Random stuff:

As I was wandering randomly on Wikipedia, I read a bit on Tai Ji Chuan and found out that there is this guy called 陈发科. To me, what is most interesting is his name. If he were to go to an English speaking country, he will be called "Fake Chen". Of course, some Chinese would insist that their names not be pronounced as one would normally pronounce English words, but it is not so clear if he would do that (especially since non-Chinese speakers usually can't pronounce the tones properly). It would be interesting if his teacher ever need to call him from afar.

Lately there is this Energizer battery advertisement about its use in camera, which ends with the Energizer battery running on the stack of photograph, tossing the photographs to the left, with itself remaining stationery. I suspect that the scenario is only physically possible if one tilts the whole scene slightly anticlockwise, or there is an external force that acts only on the battery.

Suppose you lost a new laptop. Sometime later, you win a laptop that is of the same model. Chances are, in the end, you'll be happier than you started out with. Physically, one hasn't really gained anything from the whole process. However, the process of rationalizing the loss of the laptop has made one feel not so bad about the loss. Perhaps, this suggests, that happiness and utility may not be that closely linked. After a large gain, it is likely that one will get used to it, and not feel so happy about it. Maximizing utility may not actually lead to people feeling better off. Wealth(which is related to utility) can be increased in the entire society, but if it is due to a greater amount of wealth increased in the hands of a small number of rich people at the expense of a large number of poor people, the overall happiness doesn't seem like it is maximized. An additional dollar to the rich is just a number, but it means food to the poor.

Perhaps, then, happiness is not a state function. It is more like a path function, which perhaps explains why "30 hours of free labour + lottery win" beats "30 hours of work".