 6th and 17th. The grievances, from land disputes to official corruption, that bring thousands of people to the capital every year in a usually futile search for redress will soon resurface. Even in the security-conscious build-up to the games large riots were reported in several Chinese towns over local abuses of power.

     政府花费了大量的精力保证外省的上访群众奥运期间不要来到首都。但是安保措施似乎在九月六日到十七日间举行的残奥会之后会有所放松。每年都有成千上万的人为从土地纠纷到贪污腐败的多种问题到北京来伸冤，这种情况很快就会卷土重来。即使是在安保意识加强的奥运期间，也有数个地方政府滥用职权引发大规模骚乱的报道。

     Abroad, China’s hospitality (towards those who managed to get visas, at least), lavish spectacles and magnificent new stadiums drew widespread praise. But there will be many doubts about whether all the Olympic bonhomie has transformed the way China sees the world. As China’s response to foreign reactions to the unrest in Tibet in March suggested, this can be worryingly xenophobic. The party still sees it as essential to its legitimacy to portray the country as a victim of Western efforts to contain and dismember it.

     在海外，中国的好客（至少对于那些获得了签证的人），奢华的表演，宏伟的运动场馆赢得了广泛的赞誉。但值得怀疑的是奥运的友善是否转变了中国看世界的方式。类似于中国对外国关于拉萨三一四事件行动的反应表明了一种令人担忧的恐外或排外情绪。中国共产党依旧认为将中国描述成西方企图控制和瓦解中国政策受害者的形象是合理正确的。

     Tony Blair, a former British prime minister, argued in the Wall Street Journal this week that the games would mark a “new epoch”, involving an irreversible opening up of China and a steady decline of “ignorance and fear” of the country. But what many outside China saw during the Olympics was a clampdown on dissent and a disdain even for the spontaneous street-party exuberance of previous games. This will hardly dispel worries about the impact of China’s rise.

     英国前首相托尼布莱尔本周在华尔街日报表示，这届奥运会标志着一个“新纪元”，融合着中国不可逆转的开放进程与对中国“无知和恐惧”的稳步下降。但很多身处中国之外的人在奥运期间看到的是压制抗议，甚至污蔑历届奥运会自发的街头庆祝活动。这将几乎很难消除人们对中国崛起的担忧。

Copyright © 2008 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

版权归经济学家杂志和经济学家集团所有

     作为受过高等教育的知识分子实不能莫谈国事，作为胆小如鼠的匹夫之辈可以默谈国事。

     一位老者逝去的新闻刚刚发布便随即淹没在铺天盖地的奥运喜讯之中，一个对于八十年代出生的我们有些陌生的名字——华国锋。新闻联播在几条经济形势一片大好的报道之后，主播低沉的念到“中国共产党的优秀党员，久经考验的......”。对华国锋的了解仅仅限于历史书或政治书中提及的“两个凡是”，不知道比我更年轻的人还能不能了解他是谁。父母一代对这个名字并不陌生，爸妈还记得毛主席去世时痛哭的情景，当然也会记得他的接班人华国锋。最新一期的《凤凰周刊》写到华国锋每年在毛主席的生日和忌日都要到毛主席纪念堂去去鞠躬吊唁，今年他不能去了。看到这里多少有些悲凉，不知跨越了时空剧变的他每每站在毛主席遗体前的心情会是怎样。他以一个失败者的形骸离开政坛在家养花种菜，身着旧中山装走在胡同里亦少有人能认出。他和后来的胡耀邦，赵紫阳等等都慢慢地被中国人所遗忘，在国外却名声犹存（多家外国媒体将华国锋去世的消息列在头版）。我对后者的了解仅限于他们的名字，因为历史书和政治宣传中已经没有他们的踪影。政治舞台的角逐没有对错，只有胜利者和失败者，失败的同时就失去了书写历史的权利。

     鄙人于九月一日夜间和好兄弟陆拉图及其妻室共度了某的二十六岁生日，同时还是兄弟结交十周年纪念日。陆拉图远道而来，风尘仆仆，所见者无不动容，余更是感激涕零。原本还邀约了少年同党，结果一人值班，一人孩子突发急症。“四人帮”十年大庆虽未能如愿，然我辈心中亦感慨颇多。白驹过隙，毛头小子一晃就几近而立。仿佛还能看到幼年的陆拉图在擦鼻涕，结果现在都已经成了叱诧风云的职场达人。看到一身土满脸泥的后生心中就充满了畏惧，料不到这些还不会擦鼻涕的小子将来变成什么。酒席散罢，陆某与杨某对十年的光景充满了无限敬畏，口中哼着陈奕迅的教诲“十年之前 我不认识你你不属于我 我们还是一样陪在一个陌生人左右 走过渐渐熟悉的街头”。陆拉图回首过往，提出了一个问题：你对“兄弟”怎么解释，怎样结交兄弟？这让我想起了一位古人：司马牛。

     司马牛忧曰：“人皆有兄弟，我独亡！”子夏曰：“商闻之矣，死生有命，富贵在天。君子敬而无失，与人恭而有礼。四海之内，皆兄弟也。君子何患乎无兄弟也？”司马牛确实没有必要烦虑，即便有了亲兄弟却志趣不投，既没有敬而无失也没有恭而有礼，亲兄弟若形同陌路甚或骨肉相残，想必司马牛同志就会更加烦恼了。我和陆拉图虽非亲兄弟，却情同亲兄弟，偶有旁人以为我俩性倾向有问题。这是某的幸运，而功在于陆拉图的美德。虽然老朽年纪大了，脾气略有收敛，却也偶尔露狰容。某曾多次自嘲，若某遇到一个和某一样的人定不能容。几番尝试更情改性友善示人，有却坦诚者曰“您太有个性了”。听懂了人家的委婉语，绝望之余我想这一定是一种我没有的天赋。兄弟不是交的，是通过魅力吸引来的，在通过德行留下来的。经过风雨考验才可能成为兄弟，一抬腿一投足一句话就可能失去一个朋友。能够长期相互吸引和包容就可以成为兄弟，来了又走的只能是生命中的过客，这当然需要好好反省一下自己。陆拉图不必问我这个问题，有点像一个大学生问一个小学生：你看这道微积分的题怎么解？在这个问题上我是没有发言权的。某常常向陆拉图和豆丁投去敬慕的目光，他们都没有刻意做什么，他们做的就自然符合“仁 义 礼 智 信”，所以才能够聚天下朋友，实现四海之内皆兄弟。这是他们的天性决定的，不是哪个玩弄交友技巧的拙劣表演可以相比的。当然他们也有选择，并不是什么人都可以做兄弟，朋友有远近，犹如投石入水泛起的层层涟漪，越远的越淡。虽苍路崎岖，某还在不断鼓励自己可以做好，所以还在继续向他们学习，否则早破罐破摔了哈。感谢拿我当兄弟的兄弟，向你们致敬，这些年你们辛苦了......

     最近几日颇为低迷，笔杆像坠了秤砣一样提不起来，即便写出几个字也如枯柳败花没有灵气。我想是最近话太多了，世上充斥着太多口吐白沫的人了，有什么德能来此胡说八道？强令自己“慎言”，就像在这个问题上没有发言权，在很多问题上都没有发言权，只是自己脸皮太厚。连日来头脑中总是浮现两个自造的词，可以将来悬在墙上提醒自己：“咫愚 止愚”。前面的两个字告诉自己往往和愚蠢只有咫尺之遥，所以要时刻提醒自己止愚。唉，有所长进才好......