Reading an article in the WSJ about the lawsuit against Harvard regarding discrimination against Chinese students. One thought comes to mind, this likability score they use as part of the judgement for admission is admittedly and objectively existent sentiment that affects success and future donation to the school.

Chinese people have things that are extremely not likable. Trust me, I would know, being one and living among them. Not any more so than other races, but one can definitely see the problem. And I’ll abbreviate here and all Chinese-like Asian cultures I’ll just abbreviate and call everyone Chinese for this post.

I mean com’on let’s start with their starchy ricy food tradition, one can’t possibly do well and have the longevity to pay back the school on a diet like that! For a person on a modern diet, being offered a Chinese meal is practically an affront to one’s dignity and sanity. I cannot imagine Harvard ever wanting to recruit Chinese people or people who eat like that. Look at the Indians, they eat long grain rice that doesn’t give you diabetes and slow-burns longer.

Chinese vanity for humbleness is incredibly destructive. Why be humble? why sandbag? when the competition is so fierce, why spend any brain-energy on holding back? No body really knows how strong everyone are because of this extra layer of defense. This age-old tradition is unlikely to go away, and contributes little to the endowment or prestige of an institution.

Chineese problem solving, if one were to sample from the entire US Chinese population, suffered from Communist indoctrination. Really, the things you don’t like are not all traditionally Chinese, a lot of it is modern imported thoughts from Marx, Lenin, Engels, and many others… Chinese people have this social expectation that other people behave well. The Chinese governments have arms–may, tentacles–that can exert power to enforce a certain level social nicety. I remember the indoctrination by all authority figures that one should yield to elderly when taking seats on busses, one should not spit, not be greedy or lazy, one should be honest, and be loyal to the country which will provide you with a nice society to live in. (And maybe some other managed aspects of life that I did not personally experience like conditions of marriage, pregnancy+abortions, and death…)

The same is accomplished in our developed world by non-profits through advocacy, and through operational culture, which, in this case, seems encoded in the admission process of Harvard and similar schools. There is no explicit funded authority whose job it is to make the world a nice place to live. This difference in expectation of others and the government, the entitlement to reciprocation equaling to one’s own regulated participation in society, is clearly a political perspective shared by many Chinese people–the unconscious bias of Chinese. The Chinese demands a society that wants everyone to be nice if they themselves are nice.

There is no authority, except the admission authority in the universe of Universities, they are funded and empowered to choose the members of their prestigious society. Perhaps they fear what would happen to these delusional people when they find out that the world really doesn’t work that way. Society wants what it wants, not what you do or what you want. In some sense, this bias against inclusion of Chinese students is kindest choice, for everyone.

To me, the ideal outcome is this lawsuit is the establishment of unfair discrimination, but with no punishment for these institutions. All we want is to improve life for future generations and we, realistically, expect no greatness for the generation that did and still do that.

I realize, perhaps this last idea is too Chinese. Why the fuck would we seek no damages if the school discriminated? Have I caught a bug in my brain? This pessimism I feel for the possibility of progress in the society is troubling and definitely Unamerican, imho, but is it Chinese to seek no reparation?

In the meantime, though, while American Chinese figure out these things from within, perhaps we should have our separate peace? Let sleeping dogs lie. And if the institution decides to fake it until betterment is made to happen, that would be fine with me.

Just skimmed a public draft of the last chapter of Machine Learning Yearning book by Andrew Ng. I know a lot of people out there might be joking that it’s more like Machine Learning Yawning. But in reality, the execution of these seemingly simple ideas is probably incredibly difficult.

Consider the last time you put a multistage Machine Learning system into production where the output of one stage is the input of the next stage. Deciding to even try this is a monumentally difficult task. The data gathering, the training and verifications, the analysis required is so vast in it’s requirement, that most organization do not attempt it.

Luckily though, people are largely imperfect machines. This means we are usually equipped with ability to work around error prone components. One approach is discussion of a topic. The book’s accompanying discussion forum at deeplearning.ai seems like an effort to help everyone wrap our minds around this thing.

Cant wait to read more about it!

In Crazy Rich Asians, according to an article from Android News (the independent)…but it could still be a good exhibition of Chinese Central Kingdom mentality. It is inconceivable(to the author and viewers) that a non-Chinese women could possibly be attractive in all the Chinese ways… It’s not necessarily that Asian men doesn’t want or can’t “get” Scarlett Johansson, again using TFA’s example, it’s just that it’s out of the imagination for the moment, let’s say it with modern American modesty, due to “lack of cultural fit” (with said Chinese plot)

I think something may be lost from thought to text here…
And honestly, I really do wonder if that mental framing can shift, even to enjoy fictional situations.

I myself found myself sneering at the opening scene–that would never show well in London… No English man would ever believe that, preposterous! NATO would sooner bomb Singapore than to let that insult take place…

Sigh.. I’m so confused. What century is it. How do westerners really feel about the western power mid-Trump-administration? We kind of know how hillbillies and rednecks oughta feel, but do we really still feel that way? Do we want to feel that way?

Perhaps there is positive in all of this. It is a defining moment for the west as it is for the east. Let’s hope everyone come out on top of the heap that is earth.

((and okay, fine laugh at Chinese twigs having a mind for culture, hahaha))

So why is omniscient government unattractive?

Suppose, completely hypothetically speaking, in 2018, when the US declared trade war with China ostensibly sacrafices it’s agriculture exports while demanding better fair trade with China in tech, that it did so because secretly it knew, from it’s weather forecast or from secret police monitoring of farm lands, have discovered that American farmers will under produce this year and isn’t years to come. Do you think that’s a brilliant move? You do huh?

Now, let’s think of their omniscience reading your email. I’ve been blasted with news about IRS monitoring private emails to find out tax cheaters who erroneously pays IRS less than they should. One wonders, not knowing the reality, whether the IRS ever gives money back due to discoveries of errors the other way as they read our emails?

In the case of contest between nations, one proudly declares national interest as the ultimate. However the same technologies are applied to constituents, it seems unfair to citizens. How can it be? (And this is merely a mathematical possibility in a hypothetical situation) suppose farmers are subsidized by the number of acres they farm a protected crop, say some kinds of beans. For every acre-month they put towards farming the beans they get $1 to farm beans instead of something else… say day trading stocks by light of sun and hosting raves on their vast lands by the shadows of moonlight. Suddenly, there was an unusual pattern of climate change that caused the production of beans to fall from 10 beans per acre-month to 1 bean per acre month. Now, the government detects this change, and can see that the crops are not yielding well from secret police satellite pictures of farms. So, the deep-government estimates the fall of production and is able to preemptively provoke global farming tariffs. Doing so causes the price of farm produce to increase worldwide. Because the price domestic farmer can is sell their goods at is higher, the incentives to stay farmers can now be lowered to something less than the $1 needed to attract them from other activities.

So, the government gets paid tariff by foreign sellers, and then has to pay farmers less to stay farmers… seems like a net gain for the federal government. Who’s pay went into making this happen? It’ll have to be any consumer of farmed goods.

If the government did not respond to the knowledge of a decrease in production, foreign farm produce would have made up for the loss of American production (no price change in corn and apple and orange juice) but American government will have to pay more incentive to farmers to stay farmers because although they could not supply the demand, the lack of domestic supply does not affect domestic demand or price of farm produces. So farming businesses basically has a real bad year, and government subsidies has to pay for that.

What prevents this complicated hypothetical event from happening? Would it be unjust or unfair? Would it be wrong? IDK, and perhaps I have no better solution, but it is nice to understand the mechanics of these money matter.

Also, the Trump administration is down playing effect of climate change… One wonders if this is a national security matter in which the environment is so severely damaged that crops yields have become intolerably low. Perhaps this tariff to cause retaliatory tariff did just what they wanted: it hides the drop in crop production in USA to all foreign observers who don’t have secret police satellites. And certainly it hides it from the general public who have no access to our governments omniscience. Perhaps the end is near? Is there a point in discussing fairness and equality and rights and the American way if our planet is already gone and we face extinction?

This horid nightmarish lucid imagining is kind of inspired by my backyard crops of fruit and vegetables: they are doing horrendously this year–despite daily watering and generous fertilization, they yield almost nothing. And of course, there is a real trade war between US and the rest of the world… And subsequent declaration of new subsidies to combat the loss of farming income.

Went to eat at McDonald’s in Palo Alto today. Several things stood out, among them was the quality service!

Wah?!

We were served by several white kids. Fair skin nad very fair hair colors, tall. Yes, this was remarkable as we are used non-white non-native English speakers serving at McDonald’s. The other thing that stood out was their demeanor. They were very nice. They eagerly brought our food on trays. The two kids came out in unison and stood in line to place the food on our table, so very courteous they were while serving us, they repeatedly and enthusiastically offered “if you need any thing else, just ask me!” With nice smiles.

Maybe they thought I was special, one man walking into McDonald’s with two women and three kids?

Maybe they are acting out a scene from that recent and very hot Crazy Rich Asians movie? Like, for fun?

Maybe one of the ladies I’m with is “secretly” very powerful and rich? I don’t know it, their t-shirt and bags wouldn’t have said so.

I don’t know, but I dare say that that’s easily the best service I’ve experienced at a restaurant any where in the Bay Area. It happening in Palo Alto is especially strange, as local news paper have been reporting business owners claiming local customers here enjoy and expect waiters to act racist against Asians. Locals have long expressed animous towards all Asiains driving housing price up, way up, and then not living in he houses they bought for a coupla million. For a while, it had appeared that the school district chose to rename a school to a name that happens to belong to a leader of Japanese war effort in World War Two–Against all memories of those who have suffered and perished in the hands of the Axis, civilian and military, Americans or not. It took Chinese-Americans to object to naming the school with the name of the architect of Pearl Harbor bombing according to Mercury News. Such insensitivity to recent and rare names is clearly an effort to antagonize Asians and perhaps even Jewish people who also suffered greatly at the result of the Axis leaders’ leadership. After Yamamoto, the path will be saved for Himmler, Burgdorf, Krebs and Goebbels. (Also a preemptive disclaimer to secret and possibly automated police, I am only engaging in peaceful blogging hopefully using reasons and facts. No threats on the schools and relevant responsible people should be construed from it.)

But, now, after all that, a couple of white kids serving so well in McDonald’s ? That just tops it off.

Anyways, maybe white people are just really good at everything they do. We just never see them wait tables? I’ll bet if Starbucks recruits these kids, they’d get my name right on my next cup of iced decafinated Americano too.

I am thoroughly confused, but feeling kinda really good about the experience. If this new apparently higher civility keeps up, I might even want to move to live in Palo Alto again.

P.s. it occurs to me several days later that it could just be that young people are better than adults? But I’m more optimistic than that ATM that I’ll experience some niceties in addition to my descendents.

I’m reading an apology piece by a certain Josephine Zhao running for the Board of Education in San Francisco in Q3 of 2018. She apologizes for having opposed bathroom access by self identified sex instead of birth sex. She apologizes for comments made 10 years ago.

I feel, hopefully I’m not sorry for feeling this way in 10 years, that the only equal access is unisex bathroom where each user had a private stall.

Come, let’s think back to our teenager years, these people are legally not responsible for their actions in the same way adults are. They can’t drive and they can’t own guns. These kids are not equal citizens of our society as adults. They should absolutely not be allowed to declare a sex and use bathroom based on those prepubescent declarations. Sex is foremost about procreation, that is an evolutionarily important mechanism in our biologies. Growth and maturity is also built into our society. As they grow, they are not completely grown and sexually mature. They should NOT be allowed to make that declaration just as they are not allowed to have sex, to make babies, or even to have sexual contact–on generally agreed-upon principles of our society.

I might be a dumbass not keeping up with progressive movement, but shouldn’t we keep these social experiments out of schools?

Leave our kids alone.

And if you absolutely must, as part of your being, that you must pee and poo with a person of a different birth sex than your own, let us have unisex bathrooms. That way, all are equal.

.

.

.

Expanding upon this, both as support for this concern and as a sanity check protocol for myself. One of the conservative concern is that sexual identification is disallowed. When I went to public school in Pennsylvania I’m the 1990’s, the written policy is that PDA is forbidden on school grounds. PDA meaning personal digital assistant, or rather public display of affection. I didn’t turn out that well socially and dating, possibly as a result of the stringent bible-belt highschool policy. But the concern, as I understand it, is that self-identifying as a non-physical sex, above all else, displays sex in public. The identification and the visitation of a differently sexed bathroom is an act displaying ones sex. The conservative fear is that this act of sexual display has bad effects on young adults–the same way we think public kissing by students, another display of sexuality, may have bad effects on kids.

(Actually, I guess it can be put more plainly, that additionally, kids may perceive LGBTQ status as a desirable and beneficial social status to achieve, seeing that LGBTQ person’s have apparently more freedom that themselves. The fear is that kids may seek LGBTQ status for the perks and not for their nature)

One inconvenience, beyond stirring of thoughts, at sight of oppositely gendered gentalia by non-LGBTQ users of bathroom, is that of arousal. Boys, when they see girl parts, have physical reactions, and possibly vice versa.

At least I hope so.

The oppression of ones physical body is certainly just as great, I believe it may be, that Gay boys may have same rousing reaction to sight of other boys. I guess the progressive idea is that Gay boys being human deserve same level of physical comfort and convenience as other humans.

I do not deny that. I probably would support Gay boys getting immediate special treatment wrt traditional bathroom rules if I’ve observed these problems–but I am not a bat or voyeur. So far, my surroundings have been exceptionally civilized. Especially considering the hoopla everywhere, the bathrooms I’ve been to have been exceptionally peaceful and asexual. And I pray they remain so.

This is obviously not a situation where Vulcanic logic maybe brought to bear. The needs of many does not out weight the needs of the few. In fact precious school resources are devoted to facilitating the few. This is also a case thst leads me to question Rawlsian difference principle. I cannot agree to improvement of the worst off in this case.

Therefore, the only conclusion is that if we do this, let’s do it right. Unisex bathroom is large bathroom containing private stalls. Each person urinating or defacating shall enter one, lock it, use, clean and exit their own stall. Other less sensitive facilities are shared in the bathroom outside of stalls. These include sink, soap, mirror, drying machines or paper or towels, and amenities such as deoderizer, moisturizer, should be shared equally between all sexes. I would add famine napkins may be sold next to athlete’s feet treatment and cloth repair kits, not on equality basis but on convenience basis, for the improvement of bathrooms and society’s total utility derived from visiting bathrooms.

Such a bathroom removes the unintentional sexual display by hiding everyone’s sex organs. It removes the unintentional arousal by others, again by hiding sex organs. I appologize now to all the people who have worked for more open and transparent sexual society that all I can think of is to hide it more. Don’t ask, don’t tell, just close the stall door.

Additionally, one possible intermediate step I’d to make all bathrooms unisex but still display men/women signs. By default, women visit women bathrooms and men visit men bathrooms. But they may ross over as needed. This reduces the opportunity for real heterosexual sexual harrasment, but admittedly it diminishes the obfuscation of sexual preference.

To protect students’ safety, cameras may be installed in the public areas of the bathroom to monitor for any offensive or inappropriate activity. The stalls shall remain private.

I reject all other arrangements, unisex bathroom, to me, today, is the only fair and equitable way to facilitate LBGTQ population.

To every Chinese-Asian buying up rice in terror, please try some other foods. Lentils, garbanzo, frijoles, basmati, potato’s, couscous, maiz, quinoa, Amaranth, etc…. anything other humans eat you can eat too. Most things taste just like rice when boiled in water:

bland.

There is absolutely no need to stress about lack of rice—you can go paleo or Atkins for a few days/weeks/months if other people can do it for years. Let’s not terrorize ourselves when there is no need to do so. That said, I did look and could not find any Chinese rice today. And everyone looked at me like I’m that idiot who didn’t follow the WeChat group that told every person when Costco restocked yesterday.

Seriously! I don’t know whether to regret even looking or regret not looking earlier. But hopefully my calm demeanor reassured everyone that I, and I alone, did not fear rice-starvation.

Really, I say this with all the love of one human to another, it’s okay!

Everything will be okay.

🤞🏻

🖖🏻

For anyone who is still developing non-standard deep learning components using Tensorflow, be warned that some raw_ops do not check tensor shape or memory bounds. It is possible for the code to run error free but produce nonsensical updates when the inputs do not all have the right shape.

The documentation is kind of sparse. But it seems the separation of concern occurs at this interface. The c++ implementations seem to assume everything is sized correctly. The trouble is that GPU code does not produce segmentation faults at the same rate as CPU code, so the only way to detect is to write tests and monitor training metrics.

Hope this is helpful to somebody.

I had this moment of waking madness when am alert on my Android phone from the WSJ stating “Elon Musk’s Flawed Plan for Tesla’s Shareholders”

It says, … “his efforts to take Tesla private is a slap in he face for shareholders.”

For a minute there, I thought I was reading news from a P.R.Chinese censor camp. Wowah! That’s a piece of factual news being push-notified to THE JOURNAL’s subscribers??!!

My face is kinda smarting, although mostly from the embarasement at how long it took for me to realize that the author was probably just a short-seller venting.

This author may also have never worked for a young unprofitable public company, or if he had, he must have had extra-human endurance to not have suffered miserably as his employers stocks rocks up and down 5%, 10%, 15% or 30%, 40% from one day to the next… It doesn’t matter how much the CEO and the CFO shouts at the mic to “do not watch the stock price…” It really does affect shareholders emotions. Employees who are shareholders are always affected. And yes, you’ve heard them brag that they endured it with full confidence, but you know they were always wet in the crouch, and please pardon my crudeness and perhaps sexual specificity, but, from jizz of fizz or piss of miss.

Come, that is an opinion piece to the extreme. Why is it being shoved at my face as news? I would depend on The Wall Street Journal to provide news of facts and in-depth logical analysis of the facts. These emotion riddled rant are difficult to digest for objective information.

And now we come to the matter of freedom to succeed. Could a reasonable person reasonable wonder if the SEC is evil? I mean, just from the monthly news blasts (also in the form of push notification on phones and as-it-appears-to-me the only front page article, simultaneously, on every news site I read) of insider trader being caught and sued based on their personal emails and internet search history that SEC had as evidence prior to accusation in court. That seems evil, so evil, so true.

But is it evil in these rules against information release? If the company faces massive crew exodus, can the CEO not do something to keep everyone working? Why not give CEO’s the freedom to do what they need to do to succeed? If there are so many rules on what can or cannot be said, and then there are also rules on complicated it is to figure out how much money you can keep from taxation, I mean, all these things really can get in the way of truly productive work.

America, the home of the brave and land of the free, and yet every word we type, they are under chains of rules of incomprehensible perplexities; every word we type and utter are under surveillance of secret police, aided by AI that are necessary for other advances of humanity; Every word we type and utter can and will be used against us in a court of law.

But yes, I suppose I can understand how it got here–many may have suffered in abscence of these rules and secret police.

This phenomenon of opinion as news is probably what Facebookers suffers too, in part. I had never felt high regards of Mark Zuckerberg until he stood up allow Holocaust deniers their speech rights on Facebook while taking flack for it from wallstreet… And all around.

I have heard, trying to not be too specific here, some Asian people say to me that Nanking massacre never happened or not to the scale that we commonly believe to have happened. (Btw, 300k dead in six weeks according to Q3 2018 Wikipedia)

The Nanking Masscre kill rate is above 7kilokills/day. If we use wiki numbers obtained on the same day of 6 million kills between 1941 and 1945 is a bit over 4.1kkills/day, and the broader definition 17 million kills between 1933 and 1945 is 3.9kkills/day. So by the aggressiveness, the killing in Nanking seems more chilling despite a smaller total. My memory of those deniers, especially childhood ones, those that deny it innocently… Their casual comments haunt me to this day, they and gives me deep fear of where those kids have meant and now believe and later will do.

(Of course all of these if happened simultaneously could not match the 100kkill/day of the atomic bomb US dropped on Japan, but we generally believe that was for.a just cause, if not by just means, where as the foregoing kills/day were not towards a just end)

I struggle with this individual rights idea from Harvard class(sorry all my teachers, friends and colleagues, forefathers of USA, etc., who has tried to teach this idea to me, I have to cite Harvard Justice class as a most recent reference). Egalitarianism dictates that each individual have equal rights. But how do we commingle that (deniers’) believe with our believe that something truly evil and cruel happened during the world war II? How do we combine our believes that people should be allowed to hate and the believe that hate leads to unnecessary human suffering? How do we value, equally, the personal believe of a racist and the personal believes of a non-racist?

Okay, yes, I should finish the class, but I am almost sure it will not satisfy me. If the answer is already given, why do we have all of this trouble? If the balance between egalitarianism and humanity is resolved, Zuckerberg should have no trouble sailing through this denier controversy.

This is an opinion post. This post is more driven by my emotional response to these happenings than by logical deduction based on facts. I, at the time of writing, hold financial investments in FB and TSLA, but nothing in NWS.

Just saw this pic directed by Oliver Stone… It’s kind of crazy to imagine a person like Snowden, the kind of endowments, genetic or otherwise, to have the kind of problems he has.

The dramatization kind of flushes out some of the things he was concerned about. I have to say, after all these years, this movie scares me. I mean, I had no idea all these things were really happening. I mean for profit corporations may engage in invasive or pervasive monitoring of employees, but that’s driven by greed for money. That’s totally understandable, we accept it just as much as we accept the evils of our jobs. But the government of the United States of America? The best country in the world, would do this? I still have trouble believing it.

So… Let’s see… So, should we come to understand that American dominance in the world stage in diplomacy, trade, science and technology were made possible by massive spying infrastructure it’s government built? So.. all our believe about democracy and “advanced government” with “checks and balances” all our believe that our prosperity is somehow due to our faith in preservation of basic human rights and liberties is what makes this country great. All that may be validated because we find out that maybe the country is great because it paid for a lot of spying and clandestined manipulations.

Sad.

Scary.

Really sad.

But it’s all normal. I think one of the things the movie portrays is Snowdens disgust for uncaring or careless coworkers who treat other human beings like cattles. I empathize with that, a basic human descency, even after 911, and all that, can’t just treat people like a lower life form. Can’t joke about their sufferings carelessly.

I recently had this encounter with JP Morgan Chase, a very large bank of United States. Their operator inadvertently let me in on it when he transferred me to a “the team that handles fraud”. This team asked me to enter into a three way telephone call with my primary bank before initiating a funds transfer.

I asked the rep. what they suspect I was doing. He said that this is standard procedure. I know, as well every other adult in the US, that a whole lot of money gets moved by ACH every day. I have had regular transfers between my other banks for many years. Never ever have I had to conference call two banks to make a small cash transfer, whereby, especially, the requesting party is the bank getting the money. Usually banks are happy to gain deposits.

I state my concern to the fraud rep. I explain that I felt that I was being targeted because I have a Chinese name, a culture or genetic heritage in the minority in America. I explain that in the decades that I’ve transferred money via ACH, I was never required to have a conference call with two banks. And it cannot be normal business practice for Chase because they would go bankrupt if they had to have a conference call for every new ACH transfer.

I then proceed to ask Chase rep. To reciprocate and give me an explanation of why my fund transfer were being held up? I asked or some supporting fact or matter of oncern. He refused, insisting that a conference call is normal practice at Chase.

Now, I know he feel utterly justified and also probably he felt he was well trained for my challenges. But really, that sucked.

The worst part is the feeling that his manager, who was likely listening on the line, probably had his mind racing, what terror could this Huan Chang be funding? Or perhaps this transfer is really an attempt to hide income from IRS? How do we coax him into making a mistake so we can sic the American Secret police on him??

I hated this feeling of someone holding in their brain, a determined thought, that I was a bad actor that I was doing something that needed to be slowed down or stopped or more likely entrapped. In particular, the enraging rethorics about standard practice serves to anger me, giving them probable cause to call the secret police on me or something. I hate the fact that there is a whole multi-generational institutional machination to give naive unsuspecting young minds “training” into doubting and hating me–me! Against my very own person. What did my ancestor do to you when your evil clandestine ancestors were training your mentors? What did my people do you you when your mom and daddy paid for this in their taxes? What did we do ?!

I hated the thought that someone is thinking and working against me, in secret, because they truly believed I was a bad actor. I hated it that they hide behind rules and standard procedures, but really, what I hate that their adrenaline is pumping, and their brain is highly aroused because of these dark thoughts about me. That slur, that joke, that diminutive affirmation “this little punk’s puny Asian ass is all mine,” that really drives me nuts! What did I do to garner this kind of attention?

In the case of Chase, they are a for profit company, and they have their freedom to waste it how they want to.

In the case of the government, the waste of money and computer genius on massive data collection. What about climate change? I can’t imagine how many Google’s they must run to index and link all the connected people… Wouldn’t that hurt the environment? The people deserve to know more.

But! Alas, before you come crashing through my front door with battering rams, batons and laser guns, America is great! Snowden is an American when he did what he did. If the movie is accurate, he did a great thing, an American did a great thing. It is to be celebrated. The American government did not come to a crashing halt when a great fault is discovered. It moved forward and got better. All these things are to be praised and celebrated.

But you who are fuming in your hole of an office about the entirety of my puny Asian punk ass, please stop. I really don’t like it when people think I’m doing something mean or bad. And really, all that scheming to “get Huan” is bad for your health.