繳稅、守法並不代表你同意這個政府的作為，但是沉默與不行使公民權力是。請記得本週末去投票。
I managed to squeeze this into 140 chars:
Paying taxes and obey the law does not mean consent to the current administration, but silent and not acting [your] citizen right is. PLEASE VOTE.
This Has Been a Public Service Announcement.
So the day came.
I have not much to say like everyone else on the web and mess media. I don’t want to go on skin-depth things like how he transformed the computer industry and the world – I didn’t even agree most of the tactics he used (like, all closed-source, closed and single distributor model for the iOS platform, etc.).
I want to share something personal with you here, instead.
I did a lot of things that didn’t make sense to my parents, nor to myself at the time. Ever since mid-school, I spent countless hours making websites. I was the computer guru to my high school classmates because the guestbook/chatroom service I built was practically the online social network to them. When I went to college, I chose to take physics as major instead of computer science because I thought there were more wonders in the mechanics of the physical world instead of inside a computer. That turned out to be true, and the wonders unfortunately succumbed me; my grades in physics classes were never higher than the one and only computer science class I took. I didn’t know what to do at the time; I didn’t want to, and couldn’t go for the regular career a physics-major in Taiwan would usually do, that is go to graduate school, and to TSMC/UMC or other semiconductor companies straight from school, the flagship industry of Taiwan – The promise land with dicent salary and social recognition.
Nevertheless, I got my B.Sc. anyway. I stall a bit by deliberately not to meet the graduation requirement (which is, ironically, English requirement) and stayed for a fifth year. I joined MozTW and took care of Firefox localization, started to get to know people in the technology circle, many of whom are big names I admired. I gave lectures at meet-ups and events, wrote web application for Firefox promotion. I co-organized events, designed event websites. I built a paper toss game in the IE9 hackathon event and was awarded an XBox 360 + Kinect. Eventually, I am recognized by people as a qualified front-end developer.
(Full text of Steve Jobs’ 2005 Stanford Commencement Address)
I don’t actually remember when I see the speech for the first time. At first it didn’t make an impression. It was not until some day, I realized “connecting the dots by looking backwards” is exactly what I did, and do right now: Without these “personal homepage” I wrote before college, I wouldn’t know how server-client architecture works. Without my college projects in the physics department, I wouldn’t have any idea how to organize a full-scale rich-content website, nor the chance to improve my communication skill. Without MozTW I wouldn’t be known by my talented peers. Even physics has a part when I looked backwards – The paper toss game I wrote at the IE9 event is actually based on physics simulation skill I learned in school. I hated that class, but without the knowledge the game wouldn’t have such animation effect.
Indeed, Steve was right all along. “You can’t connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. … This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.”, he said. By looking backwards, I found everything I did somehow makes who I am today, and they surely made all the difference.
This is what Mr. Jobs meant to me. Nothing technological nor innovative, purely personal. So long, Steve, you lived a good life. This post is my tribute to you, and you will certainly be missed.
六月維基解密丟出來的密文，算是我期待的那種，但是當時在新聞上好像沒有很大的爆點？
Burghardt expressed his appreciation for Ma’s pledge of no surprises in the U.S.-Taiwan bilateral relationship as well as his emphasis on substance over show. He recounted three examples Ma had given him to demonstrate this commitment:
- Taiwan would not ask for a certain kind of transit just to show that the U.S. would grant it;
- Taiwan would not ask for certain weapons systems just to show the U.S. would sell them;
- and Taiwan would not insist on certain names just for domestic political considerations.
(原文)
後面的意思是，台灣目前的執政政府私下向美國承諾：
這看起來很糟呀。畢竟看了這麼多年的中台美關係新聞，人人大概都知道，從李登輝總統開始，美國要賣什麼武器給台灣、台灣總統去中南美洲經過美國要怎麼被接待，都是美國行政當局向台灣公開表現姿態的方式。比較遜的總統像陳水扁，就會搞到下不了飛機直接被送到中美洲去；比較厲害的總統像李登輝就可以做到回學校演講，幾乎是「順便」入境美國訪問。第三項稱呼，要說杞人憂天也罷，但是美國政府自從國會制訂台灣關係法，定義台美關係之後，就沒有在對台灣的地位上有任何的正式調整了，如果政府放棄和美國行政當局堅持名稱的話，下次歐巴馬訪問中國的聯合公報會不會出現「Chinese Taipei」？
簡單說，這個密文的意義是，台灣政府把在國際還有空間可以因為美國表達存在感的工具都偷偷封殺掉了。我是不願意像某些網路上的言論去歸咎動機是什麼啦（所謂的「賣台」？）；可能只是比較遜的總統、或是在現在的國際形勢（密文以外我們還看不到的那一大部分）我們的外交部已經沒有籌碼可以放了。
唉。
The Daily Show 的 Joe Stewart 星期三請了 David Barton，一位福音教派的美國歷史學家上節目。起因是來自於之前 Stewart 和 Mike Huckabee 的對談。Huckabee 是一位後來從政的牧師，當到州長，也是明年可能的共和黨總統候選人。在他們的對話中，Stewart 引用了 Huckabee 稱讚 Barton 的引言來挑戰他，而最後 Huckabee 說他不應該幫別人說話，Stewart 應該請 Barton 來上節目，而有了這個對談。
整個對談非常精采，超過長度因此完整的要到網站上才看的到。Barton 和 Stewart 的討論環繞在原本他上節目的目的，釐清：美國是否是基於基督教信念創立的？如果是，為何憲法禁止國會樹立國教？
Barton 在對談中解釋，他個人研究的唯一目的是「藉由收集過去的歷史文獻，尋找美國早期被遺忘的歷史」，而「藉由文獻去樹立基督教在美國的地位」並不是他的初衷，也是不實的指控。他說，他編撰的教科書涵蓋了美國被忘記的許多不同面相的歷史：被遺忘的美國開國重要人物，女性、非洲裔。他對他基督教的研究被特別挑出來批評感到不平。
至於前面提到的，美國創立時，開國元勳在憲法上對政府與宗教關係的想像，他認為美國創立時的確是基於基督教的信念，開國 13 洲有許多州憲法敘明了基督教的地位。但是他們同時也相信容納不同信仰與宗教自由是更重要的，因此在憲法上禁止聯邦政府樹立國教。Barton 認為，因為憲法認為宗教是州政府的事物，故現代的解釋將此憲法條款擴及到任何人與所有層級的政府是不公正的：例如，認為政府不該贊助宗教性活動，或是禁止個人、官員在公眾場合禱告，或是以神之名發誓（「… so help me God.」）。
這個時候 Stewart 就問他了，既然憲法的限制僅適用於聯邦政府，那如果有一天有個州的人口組成主要是穆斯林，然後他們選出了州政府決定要實施伊斯蘭律法（Sharia Law），那怎麼辦？他說這樣沒有關係，反而是外面的人對他們說不能這樣做，才是問題。Stewart 就說，他認為這才是美國的本質：有外面的人在聯邦的層級說不能這樣做，因為這對社會和自由產生了內外隔閡。
我一直認為政教分離在台灣，跟很多議題一樣，是個有趣但是沒人討論的事情。
某種程度台灣社會是同意政教分離的：宗教影響道德觀，群體道德觀影響選出來的民意代表和官員，但是民意代表和官員從不會拿特定宗教的論述當做反對或贊成某個議題的論點。除了某次有市議員和教會開記者會反對台北市政府給同志嘉年華的預算，但那樣的論點也不是反方的主要理由（比較像是立場剛好所以合作一下）。宗教屬性在美國對政治人物有時是加分（像 Huckabee 之於福音教派），但在台灣可能對來說是票房毒藥，例如謝長廷與宋七力案（宋七力案的詐欺和宗教自由定義間的轉折與界線也值得探討）。
不過，另一方面社會並沒有有意識的排除宗教在政府活動的影響力。政治上，早在百年以前，宗教團體明著暗著是重要的政治利益團體。日常生活中，證嚴上人的靜思語成為許多公立國小的品格教育教材，但是卻無人反對。更進一步說，許多國家資助的機構與文化觀點具有強烈的宗教成分，例如地方政府風景管理所維運的孔廟、每年由總統親自主持的祭孔大典、將中國文化基本教材作為品格教育的方向等等（雖然我國憲法增修條文早以明定「國家肯定多元文化」）。
從這些「事蹟」來看，要說我國的國教是「儒道教」也不是說不過去。不過反過來就會有人要吵到底「儒家（Confucianism）」是不是稱為「儒道教」的宗教了。
宗教衝突在台灣也不是沒有（還記得逼菲傭吃豬肉的新聞嗎？）。這些議題就和其他個人與社會的關係一樣，是值得討論和思考的。不知這是否屬於政治哲學的範疇？
自我澄清：我是不可知論者，不偏屬任何宗教。文中所指名之宗教與團體皆為舉例，沒有針對的意思。只是很好笑的，維基百科把「子不語怪力亂神」作為孔子是不可知論者的例子，但是孔子在儒道教卻是個神 …
I’ve talked about Firefox OS during several offline occasion; some people find the concept hard to understand, some, agreed with me, suggested that I should put everything together in written so people at large would know about it. Here are the reasons why I believe Mozilla should start working on an operating system based on Firefox.
Before Apple’s iTunes Apps Store for iPhone, and iPod or iPad later, Mozilla Add-ons was one of the largest collections of web software. The add-ons does from simply help people to access content to development tools. However, after 5 years of introduction of Firefox and it’s extension framework, people find it hard to formulate a business model with it – Mozilla try to cope the problem with donation system incorporated within the add-on site, however, with the proven model from the competitors, developers had shift their focus to these new platforms. Echofon, once called TwitterFox, would not be able to deliver a paid “pro” version successfully if it had not reach other platforms.
By developing an Firefox OS, Mozilla could make proof to developers in the ecosystem that Firefox is more than a browser, and their hard work is more than browser add-ons. I am not saying turning Firefox into an OS would immediately make add-ons development profitable – however, it might not never be if there is no OS.
When I talked about Firefox OS, people often compare my imaginary OS with Chrome OS. It’s comparable, yet, the Google’s approach might not be the best way. For instance, Google intend to copy Apple’s business model, creating an centralized Chrome Web Store, defeat the purpose that web should be a platform without a controlling vendor.
Should Mozilla had working on a Firefox OS, it not only provide an alternative to Chrome OS, but it also give users valuable choices on browser OS front. Alternative is not about playing the RMS card – that every software should have a libre alternative – instead, the existence of the strong enough alternative is the key to drive innovation.
(Don’t believe me? Think about IE6.)
The recent development of Firefox 4 bring exciting UI changes that align with many modern browsers, like Application Tabs or TabCandy, later known as Panorama, which enables user new innovate ways to organize information and works.
These powerful features, nevertheless, doesn’t work within an application as tiny as a browser sometimes. Before Panorama, I usually group my works in different browser windows, so I could switch between them on Windows taskbar. After trying Panorama, along with Application Tab, I don’t think it works as well as Exposé in Mac OS X, or even what I did. For example, app tabs are always visible no matter what Panorama work space you selected, yet in Panorama view app tabs actually belongs to a group – this results confusion. What’s worse, click in any app tab in another work group immediately brings you to that group, with no fast way to switching back.
Another example would be the UI change decision about bringing tabs on top of the toolbar. I agreed with the decision to bring tabs to top; but when I pressed F11 to make my Firefox window go full screen, I found the close window button (the X) was not on the top-right corner of the screen (which, according to Fitt’s law, is a hot spot for cursor aiming, and, according to the logic of Windows OS, should be always the place to close a maximized window).
These examples might be just tiny issues that come with a beta version of Firefox; I believe most of them will be fixed by talent people at Mozilla before the final version releases. Nonetheless, these are the evidence that how messy it would be to ask an browser within an operating system to manage it’s own tasks – We should definitely work on these user experience innovation, however a Firefox browser will always be a constraint for these interaction innovations – A Firefox OS will not. By developing a Firefox OS with these innovations, Mozilla will certainly have a better chance to polish them before they were brought to the browser.
Ever since Windows 95, binding between tasks in browser window and tasks in client applications has always been a key issue. Windows 7 introduced jump list; IE9 users will be able to pin websites on their Windows task bar. A Firefox OS will help Mozilla developers come up with even better interaction, instead of endlessly implement what Windows, or other OS APIs enables applications (browsers) to do.
Mozilla is a foundation with limited resource. Everything it does has to be somehow connect to its mission. A Firefox OS project will undeniably connect to the cause. Here is one of the reasons why: Today, users prefer mobile apps than [mobile] web.
I twitted the link sometimes ago. The sad inconvenient truth is, if people access information mainly from apps but not the through the browser, the browser itself will be irrelevant. Eventually, the web itself will be irrelevant, along with the promises of the Open Web that Mozilla holds true. Yet, this is exactly what is happening right now on the mobile front.
(Stilling thinking about bring a full Firefox to iOS is important? IMO it brings more buzz than piratical use.)
Firefox OS has the potential to become not just browser OS for web platform but also a truly open platform. Think about a slightly exaggerated future, where desktops, OSes, and applications on it seize to exist. People would access information on the Internet without going through the Web (and HTTP) but using devices and site-specific applications using socket connections. In that future, there are better be a vendor that continue express interests of openness through technologies and end-user products, and let that vendor be Mozilla, even though the Web as we know it seize to exist. Firefox OS could be that end-user product, just like Firefox 1.0 did to the web almost 6 years ago. Firefox OS could ultimately transform itself beyond browser, or browser OS, but first Mozilla need to make a browser OS.
Thus, to Mozilla HQ: It’s about time to launch a Firefox OS Project.