leaf

I just finished writing a blog and got educated by black hat hackers. However, thanks to the black hat trickster, whether it's a brother or sister, for the friendly deletion and account leak (after all, there is no eternal security; curiosity is the ladder for hackers' progress).

Let's make friends next time.
While there are few people around, let me bully you a bit [tv_doge]
{__/}
( • . •)
/ >⚪️
Did you see this coin?

{__/}
( • - •)
⚪️<
I won't give it to you even if I eat it.

{__/}
( • . •)
/ >⚪️
Just kidding, here you go.

{_/}
( • - •)
⚪️<
Hey, I snatched it back again.
{_/}
( • . •)
/ >⚪️
Here you go, I'm not joking.

{__/}
( • - •)
⚪️<
Hey, just kidding.

Σ(っ °Д °;) っ
Hey, why are you crying?

{__/}
( • . •)
/ >Coin, like
Here you go, all yours.
As for cyberspace, a hacker alone is different from a hacker organization.
“We are Legion.”
Translation: We are Legion.
This slogan is often used to represent the decentralized nature of hacker legions, implying that their members are numerous and cannot be easily defeated. It emphasizes the concept of collective power.
2. “We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.”
3. “Knowledge is free. We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.”
Translation: Knowledge is free. We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.
This version of the slogan combines the spirit of information freedom and opposition to the suppression of free speech, while reiterating the organization's threat and determination.
4. “The Internet is the last bastion of freedom.”
Translation: The Internet is the last bastion of freedom.
Hacker legions often advocate for defending free speech and privacy, claiming that the internet is an open and free space that should maintain its independence, opposing surveillance and suppression by governments, corporations, or other organizations.
5. “If you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.”
Translation: If you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.
This statement reflects the hacker legion's criticism of privacy and surveillance, emphasizing the importance of individual privacy rights in modern society. It also satirizes certain authorities or organizations that infringe on personal freedom with a "fearless" attitude.
6. “Anonymous has no political affiliation.”
Translation: Anonymous has no political affiliation.
Hacker legions often emphasize that they are an organization that transcends political positions, focusing on information freedom, opposing suppression and injustice, rather than supporting any specific political agenda.
7. “Expect Us, we are everywhere.”
Translation: Expect us, we are everywhere.
This quote emphasizes the widespread influence of hacker legions and their anonymous actions through the internet, capable of appearing anywhere and taking action at any time.
8. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
Translation: Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
This statement is inspired by a famous quote from American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., and hacker legions use it to express resistance against global injustices, advocating for fairness and justice on a global scale.
These quotes represent the core values of hacker legions: supporting free speech, information transparency, opposing suppression, and taking a strong stance against injustice and abuse of power. Although the methods of hacker legions are often...

In the end, the world allows us to grow, and because of our dreams, we take root.

This is the Chinese translation of the philosopher Descartes' famous saying "Cogito, ergo sum" (I think, therefore I am). In reverse thinking, the English translation of "我在顾，我思" (I am here, I think) can be: "I am here, I think."
Combining dialectical thinking, when translating "我思，故我在。我在顾，我思，" it can emphasize the multi-layered, variable, and interdependent relationships of its connotation. These two sentences demonstrate the relationship between thinking and existence, reflecting the dialectical unity between thought and self-awareness.

Here is the English translation based on dialectical thinking:

"I think, therefore I am."

This part is Descartes' famous saying, reflecting the dialectical relationship between thought and existence. The translation remains concise as it conveys that thinking is the foundation of existence, the core of "self-awareness" and "self-affirmation."

"In my being, I reflect; in my reflection, I think."
"In my being, I reflect; in my reflection, I think."

Here, "我在顾，我思" is understood dialectically, reflecting the interaction between thinking and reflection. According to dialectical thinking, we can understand that "existence" and "reflection" do not exist separately but are interconnected and interact with each other. Thinking is not just about cognition of things; it is also about the perception and reflection of one's existence, and the two coexist.

This expression emphasizes the dialectical unity of "I think" and "I am judging," indicating that the awakening of self-awareness is not only the result of thinking about matters but also a dynamic process of thinking through reflection and self-examination.

Here and Now (IOC)#

The internet is the most magical thing created by humanity over thousands of years, liberating people from technological, knowledge, and historical structures. The freedom and democratic consciousness it brings, personal awareness, participation, and experience allow individuals to be independent and freer. It is a true revolution that will ultimately change the pattern of this world.

Memory is a particularly important cognitive aspect of how people view the retrospective effect of themselves.

• Memory is more like a path pattern of our behavioral cultural habits.
• We usually establish culture and teaching on a sense of security, and that sense of security is based on the organization of memory. Memory affects our behavioral decisions and perceptions today.
• High-level needs of dreams, I don't have many dreams, and it's hard to see good results from dreams.
  • Sensibility allows our lives to have emotional experiential possibilities, smells, light, letting us know that life continues, with pleasure or pain. Sensibility informs us of the existence of life.
  • Rationality is a tool of cognitive order that ensures the continuity of sensibility. Rationality tells us the psychological safety and discernibility of the cognitive process of experiential fragments over time; it can sometimes be narrow and one-sided.
  • Sensibility does not wish to remain in this narrow range; it hopes to make the impossible possible. Sensibility is a temptation for us to move forward, with concealment and deception; sensibility is often the reason for our behavior.

Education#

Education, at its core, is about telling others what is possible to achieve.

• However, the education we receive often tells us what is impossible; it is neither enlightening nor a current model. Bad education is worse than no education; it misleads a person's entire life. I am the most uncertain and unconfident example; I have no possibility of educating others, and I am confused about many issues.

Art is only valuable as a practice and experiential process of beauty and cognitive sensibility.

• Its value lies in the new understanding of life gained by practitioners, experiencers, and viewers—on personal behavior, in epistemology, life thus becomes individual thinking, and the educational social structure differs from before. The meaning of this understanding is actually limited, but our lives are so simple that this limitation appears precious, making such practices necessary.

• Whether it is worth the price, why it is worth the price, who decides, all have little reasoning. Just like the stock market, it is a very vague matter. Some people are willing to spend money to buy, willing to speculate, or worship it like a relic; this is entirely a personal matter.

  It has no real significance for art itself. Art will not become better or worse because of this.

  The art market is a game for the wealthy, a game for museums and art institutions, closely linked to human desires, power, possession, the hope for eternity, and the desire to conquer death. It is actually quite foolish.

  • Works often express a boring state of socialized dog language symbolism, with no profound thoughts—my thoughts are very simple, but people do not allow such simplicity; it must be said more complexly, endowed with certain meanings. Human artistic ability is like the desire to eat; everyone should possess it.

The behavior of artists is beneficial for the mental enlightenment of others; through an artwork, it helps redefine a possibility that is astonishing to people.

• Photography records images on a flat surface through light in an instant. These images seem to be the most authentic records of reality, yet they are deceptively disguised.
• It distances itself from realistic expression, betraying the closest kinship with reality, honestly stating the greatest lie. Photography is photography itself. Once photography is completed, everything else is quickly destroyed.

Photography is the same as other visual art forms like painting and film; people cognitively load a stubbornly, desirously expressed program of others, saying things that are not easy to clarify. Only the act itself has real meaning; reproducing it forms another kind of behavior, another possibility. Things that cannot be realized can only express an attempt, an illusion, which relates to our ignorance, our obstacles, or so-called defects.
Adapted from "Images"

Seeking a Possibility#

Is there an inseparable relationship between art and politics for you?
All human activities are inseparably linked to politics. Art, as a form of human linguistic activity, is difficult to separate from politics. Art requires self-expressive ways to represent social symbols, expressing possibilities that generate certain impacts and butterfly effects among others and other groups.
It allows people to potentially transcend outdated expressions and communication methods; when this expression and communication method changes, society has already changed, and its original power structure, value system, and center have all changed. Individualized and independent thinking has truly become possible; this is the first time in human history that technology has made individualization and independence possible.

What is your creation exploring? What does it reflect?#

Most of my activities are about seeking a possibility. Possibility is not a clear purpose; it is a human need that asks whether this known world is as imagined, whether it must be so, whether what we recognize is reasonable.
Your father is a poet; how has he influenced your growth and later work? What does poetry mean to you?
If there is an influence, it is to make me aware of the existence of language and thought. Spirit is part of human existence; it is a fundamental content of strong human existence. The era I grew up in was a dark time when many people faced misfortune; their life experiences merely expressed the darkness of this era. Only in dark times do those with the capacity for thought suffer.
Having engaged in architecture, sculpture, painting, design, installation art, and book editing, do you consider yourself an artist, a multimedia creator, or something else?
I do not like or care about these titles; titles are merely saying you are a pig, he is a dog, she is a cat; there is no more meaning in that. Here, perhaps the reason for life is more important; a living person needs to breathe, needs to deal with some things they face and must do, and these things bring some pleasure. Many things I will not repeat because the pleasure no longer exists.
What does contemporary art mean to you? What is the value of contemporary art's existence?
Contemporary art is how humans respond to contemporary life through aesthetics or philosophical means, expressing a form, color, sound, or an extremely personal sense of language and thought, expressing an understanding and evaluation of modern life. Contemporary art has replaced the position of philosophy, possessing attributes of modern people that counter simple desires like pragmatism and materialism.
In terms of monetary value, artworks have held a significant position in the global art market in recent years; what are your views on this?

Is art a reflection of history, a reflection of the present, or an expectation for the future?

• Art is the formalization of its symbolic form; it does not possess these explicit social responsibilities. It can be both a retrospective reflection of memory input and a so-called psychological expectation. However, art is actually nothing; it is not something that can be directly appropriated by society; it is an expression of existence beyond practicality.
• What is the relationship between the expansion of materialism and artistic creation? Is it good or bad?
  Materialism, or nihilism, or violence and corruption, or religion, can all relate to art because art itself is something that is everywhere and nowhere; this relationship is both latent and evident.

From creation to circulation, to collection, to criticism, this system is certainly in a state of vague movement; how do you view this system?

Society naturally gives birth to its system, from imperfection to perfection, allowing it to operate. However, I feel I have no relationship with it; I can live without it. My happiness or unhappiness is unrelated to this; it is an internal state, a psychological feedback to the brain's pleasure or sadness, which others cannot decide.

• Whether it is a nation or a country, its quality is also unrelated to this; like this country, even if a thousand museums are built and two hundred opera houses are constructed,

• Should consciousness be about drawing big powder people or drawing big powder people?
  How are projects chosen?
  Most of these projects are chosen during very boring times or are chosen. Everyone encounters various opportunities and setbacks; there is no need to care too much about this issue.
  How do the inherited factors of family, history, and culture affect an individual's way of handling issues later on?

• It should be looked at carefully and experienced carefully. This influence only becomes apparent when encountering other events or handling different matters. Culture lurks in a person like a virus; only when it truly erupts does the virus reveal its characteristics, and the virus surfaces.

• Politicization is entirely accomplished through the planning of agencies and administrations. However, due to the presence of huge interest groups, there are significant gaps; where there are gaps, there are many places to hide dirt, and I belong to this dirt. Power itself is so strong that it no longer cares about these surrounding matters, thus giving us great freedom; various other values may survive here. This itself is a contradictory and complex place; it has such great irrationality yet meets the necessary human nature, but there are also detailed descriptions of human survival. I believe contradiction is a necessary condition for human thinking.

• Indeed, in a massive system, individuals are very powerless in the face of power. In the city, you can see devilish operations, but at the same time, you can also see the feeling of heroism you hope for. You still have a space for good deeds, and individuals will still have anger and emotions.
  The whole society is like this.
  This is a very interesting era. In a highly centralized society, once the basis of power disappears, it will become the freest society. Because its past power was highly concentrated, the social structure is very singular; once lost, it becomes completely chaotic and disordered.

What do you think about the relationship between artists and intellectuals?#

• An artist is an unavoidable cultural expression of a socialized intellectual; you possess a special religious ideological consciousness, which plays a special role in the culture of power. All the value of an artist is reflected in the experiential basis related to human cognitive sensibility.

• When the scope of issues an artist focuses on is too small, collective cultural conceptual repetition often occurs. However, installation or conceptual art will always involve some public topics; for example, if your work crosses into the field of architecture, how do you view the conceptual issues of artists?

• Concepts are ubiquitous; they can be politicized, mathematical, or simply logical. Conceptual art can be very extreme, and there are semantic repetitions that are entangled and unclear. After all, art is an observation of a person's life activity; as long as there are personal characteristics and privacy, it will naturally help others. One cannot expect an artist to do something remarkable; the key is whether they possess independent characteristics.

• You have a dual identity as an architect and an artist; which identity do you think has a greater impact on society?
  It depends on what kind of impact it is; you cannot say that architecture can be lived in and thus influences people. I think these two are one identity; it is not that I am an architect and also an artist; everything I engage in, including my blog, is actually the same thing.

On the jar, smashing a Han dynasty urn on the ground. You seem to want to explore how history transforms into today's societal branding, where big trademarks appear in major cities worldwide, while in the past, they were discarded by everyone in a very natural and simple way.
When we consume something, whether it is Coca-Cola or expensive Han dynasty pottery, our brains are also consumed by that consumable; consumption is bidirectional. We must acknowledge its value and ideology, which provides culture with a possibility, meaning we will constantly ask what value is.

So what is our culture today?#

Today's culture is more of an uncertain dynamic change state.

• This uncertain state generates consciousness because we possess too many different types of emotions, values, and morals;
• On the other hand, we no longer believe in these; we are always waiting for something new to appear, ready to intervene at any time.
  But here is a residential area, not just your house.
  Initially, I only built my house, and for the next seven years, no one came to find me. Only in the last two years did the villagers begin to realize that this house brought me wealth, so they started asking me to design more similar buildings to rent to galleries or artists.
  I agreed, right next to my house, and it was also not troublesome. So I built many such houses in the village, one after another, requiring little design, like template replication.
  Design is not important here; it can be said to be a minimalist project, showcasing a certain control to prevent things from becoming too complicated. I do this merely to avoid worsening the situation. I am not saying that what I do is excellent; it just prevents the situation from getting worse, avoiding it from becoming as shocking as future urban areas.
  People say they have succeeded; the meaning is the same, whether you are trading stocks or running a small business; the standard of success is a series of numbers, that is, how much you can sell. People do not have time to question or discuss other matters. Now you know that those works are products of some public desire, born from the hands of the devil, who only wants to fill his stomach and satisfy his desires. Those people are merely victims, just passersby at this feast.
  Just like what is written on your doorplate, is it a fake?
  That's right; I would call it a fake because whether classical or contemporary, our values should be linked to our perception of reality to discern what is real and what is fake.
  Just like in your work, what is new and what is old.
  The problem lies in how we make judgments and how we evaluate our value standards.
  Numbers seem to have become the only value standard now.
• Life has become so simple that it feels sad. Suddenly, we have become strangers in our own world; we are so familiar with a place, yet we are strangers there.
  So is that why you carry a camera and keep shooting everywhere?
  It's like watching a monkey show. You sympathize with those monkeys; why are they jumping around? If someone looked down from above, they would have the same question: what is this fool busy with?

So why do you keep recording?#

Because the feeling is disconnected from reality. No matter what you do, you cannot feel the connection with people, with reason and mind. You cannot truly understand anything, always on the brink of madness.

Your camera is an extension of your brain and hand, right?
Shooting should faithfully record scenes or real conditions, such as distance, light, position, etc. But where is the meaning of the recorded phenomena? How can they be pieced together? Is it that after collecting all the facts, you can find meaning and truly understand reality?
Especially with digital cameras, we can take thousands of photos at once.
Yes. The more images there are, the less meaning there is.
So there is neither a beginning nor an end, just a cyclical possibility?
That's right; after repeating it twice, three times, or a hundred times, the meaning automatically dissolves.
The first time I saw you, I thought you looked like Andy Warhol's son, always shooting.
I think Andy Warhol was ahead of his time. In that era, there were no digital devices; he had to overcome technical shortcomings. When making screen prints, he had to have the factory repeat the pattern a hundred times, but today, you can copy it a billion times with just a click of a mouse. He was lucky not to have been born in this era because if he were today, he could not create anything. He just happened to be ahead of the times, which is why Andy Warhol became Andy Warhol.

• The way the human brain operates has changed significantly. Thinking has become outdated; what we do is merely receive and react. You do not have to clarify things; the result comes out before you understand it; you must learn the result from the media.
  Do you write?

• I write some things to clarify my attitude. I believe words are still the primary tool for recording, so that people can say, oh, that person indeed said such words at that time. I want to challenge myself to write something, just like walking, there are many different ways.
  At the same time, maintaining production and creation.
  Production and creation are not very meaningful; making something takes too long and easily turns into a performance.
  Is there anything that makes you feel closer?
  My attention is mainly not on the art circle but in other places.

Because all human evaluations of various social structures are completed under very limited performance conditions; it can bring you honor or let you lose honor. I have no illusions about this. I do not care much about public evaluation; I am part of the public, so I do not care about my own evaluation.
If everyone blindly pursues trends and fashions, the world will become very boring. Life is about each person going to their own place, doing things in their desired mood. Being oneself is the most important and the hardest because after so many historical struggles, hardships, poverty, and the confinement of thought, the decline of education, and the decay of aesthetics, reality is full of wounds. Although it is difficult to be one's original self, it is indeed important.
This is a relatively complex issue. The so-called good house is made for a specific purpose in a specific complex cultural environment, specific group conditions, and specific historical periods.

• Why emphasize this specificity of culture and historical limitations? Because only this specificity and limitation can present what is called "good." If this specificity and limitation are removed and moved to another place, the evaluation standard of this "good" will be lost.

• Therefore, a good building can be a mountain path, a bridge, a farmhouse, or an art museum. Any "man-made" thing has a human evaluation of beauty, appropriate means, and effective efforts, which is the so-called human judgment. These should not be limited to modeling means or merely a subjective ideological intent; many architects have this ambition, which is a very low-level technique.

• Architecture is built through layers of human cooperation; merely having beautiful inner thoughts is meaningless. Because architecture is "constructed," if architecture only remains in the stage of fantasy, then it is not architecture. The gap between this desire and reality exists because most architects or most people in this industry lack good training and quality; they hardly know what kind of industry they are engaged in and what the basic characteristics of this industry are.

• This is a failure of education. Just like someone engaged in aviation design does not make an airplane according to their wishes but follows constraints to build. When these constraints are not fully respected, good architecture cannot emerge.

• The process of building a house is still enjoyable, right?
  In reality, troubles outweigh the pleasures; in most cases, you cannot truly realize all your imagination. Although the people I build for are relatively free, only those who believe in freedom come to me for architecture. Even so, you still have to face a massive social structural system; you are often a prophet rather than a true, complete implementer. This process involves investors, structural design, construction processes, and various policy and regulatory transitions.

• This process is complex; you have to expend a lot of energy during it. By the time it is completed, you are no longer willing to think about it, but you still have to think about it; otherwise, you will forget this pain. But when I say "can do," I mean I can still place my fantasies on the next thing. The next and the previous are not much different; after a certain time, you will feel it is not worth it. Doing art and doing architecture are two kinds of dilemmas. In architecture, due to its inherent constraints, its results have a relatively complete rationality; achieving this point means this thing is basically a complete thing. In art, there is no such completeness; whenever it becomes complete, it means this thing has lost its meaning, and it is time to overturn it again. Therefore, the enemy of doing art comes from within. If you are willing to compromise, you are complete. If you are unwilling to compromise, you will always be fragmented and cannot be complete. This is a struggle in two senses.

• "Reality" does not need to be sought; "reality" and "fact" are right there; "truth" has many human layers and only requires cultural recognition.

When lies and hypocrisy become a collective consensus of society, we will face the loss of systemic principles and judgments. When basic principles and judgments are lost, aesthetics loses its basis.

• Everything has a collective ideological consciousness, and this ideological meaning expresses a state of language transmission, consciously or unconsciously.

• Architecture is the same. If you only evaluate it as good or bad, then your evaluation is an ethical or moral evaluation; aesthetics is always related to this. This reason is important. Where does this reason come from? This reason should obviously not be a simple architectural reason. Universal philosophy and ethics are in a period of decline; society does not possess this evaluative system, which is a premise for saying its chaos. In the absence of this system, this aesthetic reason becomes very questionable.

• Therefore, I usually avoid evaluating such a question; I can only say which thing is relatively effective for this era; it is not about aesthetics being good or bad, as there are no absolute standards; and which are ineffective, or not ours, but problems that another country or period should solve. This is as simple as it can get.

• If we seek specific conditions, we must seek a standard, which is human emotion, the real capacity for understanding, the ability to distinguish right from wrong, and good judgment training. Because these have an impact on human life.

• Whether it is architecture or not is not important; it always has an impact on our lives because we use it to treat others, use it to buy a piece of clothing, and use it to decide whether to meet someone today. This is useful and effective.

• So when encountering architecture, we place its scale on a question of choice, just like we choose to buy this or not buy that, which relates to our economic conditions, the period we are in, and our judgment of material is also related to the temptation presented by the product. The world is complex, especially today; it seems there are more choices, but choices still need to be based on your cultural ability and social class, belonging to a set of emotional ways and moral judgments you have formed. It sounds very ethereal, but this choice and judgment cannot be absent.

Shouldn't we follow our primal instincts more, rather than rigidly establish some standards?#

This statement is correct; follow primal instincts, but what are instincts? How much of our instincts remain? After education, a child grows up in a specific place, regardless of where it is, goes through elementary school, middle school, and several teachers' education, and then scores some points to enter Tsinghua; how much instinct remains?
Is your instinct his instinct? If your instinct is his instinct, this is a shared thing. So, I think these are all questions. These questions can be said to be negligible because everyone has this problem, but when talking about a nation's creativity and creative power, when discussing the quality of people in a certain period, these things must play a role. His enthusiasm, his ability to accomplish tasks, and the paths he chooses constitute a characteristic of the creation of that historical period.

Yes, you can talk to someone about gravity, you can talk about apples falling from trees, and you can also say, oh, how the bouncing muscles work. But you can also emphasize absolute height; you must surpass this height to win a medal or receive a prize.

• But another person might say, I will break this child's leg so he cannot get this medal. This world indeed has multiple angles and standards, and there are various circumstances of coercion.

• Schools have a kind of training obedience norm; for example, if you want to participate in gymnastics, you must press your legs for so many hours every day. I think it is a barbaric, inhumane, and foolish training method because it simply aims to achieve an effect, saying that if you do not press your legs, you cannot achieve this; it does not care why you need to press your legs. The person pressing the legs has no interest in aesthetics; as long as they do not fall from the bar, that is enough.

• Schools are increasingly like this kind of structured society; you must not fall; if you fall, it will be very embarrassing; if you fall, you will be eliminated; if you fall, no one will catch you. This has cultivated many inhumane people who feel they have entered an environment that is advantageous compared to others, taking pride in the fact that most competitors are far behind them, right? This mentality is very Nazi-like; in fact, I believe people are the same. You begin to disrespect the most basic feelings of people, and then you will listen to the very hypocritical standards of professors in universities.

• Most professors are miserable people; they have no ability in reality. These people have neither basic emotions nor behavioral abilities, reciting some strange vocabulary in a tongue-twisting manner to make a living.

• Now, where can we obtain information that cannot be obtained, but we must get it from their mouths? But if he is a role model—if only in one aspect, his education is effective; if not, he is not worthy of being a teacher; he is just an extra trouble in your life because you must spend some time with him. So education is a big problem. But usually, many people want to use this to talk about proportion, scale, materials, light, and the transformation of space... but these people are not capable; they are very poor; I do not want to talk to them about this because none of them dare to discuss this with me.

• I think education is consistent with other emotions; it is a material reflection under those emotional judgments. If you do not have a good emotional state, all of this is very questionable; there cannot be an absolute scale. Life may be worse; we may have to deal with disasters or must be in difficulties. Therefore, human life should not be an absolute state; it is not that we must have a certain number of rooms and halls, a certain number of square meters; these things are ridiculous because pleasure has nothing to do with this; this is something everyone knows.
  Does this mean that you emphasize those very technical things, space, scale, etc., are unrelated to pleasure and exciting things?

There are too many possibilities for people to choose from. Because we have already chosen to step out of primal savagery, meaning that there are more and more choices, and more and more possibilities no longer respect past principles.
What is civilization? It is that your material barriers are decreasing, but your inner self remains the same. In the past, it may have been relatively uncivilized, needing to rely on rituals or primitive cultural totems to accomplish this; today, we must rely on our own insight or character to complete it.
Now, to complete this process requires accumulating experience and providing a set of standards; it will not appear out of thin air. For example, perhaps our judgment standards come from the most superficial scale of space we learned in architecture. Do you think that in the most vulgar education, learning these things is a helpful process for our understanding and recognition of the world?
It is an effective educational institution, but it should constantly emphasize its imperfection. Because you can imagine, if you train a person with an incomplete emotional system to have a very complete way of doing things, it is very dangerous; if you hand a quickly sharpened knife to a person without judgment, it is better not to teach him. Good education should be complete. The so-called completeness means that all its various needs can simultaneously support each other; otherwise, it will become 偏失，turning into an unbalanced object.

If you are interested in architecture, you come in to do architecture. How do you view this phenomenon? Do you think artists have some advantages or disadvantages in architecture?
Generally speaking, architectural thinking does not need to be done by architects. It was not necessary in the past. The term architect is a Western term about social division of labor.

• Architecture in China is a set of carpenter conventions because the best possibilities regarding architecture have already been established in that period. It is related to materials and ethics; it is a fixed regulation, like a chess game with established patterns. Other crafts and details change according to your state and the local environment, constantly evolving under this larger system. Like Chinese furniture, the furniture of the north and south has variations in taste, but logically it is the same.

After the industrial revolution, skyscrapers emerged, requiring buildings with greater structural strength, and this type of architecture also presents a structural pattern. There are not many other possibilities. It needs to face the density of cities, traffic, and the possibility of comprehensive utilization and coexistence, but I do not think these are very complex issues. In fact, when you walk into a village and see some houses built by farmers, they also use many architectural elements, often more reasonably than architects do, such as aesthetics born from poverty, practicality, and temporariness, considerations arising from cheapness, appropriation, or borrowing; these are actually very important architectural factors, but academies do not teach you these. They teach you how to be a chef in a five-star hotel, but any grandmother can make a dish that is not worse than that of a restaurant, even if it is just picking a few leaves from the backyard or boiling something at home without oil; it can still be an excellent dish. Why has it developed so abnormally today—that only dishes served in five-star hotels are called food? That is just nonsense. I think the entire education in the academy is a conspiracy; it says: what is the dish your mother made at home?
There are too many possibilities for people to choose from. Because we have stepped out of primal savagery, meaning that there are more and more choices, and more and more possibilities no longer respect past principles. What is civilization? It is that your material barriers are decreasing, but your inner self remains the same. In the past, it may have been relatively uncivilized, needing to rely on rituals or totems to accomplish this; today, we must rely on our own insight or character to complete it.

• Now, to complete this process requires accumulating experience and providing a set of standards; it will not appear out of thin air. For example, perhaps our judgment standards come from the most superficial scale of space we learned in architecture. Do you think that in the most vulgar education, learning these things is a helpful process for our understanding and recognition of the world?
  It is an effective educational institution, but it should constantly emphasize its imperfection. Because you can imagine, if you train a person with an incomplete emotional system to have a very complete way of doing things, it is very dangerous; if you hand a quickly sharpened knife to a person without judgment, it is better not to teach him. Good education should be complete. The so-called completeness means that all its various needs can simultaneously support each other; otherwise, it will become 偏失，turning into an unbalanced object.
  We recently heard that He Lan Mountain House found a place and invited some artists to create a group of buildings. This means that now in China, many people who are not trained in architecture, many people from other industries, are interested in architecture and come in to do architecture. How do you view this phenomenon? Do you think artists have some advantages or disadvantages in architecture?
  Generally speaking, architectural thinking does not need to be done by architects. It was not necessary in the past. The term architect is a Western term about social division of labor. Architecture in China is a set of carpenter conventions because the best possibilities regarding architecture have already been established in that period. It is related to materials and ethics; it is a fixed regulation, like a chess game with established patterns. Other crafts and details change according to your state and the local environment, constantly evolving under this larger system. Like Chinese furniture, the furniture of the north and south has variations in taste, but logically it is the same.

• After the industrial revolution, skyscrapers emerged, requiring buildings with greater structural strength, and this type of architecture also presents a structural pattern. There are not many other possibilities. It needs to face the density of cities, traffic, and the possibility of comprehensive utilization and coexistence, but I do not think these are very complex issues. In fact, when you walk into a village and see some houses built by farmers, they also use many architectural elements, often more reasonably than architects do, such as aesthetics born from poverty, practicality, and temporariness, considerations arising from cheapness, appropriation, or borrowing; these are actually very important architectural factors, but academies do not teach you these. They teach you how to be a chef in a five-star hotel, but any grandmother can make a dish that is not worse than that of a restaurant, even if it is just picking a few leaves from the backyard or boiling something at home without oil; it can still be an excellent dish. Why has it developed so abnormally today—that only dishes served in five-star hotels are called food? That is just nonsense. I think the entire education in the academy is a conspiracy; it says: what is the dish your mother made at home!

• "I like you," I just need to say "I really like you," without having to quote a line from Shakespeare to express my feelings. Rational expression is the intersection of two lines from a macro perspective of the universe, yet they are unequal.
  I do not think it is a matter of technique; it is just that it is of no use to me. If a glance and a gesture can express my feelings, I do not need to say I am knowledgeable. I feel that most people only have false components, lacking this knowledge. If today it only requires straightforwardly expressing this emotion, I do not need to go around in circles. It is a difficult thing for people to directly express what they want to say clearly. I am not hypocritical enough to make my words sound more beautiful; I just need to convey my intention.
  Writing a blog, in such a small space, how much impact do you think it can have?
  The internet is the best peach humanity has encountered since its birth, after jumping down from trees. It truly liberates individuals from the old system and traditional information control. The free acquisition of information and free expression are characteristics of today; with the internet, individual existence truly begins. What is an individual? An individual is one who acquires information and expresses opinions independently; this is the basic characteristic of human existence. The development of technology has the most direct relationship with human rights and freedom of speech, especially in societies that are relatively simple; the role of the internet in the flow of information is invaluable.

Are you a person with a strong sense of justice?
Do you generally respond to popular information circulating in society?
Everyone has their own judgment on whether a line is straight or slanted, whether a scale is long or short; some people are just more sensitive to these. When a society confuses these judgments, it is no longer a human realm but a ghost domain.
You once said that if you were to inscribe a line on your tombstone, it should read: "A classic personality split, representing all the cultural expression flaws of that era." Why describe yourself this way?
Equally glamorous, equally graceful, equally charming. The difference is that there cannot be an Andy here, a superstar from an ordinary family, along with the accompanying value orientation and human shine.
Facing a world that becomes stranger day by day, he endlessly narrates a cold story: "Beware of what you wish for; it will indeed come true..."