Resolution: 900×1440

Yes, the title is correct, 900×1440: the resolution of a 19″ tall-screen long screen instead of a widescreen monitor.

That’s what I’d set up in my house when I bought the discount BenQ FP92W this weekend. The first thing I do when I brought it home is to remove the monitor stand and place the monitor against the wall vertically.

Why would I do that? Because, my parents are using that computer for web surfing and text processing; with a 19″ tall-screen long screen, an A4 sheet can be seen 1:1 without scrolling: a great perspective for PDF documents.

But when come to the webpages, there is a little difference than I expected: like A4s, most webpages are vertical, a tall-screen would effectively making the viewing area larger; but unlike A4s, width of the webpages are often fixed in pixels. See the problem is? 900 is smaller/shorter than the width of a common webpage design, which is 1024. In 900×1440, horizontal scrolls will pop out and make the things worse.

The whole story end up with one of my webdesign principles: Do not design webpages in fixed width; Not everyone likes to maximize their browser and browse with a 1024×768 screen; besides, if you are a pro-web standard designer, aim to design a web for everyone with every browser and device, your webpage on 176×208 (S60 mobile) should be as usable as on 1680×1050. Fixed width would either waste usable spaces or simply unusable.

Let’s go back to the tall-screen long screen thing. My plan would be perfect if I bought a 22″ monitor with desktop resolution 1050×1680. But 22″ is too big to see everything at once and they are not that affordable. I’m just nobody abut a poor student trying to get my parents comfort and productive when using computer; they are in a age that couldn’t sit in front of the computer too long; backache hurts.

Child labor their own child

雖然傳統價值是小孩應該要孝順父母,竭盡所能的滿足父母的需要,我還是覺得學校宵夜街的那些店家不應該把自己的小孩叫來幫忙,當工讀生用。

我不覺得多請一個工讀生就會讓餐廳的生意倒閉。

我覺得小孩子應該要把自己的時間拿來探索自己的無限可能。如果是小學生,她/他應該和朋友出去玩,或許以後會是個外交官;如果是國中生,她/他應該去公共圖書館翻翻書,或許以後會是個文學家或是學者。

這樣的機會不應該被剝奪,無論父母的職業為何。

只是,也有可能是我的世界太完美了。

Although it’s the Chinese tradition that require children to fulfill their families’ need, to piety their parents, I don’t think restaurant owners should make their children working without pay.

I don’t believe one more paycheck (to one more part-time worker) will bring down the business.

I think children should make use of their own time to explore their endless possibilities. He/she could be a diplomat some day, if he/she hang out with his friends more; He/she could be a excellent scholar, if he/she spend more time in the public library.

Chances like this should not be taken no matter what parents do for living.

Or you may say as someone would: Hey Tim, your world is too perfect.

教科書的立場

聯合報

一位編書教授認為,「武昌起事」確實學術中性,而「武昌起義」代表中華民國推翻滿清的正當性,教科書本來就該有立場,是「中華民國」的立場,所以該用「起義」才對;評審查委員都是中華民國政府聘任的,不應謀殺中華民國的立場。

這句話看似正確;但用這種角度編撰教科書的話,是不是該在前面序章寫個聲明?什麼都不用多說,寫個中華民國的現狀處境就好了。

而且,什麼是中華民國的立場?中華民國最後一個立場(行政命令,未寫入憲法)是「中華民國放棄宣稱擁有全中國的主權與代表權,願意以代表台灣人民的民主政府的姿態與中共政府進行對等的談判,共同追求未來自由、民主、均富的統一新中國。(19941991,國家統一綱領)」。照這個立場,不把中國稱為「我國」沒有錯呀;我國雖然叫中(華民)國,但是是代表台灣而不是中國的民主政府呀;把前半段的歷史改為持平用詞、去掉國父等等稱呼也是合理的不是嗎?我實在是看不出這對「我國」的國族認同有任何危害。

更麻煩的是國家的立場的變動速率:雖然偷偷在背後搞現在這些東西,但是現任的總統凍結國統會之後並沒有推出明確的新立場;那再換黨執政之後教科書就再改嗎?把這個教科書編撰的邏輯套用到偉大的右派布希政府的話,那美國的教科書不就都沒有地質學和演化論了?地球是在西元前4000年第一週由上帝創造的嘛;生物的精巧、奇妙與不可知也是因為是由更高等,全知、全能的智慧所創造的囉。這位「編書教授」有沒有一點學術獨立的精神呀?如果他拿 NSF 的錢去做全球暖化的研究的話,他會不會說「全球暖化只是個理論,不是事實」?

學術中性才是教科書編撰的立場;如果用國家的立場編撰義務教育教科書,快速的變動和各國間的歧見(想想二戰歷史)會導致後患無窮。聯合報為什麼不乾脆說「教科書要符合(媒體塑造的)民意的立場」這樣還比較快。偉哉!聯合報。