2013年6月25日星期二

Snowden: 美国入侵中国移动网络运营商,窃取大量用户手机短信

EXCLUSIVE: US spies on Chinese mobile phone companies, steals SMS data: Edward Snowden
The US government is stealing millions of text messages in their hacking attacks on major Chinese mobile phone companies, Edward Snowden has told the Post

The US government is hacking Chinese mobile phone companies to steal millions of text messages, Edward Snowden has told the South China Morning Post. And the former National Security Agency contractor claims he has the evidence to prove it.
The former CIA technician and NSA contractor, hiding in Hong Kong after the US sought his arrest, made the claims after revealing to the Post that the NSA had snooped on targets in Hong Kong and on the mainland.
Edward Snowden. Photo: AP“There’s far more than this,” Snowden said in an interview on June 12. “The NSA does all kinds of things like hack Chinese cell phone companies to steal all of your SMS data.”
Text messaging is the most preferred communication tool in mainland China, used widely by ordinary people and government officials from formal work exchanges to small chats.
Government data show that the Chinese exchanged almost 900 billion text messages in 2012, up 2.1 per cent from the year before. China Mobile is the world’s largest mobile network carrier, with 735 million subscribers by the end of May. China Unicom, the second largest, has 258 million users. China Telecom comes in third with 172 million users.
Snowden’s leaks have rocked the international community for the past two weeks and fired up a debate about US government surveillance of citizens’ phone calls and internet browsing data without due cause.
Now, as the likes of Huawei, Datang and ZTE dramatically improve their suite of products and the reliance on foreign-made parts has dropped, some experts with ties to Beijing have become more vocal.
For years, cybersecurity experts on the mainland have been concerned that telecommunications equipment was vulnerable to so-called “backdoor” attacks, taking advantage of foreign-made components. They have kept quiet because domestic hardware suppliers were still striving to catch up with their international competitors.
Fang Binxing, president at the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications and widely believed to be the father of China’s “great firewall”, which restricts access to the web, told News China in October last year that foreign equipment was a serious threat to national security.
President Fang Binxing of the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications. Photo: Xinhua
“China should set up a national information security review commission as soon as possible,” he said.
Telecom companies have started replacing foreign-made equipment.
China Unicom quietly replaced all Cisco routers at a key backbone hub in Wuxi, Jiangsu last year, according to the National Business Daily.
The changes are being kept quiet to avoid panic and embarrassment to the government, people in the industry say.
A series of reports based on documents provided by Snowden to The Guardian revealed how the US compelled telecommunications provider Verizon to hand over information about phone calls made by US citizens.
The leaked documents also revealed the Prism programme, which gave the US far-reaching access to internet browsing data from Google, Facebook, Apple, Skype, Yahoo and others.
The US and UK also had technology which gave them unauthorised access to Blackberry phones of delegates at two G20 summits in London in 2009, Snowden said.
The US government has defended its electronic surveillance programmes during congressional hearings with claims that up to 50 would-be terrorist attacks were foiled because of the intelligence gathered by the NSA.
US President Barack Obama says the NSA is not listening in on phone calls or reading emails unless legal requirements have been satisfied.


----------------------------------------

来看看美国NSA头头Gen. Keith Alexander是怎么回应窃取中国手机用户短信的:(其实就一句话:我们美国需要这些信息,而且我们是在美国法律范围内行事的。)

PHOTO: Gen. Keith B. Alexander, commander, U.S. Cyber Command and director,
Gen. Keith Alexander, director of the National Security Administration, testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, June 12, 2013, in this file photo. (Charles Dharapak/AP Photo)
STEPHANOPOULOS: In the statement that Hong Kong put out this morning, explaining why they allowed Snowden to leave, they also say they've written to the United States government requesting clarification on the reports, based on Snowden's information, that the United States government attacked (ph) computer systems in Hong Kong. 

 He said that the NSA does all kinds of things like hack Chinese cell phone companies to steal all of your SMS data. 

 Is that true? 

 ALEXANDER: Well, we have interest in those who collect on us as an intelligence agency. But to say that we're willfully just collecting all sorts of data would give you the impression that we're just trying to canvas the whole world. 

 The fact is what we're trying to do is get the information our nation needs, the foreign intelligence, that primary mission, in this case and the case that Snowden has brought up is in defending this nation from a terrorist attack. 

 Now we have other intelligence interests just like other nations do. That's what you'd expect us to do. We do that right. Our main interest: who's collecting on us? And I'd just say let's look back at where that source comes from. 

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, that was the government of Hong Kong putting out that statement. 
 Are you confident that we have not broken the laws of Hong Kong?

ALEXANDER: I'm confident that we're following the laws that our country has in doing what we do. We have a set of laws that guide how NSA acts; we follow those laws. We have tremendous oversight by all three portions of the government: the courts, Congress and the administration. 

Now when you look at these laws and the way they've been passed and the oversight mechanisms that we have, I am confident that we are following our laws.


----------------------------------------------------------

看看中国政府怎么回应斯诺登事件:(一句话:“中美两国构建新型大国关系,是前无古人、后启来者的伟大事业。”)

        得益于长期以来的积累,中美合作具有很好的基础。但是,某些美国政客操纵的暗流并没有退去,仍在借机对中美关系的主流进行冲击。这股暗流干扰美国对华政策的连贯性,阻碍中美两国建立战略互信。中美关系大船沿着既定航线稳定前行,就必须提防和遏制这股暗流的干扰。

 回顾中美重新打开交往大门40多年的历史,两国经历的一些风雨完全是某些美国政客一手制造出来的。在“棱镜门”和中国之间建立“新关联”,无异于在中美关系的晴空布下一块新的阴云。阴云不除,贻害无穷。道理很简单,阴云不仅遮蔽阳光,集聚到一处,还真有可能掉下几滴雨点来。用好“新关联”这部反面教材,就是不能让“新关联”不了了之。胡言乱语不付出必要的代价,某些人继续扮演“大嘴”的冲动就难以消除。

  中美两国构建新型大国关系,是前无古人、后启来者的伟大事业。双方既要大处着眼、登高望远,又要小处着手、积微成著。不断积累正能量,为中美关系营造良好氛围,至关重要。

(说明:外交部发言人华春莹在23号回答记者提问时才回应说中方已向美发提出交涉,这种外交辞令没有实质内容,远不及人民日报钟声的文章更能全面具体反映中国政府的态度。)


2013年6月9日星期日

NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others


NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others
Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill
• Top-secret Prism program claims direct access to servers of firms including Google, Apple and Facebook
• Companies deny any knowledge of program in operation since 2007
Obama orders US to draw up overseas target list for cyber-attacks

A slide depicting the top-secret PRISM program.

The National Security Agency has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants, according to a top secret document obtained by the Guardian.


The NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called Prism, which allows officials to collect material including search history, the content of emails, file transfers and live chats, the document says.

The Guardian has verified the authenticity of the document, a 41-slide PowerPoint presentation – classified as top secret with no distribution to foreign allies – which was apparently used to train intelligence operatives on the capabilities of the program. The document claims "collection directly from the servers" of major US service providers.


Although the presentation claims the program is run with the assistance of the companies, all those who responded to a Guardian request for comment on Thursday denied knowledge of any such program.

In a statement, Google said: "Google cares deeply about the security of our users' data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government 'back door' into our systems, but Google does not have a back door for the government to access private user data."

Several senior tech executives insisted that they had no knowledge of Prism or of any similar scheme. They said they would never have been involved in such a program. "If they are doing this, they are doing it without our knowledge," one said.

An Apple spokesman said it had "never heard" of Prism.

The NSA access was enabled by changes to US surveillance law introduced under President Bush and renewed under Obama in December 2012.
The program facilitates extensive, in-depth surveillance on live communications and stored information. The law allows for the targeting of any customers of participating firms who live outside the US, or those Americans whose communications include people outside the US.
It also opens the possibility of communications made entirely within the US being collected without warrants.

Disclosure of the Prism program follows a leak to the hGuardian on Wednesday of a top-secret court order compelling telecoms provider Verizon to turn over the telephone records of millions of US customers. (Link here)
The participation of the internet companies in Prism will add to the debate, ignited by the Verizon revelation, about the scale of surveillance by the intelligence services. Unlike the collection of those call records, this surveillance can include the content of communications and not just the metadata.

Some of the world's largest internet brands are claimed to be part of the information-sharing program since its introduction in 2007. Microsoft – which is currently running an advertising campaign with the slogan "Your privacy is our priority" – was the first, with collection beginning in December 2007.

It was followed by Yahoo in 2008; Google, Facebook and PalTalk in 2009; YouTube in 2010; Skype and AOL in 2011; and finally Apple, which joined the program in 2012. The program is continuing to expand, with other providers due to come online.

Collectively, the companies cover the vast majority of online email, search, video and communications networks.

 (这张幻灯片显示至少有九家互联网公司参与了该计划)
The extent and nature of the data collected from each company varies.

Companies are legally obliged to comply with requests for users' communications under US law, but the Prism program allows the intelligence services direct access to the companies' servers. The NSA document notes the operations have "assistance of communications providers in the US".

The revelation also supports concerns raised by several US senators during the renewal of the Fisa Amendments Act in December 2012, who warned about the scale of surveillance the law might enable, and shortcomings in the safeguards it introduces.

When the FAA was first enacted, defenders of the statute argued that a significant check on abuse would be the NSA's inability to obtain electronic communications without the consent of the telecom and internet companies that control the data. But the Prism program renders that consent unnecessary, as it allows the agency to directly and unilaterally seize the communications off the companies' servers.

A chart prepared by the NSA, contained within the top-secret document obtained by the Guardian, underscores the breadth of the data it is able to obtain: email, video and voice chat, videos, photos, voice-over-IP (Skype, for example) chats, file transfers, social networking details, and more.



The document is recent, dating to April 2013. Such a leak is extremely rare in the history of the NSA, which prides itself on maintaining a high level of secrecy.

The Prism program allows the NSA, the world's largest surveillance organisation, to obtain targeted communications without having to request them from the service providers and without having to obtain individual court orders.

With this program, the NSA is able to reach directly into the servers of the participating companies and obtain both stored communications as well as perform real-time collection on targeted users.

The presentation claims Prism was introduced to overcome what the NSA regarded as shortcomings of Fisa warrants in tracking suspected foreign terrorists. It noted that the US has a "home-field advantage" due to housing much of the internet's architecture. But the presentation claimed "Fisa constraints restricted our home-field advantage" because Fisa required individual warrants and confirmations that both the sender and receiver of a communication were outside the US.

"Fisa was broken because it provided privacy protections to people who were not entitled to them," the presentation claimed. "It took a Fisa court order to collect on foreigners overseas who were communicating with other foreigners overseas simply because the government was collecting off a wire in the United States. There were too many email accounts to be practical to seek Fisas for all."

The new measures introduced in the FAA redefines "electronic surveillance" to exclude anyone "reasonably believed" to be outside the USA – a technical change which reduces the bar to initiating surveillance.

The act also gives the director of national intelligence and the attorney general power to permit obtaining intelligence information, and indemnifies internet companies against any actions arising as a result of co-operating with authorities' requests.

In short, where previously the NSA needed individual authorisations, and confirmation that all parties were outside the USA, they now need only reasonable suspicion that one of the parties was outside the country at the time of the records were collected by the NSA.

The document also shows the FBI acts as an intermediary between other agencies and the tech companies, and stresses its reliance on the participation of US internet firms, claiming "access is 100% dependent on ISP provisioning".

In the document, the NSA hails the Prism program as "one of the most valuable, unique and productive accesses for NSA".

It boasts of what it calls "strong growth" in its use of the Prism program to obtain communications. The document highlights the number of obtained communications increased in 2012 by 248% for Skype – leading the notes to remark there was "exponential growth in Skype reporting; looks like the word is getting out about our capability against Skype". There was also a 131% increase in requests for Facebook data, and 63% for Google.

The NSA document indicates that it is planning to add Dropbox as a PRISM provider. The agency also seeks, in its words, to "expand collection services from existing providers".

The revelations echo fears raised on the Senate floor last year during the expedited debate on the renewal of the FAA powers which underpin the PRISM program, which occurred just days before the act expired.

Senator Christopher Coons of Delaware specifically warned that the secrecy surrounding the various surveillance programs meant there was no way to know if safeguards within the act were working.

"The problem is: we here in the Senate and the citizens we represent don't know how well any of these safeguards actually work," he said.

"The law doesn't forbid purely domestic information from being collected. We know that at least one Fisa court has ruled that the surveillance program violated the law. Why? Those who know can't say and average Americans can't know."

Other senators also raised concerns. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon attempted, without success, to find out any information on how many phone calls or emails had been intercepted under the program.

When the law was enacted, defenders of the FAA argued that a significant check on abuse would be the NSA's inability to obtain electronic communications without the consent of the telecom and internet companies that control the data. But the Prism program renders that consent unnecessary, as it allows the agency to directly and unilaterally seize the communications off the companies' servers.

When the NSA reviews a communication it believes merits further investigation, it issues what it calls a "report". According to the NSA, "over 2,000 Prism-based reports" are now issued every month. There were 24,005 in 2012, a 27% increase on the previous year.

In total, more than 77,000 intelligence reports have cited the PRISM program.

Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's Center for Democracy, that it was astonishing the NSA would even ask technology companies to grant direct access to user data.

"It's shocking enough just that the NSA is asking companies to do this," he said. "The NSA is part of the military. The military has been granted unprecedented access to civilian communications.

"This is unprecedented militarisation of domestic communications infrastructure. That's profoundly troubling to anyone who is concerned about that separation."

A senior administration official said in a statement: "The Guardian and Washington Post articles refer to collection of communications pursuant to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This law does not allow the targeting of any US citizen or of any person located within the United States.

"The program is subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Executive Branch, and Congress. It involves extensive procedures, specifically approved by the court, to ensure that only non-US persons outside the US are targeted, and that minimize the acquisition, retention and dissemination of incidentally acquired information about US persons.

"This program was recently reauthorized by Congress after extensive hearings and debate.

"Information collected under this program is among the most important and valuable intelligence information we collect, and is used to protect our nation from a wide variety of threats.

"The Government may only use Section 702 to acquire foreign intelligence information, which is specifically, and narrowly, defined in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This requirement applies across the board, regardless of the nationality of the target."

Additional reporting by James Ball and Dominic Rushe
原文在此
法庭强制Verizon 提交通话记录的原文件:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/709012/verizon.pdf
NSA 主任James Clapper承认以上Guardian的报道属实:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/07/clapper-secret-nsa-surveillance-prism
为什么各家公司一致抵赖"No Such Agency"?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-bristling-concede-to-government-surveillance-efforts.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

2013年5月13日星期一

互联网大脑,能阅读思考?


《书城》 2011-04期
作者:利求同

互联网数码技术带来的方便,似乎是无穷无尽的。坐在北京家里,暖气一开浑身发干,上网定了加湿器,立刻就送货上门。周末,同纽约的同学上Skype聊天,谈合作计划。前不久,朋友提起《圣经》里的海枣的种种用处,上网“谷歌”一把,果然,大长见识。有时我想,万一哪天互联网歇工一小时,这世界会怎么个绝望!

还有一个现象,邻居王老师说的:原先读书,一篇长文能一口气看完。现在变了,读上一两页就走神,情不自禁想干点别的:上网接接电邮,追踪微博新闻。他太太也说,女儿像长了三头六臂,做着作业,电脑要打开七八个视窗,飞信来回,一边还放音乐,玩手机,哦,还有YouTube视频,忙个不亦乐乎。说她,她还嘴硬:大家都这样,这叫multi-tasking,复合型人才,没听说过呀?

看来,以互联网为代表的数码技术在提供方便之时,也悄悄改变着我们。“洛杉矶时报/布隆伯调查”表明,现在每五个青少年中有三个说,喜欢同时做好几件事,而不喜欢集中精力做一件事(见((洛杉矶时报》2006.8.7)。与此相关,网民的荧屏阅读习惯,就像是蜻蜓点水,在文献间横向跳跃,注意力不断转移、停留不住。这现象已有专家在研究,还给它取了一个吓人的名称:“互联网注意力缺乏症”(IADD),担心人类的思维和创新能力会因此受妨碍。当然,也有乐观的一派,认为互联网只会使我们更加聪明,因为网上汇集了“海量”的知识信息,而信息的管理、检索和传播从来没有像今天这样便捷。但是,无论担心还是乐观,有一点是大家都意识到的:互联网正在重塑大脑功能,影响到人们的一部分认知行为,尤其是阅读、理解、学习和思考。那么,这些变化对人类社会的未来到底意味着什么昵?

既然事关我们的大脑,这问题必须搞清楚,阅读是人类一种主要的学习和智识发展途径;所谓“阅读型大脑”,即表现在通过阅读吸取知识,培育综合性的包括排序、推论、联想、分析、批判、洞察等高层次认知技能。新知同实践经验结合,便生成了真实有用的知识和智慧。知识信息是一个微循环系统,渗透人类社会的每一个神经末梢,刺激并规范着个人和群体的各种行动。互联网普及以前,我们的知识信息系统是建立在以纸张书写(印刷)为主的物质载体上的,并有一套由托勒密王朝亚历山大城图书馆开创的管理模式(参见拙文《心智的圣所》《Pinakes:谷歌百度们的鼻祖》,载《书城》2010年9月与11月号)。由此形成的信息处理、传递、学习、评价的方法和标准,几千年来为世人遵循使用。阅读便是这传统的产物。它以独立思考为最高价值,亦即读者不时需要调动已有的知识,通过质疑、推理、联想等,来展开自己的思考。从生物学和认知角度看,阅读不是人类与生俱来的能力,须经过学习训练才能掌握。换句话说,阅读是“文明人’的创造,是视觉感官和大脑同纸质书写环境长期互动而形成的。注意力却是“天生”的。人需要随时警惕周围环境的变化,学习灵活应变,以求生存。因而,合理地优化分配使用注意力对人类生存发展至关重要。传统上,知识产品的组织结构呈固定线性等级形态,生产和传递成本高,速度有限,检索费时费工。这样的环境促使人们养成了长时间集中注意力专事阅读的习惯。读者可以享受时间的慷慨赐予,而阅读则讲究循序渐进,通过推论、分析、批判、洞察等高级认知行为的参与,不断训练我们的大脑,奠定了抽象认知和复杂思维的基础。法国“意识流”小说的巨擘普鲁斯特说过:从事阅读的大脑的专长,是超越了文字符号的思考,是造就思想着的智慧的读者。

自上世纪九十年代以来,互联网数码技术崛起,带来了一场信息革命。它挑战颠覆的正是阅读型大脑的培育者—从手工抄写到印刷术的纸本(书籍)阅读传统。我们引以为骄傲的阅读模式似乎难以维系了,因为互联网要求大脑感官与之适应,将信息时代的“基因”植入用户的阅读习惯和认知行为,新型的学习思维在孕育形成。这一现象可以具体地从信息源、信息量和传递速度及其组织结构特征来分析考察。

互联网是众多分散独立的信息源的集合,通过服务器、宽带、超文本(hypertext)等手段,结成一体,其组织结构呈变动中的多维平等之网状形态。管理咨询专家费德蒙(Mark Federman)先生把互联网世界描述为:无所不在的连接、不断弥散的靠近。信息的捕捉存储和传递极其简便,信息产品的成本大幅降低。于是,信息量和传递速度爆炸般升级,信息时代来临。与之相应,使用者的大脑所受的信息刺激也大大增加了; 后果便是注意力的损耗。注意力,即认知过程中有选择地将感知力集中于环境的某一面而忽略其他,包括脑力资源的分配。它以集中、有意识为基本要素,与大脑工作记忆空间和警觉性紧密相连。故而,它的“量”在特定时间内相对固定,是一种有限的资源。我们可以这样理解:首先,假设互联网之前,信息对大脑的刺激频率的平均值为十次/一注意力时段,每次刺激可分得十分之一的总注意力。互联网之后,信息刺激频率在该时段升至四十次,则每次刺激仅能分得总注意力的四十分之一。可见,高频刺激容易引起注意力的损耗,影响阅读效果。其次,网上信息来源繁多,内容良莠混杂,真假难辨。这就迫使读者花很大的精力去应对、甄别、选择。结果,注意力被反复分割、干扰,变得支离破碎,使得读者难以专注于阅读,并由阅读进入深层的思考。第三,阅读和注意力的关系,还涉及互联网的组织结构。网络提供了全新的信息处理方法,信息的组织结构有了大得多的灵活性,但也就不那么稳定了,往往干扰阅读中注意力的优化分配使用。例如,链接 (hyperlink) 的植入,可以方便地把各种信息连接在一起,为读者提供实时的辅助信息,被看作互联网优于纸质载体的最有效的功能之一。上世纪八十年代,美国信息科学和技术协会 (ASIS&T) 在一次年会上披露展示了链接技术,成为爆炸性新闻,我和与会同事们的震撼激动至今还记忆犹新!但是,它对系统完整地阅读的负面作用往往被忽视了。阅读和写作是一个硬币的两面,是知识生产的两大对应环节。我们的写作习惯也是以纸质载体为代表的信息系统的产物。一个作品,无论是小说、公文或论文,在思想表达和推理论证过程上都是自成一体的完整叙述,因而阅读作品也是一种把握叙述的完整性的经验。而链接的植入,很容易引导读者走入岔道,干扰阅读,造成“破碎”的阅读经验。上述种种,决定了互联网时代的阅读行为与心理,跟传统的阅读大不相同。(按:这大概也就是以前我一直说屏幕上的阅读是平面化的原因

这一观察得到了大量实证研究的支持。二OO八年,伦敦大学学院信息行为和研究评估中心有一项研究,分析大英图书馆和英国JISC两个图书期刊数据库的读者阅读行为。研究者发现,读者趋向简略浏览,很快地从一个文献跳到另一个文献,多数(65%)读者不再回返链接链前方的文献。换言之,链接的实际效果,常常是单向的不归之路,消解了完整的阅读。同一研究还表明,读者查找信息的时间大大高于通过阅读查找文献的时间。电子书和电子期刊网站上的阅读时间都很短,平均只有四分钟和八分钟,主要用于书名、目录和摘要,或者浅浅浏览一两页内容,就跳到下一篇去了。没有证据表明读者在网下阅读查到的文献。也就是说,读者容易把在网上查寻信息的过程误作为阅读学习,满足于在深度阅读的大门前徘徊。另一种阅读倾向则更令人担忧,尼尔森 (Jakob Nielsen) 博士被《纽约时报》称为“网页可用性大师”,他的研究发现:网上阅读,读者平均只读了一篇文献总字数的百分之二十八,而大多数人只读了百分之二十。如此阅读,我们很难希冀完整准确的理解,深度思考就更不能指望了。美国塔佛兹大学发展心理学教授伍尔芙形象地描述说:荧屏上的文字被跳过、分割、随意摘取,半懂不懂地阅读了。

的确,太多的信息要知道,可是时间和注意力太少,不够用呀,只好“偷工减料”了。信息时代把竞争效率看得高于一切,引诱我们对瞬时即变、大批量生产的信息给予即刻注意,无论重要与否。在持续性密集型信息轰炸下,注意力分配机制的灵敏度降低,人变得迟钝,被动且缺乏意志。往往来不及调动分析、批判、想象等高等认知思维技能的参与,注意力的目标就转移了,理解力基本没有派上用场。久而久之,我们的阅读能力减退,难以享受到由深度阅读生成的思想碰撞与联想;走出文本,窥探新知识的地平线就成了奢望。而网页设计者为广告等商务性目的所驱动,往往迁就网民的在线阅读习惯,加剧了网上阅读弊病的恶性循环。伍尔芙教授指出:从认知神经学的角度看,数码文化强化了对注意力的多源干扰,加快了注意力的变换,这会对慢速的、认知要求更高的理解过程的发展造成短路,从而影响深度阅读和深度思维的形成。但也有学者认为:这不是互联网的错。互联网只是揭示了人的注意力的虚弱,虚弱到了对哪怕极小的引诱都无法抵御的地步。记者毕尔顿 (Nick Bilton) 是互联网的铁杆拥趸,他写道:神经学研究发现,各种知识信息载体对大脑的开发使用,都有自己的贡献。玩电子游戏,能刺激大脑的动作记忆,手、眼的协调和集中注意力,因而可以改善我们的认知技能。而阅读则促进深度思考,并训练大脑的掌管反思、推理及批判型分析的部位。口述故事则是培育大脑的创新、语境思考和执行功能。互联网囊括了所有这些智能活动,应该有利于大脑的多功能的综合开发(见《纽约时报))2010.6.11还有研究表明“上网搜索比阅读更能促进中老年人大脑活动”  Your brain on Google: patterns of cerebral activation during internet searching,Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009 Feb;17(2):116-26.)。乍一看,毕尔顿挺有道理,但他混淆了信息的物质载体和内容题材的表现形式。如上文所述,互联网的冲击力主要来自它作为信息的物质载体的特征,以及由它引发的信息系统在组织与结构上的革命,而互联网运载的内容及其表现形式不是它的创造,是先于它且独立存在的事物。尽管如此,网上的信息,即网络阅读的内容,不可避免地带上了数码技术的“气息”。这对阅读行为和知识生产的影响巨大,必须予以重视。

互联网是一个松散多变的庞然大物,二百五十多亿个可标引的网页各自为政,原则上,任何人都可以实名或匿名,上载下载文献,随时更新内容。它信奉民主,鄙视内容审查,是新时代的乌托邦。然而,要了解、使用它无所不包的知识信息,我们不得不依赖搜索器,否则寸步难行。谷歌、百度等不负众望,只要我们输入关键词句,它们就会依据精密的算式程序搜索,并对搜索结果排序。瞬息间,我们所需要的信息就有条不紊地出现在荧屏上,真可谓便利之至。搜索器就是信息之汪洋大海中的引航员,它指向哪里,我们就奔向哪里。但我们为此付出了高昂的代价。二0O八年七月,芝加哥大学埃文斯(James A. Evans)教授在《科学》杂志撰文,讨论科学家的文献引用行为的变化。他使用一个拥有三千四百万篇学术论文的数据库,分析了一九四五至二00五年间的引文和一九九八至二00五年间的期刊上网情况,发现:随着上网的期刊增多,被引用的期刊和文章数量却在减少,学者不大提及早先的文献,倾向于引用近期文章,被引用期刊也日趋集中。虽然互联网看似无所不包,查找科学文献也十分便利,结果却是阅读和引用范围变得日益狭窄。为什么呢?原因固然很多,但突出的一个,就是大型搜索器和链接等技术手段的普及使用。在互联网逐渐成为“我们的图书馆”之时,搜索器用精密的算法程序和预设的关键词规则搜索排序,替我们规划了文献检索。同时,谷歌、百度们的检索结果的排序算法是不公开的,但如有钱雇用专家帮助设计,可以大大提升网页的排序位置,占据检索结果的前列。这样一来,“科学”的排序,就不免带了商业的“偏见”。很多研究表明,读者常常只浏览检索结果的头一两页,不再往下看。出现在排序前位的那些网页文献自然就人为地得到阅读优先。其他文献即使更贴近读者需要,更能刺激高等认知思维,也没有了机会。于是,读者实际选择阅读的文献容易划一,质量并不一定如想象的那么高。而链接在阅读过程中,不知不觉地把读者引向主流观点,加快了意见统一,使结论和想法变窄。阅读内容的多样化遭遇阻碍,这对思想的独立、开放、创新是不可忽视的威胁。

这威胁还是全方位的。例如,阅读思维模式的变化,会影响写作。读者的跳跃式浏览、对细节的轻忽,强烈地暗示作者,没有必要太讲究文字。于是乎,上网文献的错别字多了; 文句的逻辑和组织也漏洞百出。而写作的马虎,必然导致知识描述和讨论的失真,知识生产中次品劣品剧增。这不仅大量消耗了有限的注意力资源,更严重的是,会阻挠知识的学习使用和传播继承。“注意力缺乏症”还溢出互联网,影响到网下行为,成为社会通病。美国一位执教三十年的中学老师叹息道:学生中间,集中注意力的能力、恒心和学习热情,都是每况愈下,而且不仅是青少年的问题,成年人也受了“感染” (韩国的研究 The relationship between daily Internet use time and school performance in Korean adolescents, Central European Journal of Medicine, 7,444-9, 2012 )。伦敦大学学院的报告对学生和教师的行为作了比较研究,发现:在数字图书馆环境中,师生双方都倾向于浅易、横向、翻阅式的阅读。

看来,互联网确有削弱我们的学习思考能力之嫌。不是没有可能,创造新技术的智慧反而被新技术威胁,如科学史家特纳 (Edward Tenner) 所言。历史上,新发明曾多次引起社会生活和人们心理行为的巨大变化。例如,机械计时器的发明,让人不再看日头星辰或凭身体的感觉来安排作息;人们逐渐接受了时钟的暗示和规范,并把那暗示和规范化作社会准则而自觉遵守,诞生了一种“现代”生活方式。互联网数码技术也是如此,让我们在享受便利的同时,接受新的约束,甚而感到危机四伏。不过,这不是第一次信息技术的“危机”。早在纸草纸书卷和小牛皮抄本流行之时,苏格拉底就警告过希腊人,书写将催生灵魂的忘性,因为盲从书本的读者不再会借助记忆的努力(《斐德罗篇》“这个发明结果会使学会文字的人们善忘,因为他们就不再努力记忆了。” ),书籍的海洋将淹没读书人的心智。印刷术传到欧洲,也有类似的担忧。十七世纪大学问家伯顿所言,可代表书蠹的牢骚:藏书是容易了; 汗牛充栋,可让人读得眼酸指痛(《忧郁之解剖》)。电报的发明,有权威的物理学家怪它引发了精神病。再后来,就是“万恶”的电视,用画面毒害儿童,诱惑他们离开书本。回头看,还好,我们还在阅读思考。只是这一次情形不同了些。互联网数码技术不仅主宰了记录下来的知识信息,还渗透了几乎所有的生活领域。其规模之大、范围之广侵入之深,超出印刷术、留声机、复印机、电话、电视等所有信息技术的总和。如今,它已是我们的笔和钟表、记事簿与百科全书;它是最新的电话、电台、电视、出版商;它充当了百货店、菜市场、旅行社、政府和医疗服务;更触目惊心的是,它在成为育人的学校。互联网无孔不入,无处不在。它还迫使旧媒体适应并模仿自己,如电视屏幕在尝试多个视窗,让观众可以同时收看连续剧、留意股市走向或追踪体育新闻。纸版《纽约时报》的第二页(周日版加上第3页)已改为文摘栏,方便习惯于“浅阅读”的读者。人类依赖集中注意力进行深度阅读,调动深层思维联想,来探索获取智慧、实现创新。可是,在互联网时代,我们能否继续阅读、思考呢?

我想,这是完全可能的。大脑可塑,它总是在与环境的互动中不断调整,让我们适应新的环境,开拓新的行为领域。大脑的可塑性既是这场信息革命的对象,也是我们的希望所在。关键在于学习训练,即有意识地守护阅读型大脑的深层生成力。如何设计出科学有效、针对性强的教育计划来实现这一目标,便是时代的挑战。美国作家爱泼斯坦 (Joseph Epstein) 说:在某种意义上,我们是被阅读所塑造的。因此怎样阅读,就关系到每个人和全社会的未来。在奉自由竞争为神圣的市场上,竞争者在各个领域、层次的交锋,都是所掌握的知识信息的较量。互联网之前,拥有获得信息的渠道给予竞争者很大优势,甚至绝对优势。现在,数码技术大大拉平了对手间这方面的力量对比,同时,却扩大了深层思维的差距。因此,竞争就更加集中在知识信息的运用,及转化为智慧和创新的能力。面对信息的“狂轰乱炸”,唯有保持自律而拒绝被互联网牵着鼻子走的人和群体,才可能遏制形形色色信息的诱惑,有效地分配使用注意力。未来属于这样的坚持阅读并思考着的大脑。

原文:http://www.ideobook.com/1245/internet-brain/
----上文完----

附:
全球化资讯焦虑
信报财经新闻  2012-07-10

托夫勒在半个世纪前所论说 future shock到底是什么?可能就是地球人对未来无知,从而产生的焦虑感,亦即理查.伍尔曼(Richard Saul Wurman)在《资讯焦虑》(Information Anxiety )一书所说的一种全球化通病──不用害怕,那就像伤风感冒一样,只是小毛病。

网络时代带来空前的爆炸资讯量,世界好像愈来愈透明,一切的阴暗面在网络时代的强光下无所遁形,但世界愈透明,地球人便愈焦虑,因为他们(当然包括我们)都在不知不觉间,沦为消化不良的资讯贪食者。

超级蠢材

伍尔曼在此书告诉无知的地球人,「资讯焦虑」源于「我们真正了解的」与「我们以为应该了解的」之间不断扩张的一道「知识鸿沟」。时至今日,资讯已变成一种两刃武器,如果我们无法在日益泛滥成灾的资讯中认清资讯与知识的本质,无法分辨和判断两者的差异,久而久之,就会沦为富兰克林(Benjamin Franklin)眼中的「超级蠢材」:「满腹经纶的蠢材往往比无知的蠢材更愚蠢」。

千万不要做一个满腹经纶的蠢材,这道理其实一点也不复杂,资讯焦虑这全球化的通病源于地球人的大脑变化,由于长期贪婪地生吞活剥资讯,长期无节制地,无限量地透过网络、电视、广告接收和处理扑面而来信息,逐渐便形成资讯暴食症,久而久之,很容易造成大脑皮层活动抑制,在好像愈来愈透明的世界里茫然不知所措。

活在资讯成灾的网络时代,谁也没有免疫力,可不必过于紧张,也许唯一的救药是保持距离──放心,跟资讯保持适当的距离,并不意味对社会漠不关心,也不意味政治冷感,道理太简单了,一叶足以障目,那就连泰山也看不见了,那么,不妨移开眼前的一片叶子,稍稍离开眼前的一道人为的「水马」,世界便自然会重现眼前。

2013年4月13日星期六

女人选择老公的估值方法

一、 前言 ;
  从人类天性来讲,男女的需求是高度统一的:即都是好色又好财,物质为基础,精神为追求。社会观念与社会规则改变了成年后的男女,使其向不同的方向发展:即,男求色,女求财。 
  中国发达城市,包括韩国,日本全亚州的国际大都市,即使男女比例不失调的前提下,"剩女"现象极其普遍。除了个别是真正不想结婚外,大部分都是想结却找不到合适的对象。究其缘由,本质上是有一种观念在起作用,即男女经济收入要达到一个怎样的平衡,大家才认为:“男可娶,女可嫁”。说得好听点,就是男要达到怎么样的价值,女方才会认为是可以嫁,嫁得不亏。因此女性选老公,正如同风险投资者选择收购企业,是风险于收益的平衡。 
   注意,女性这笔风险投资绝对属于战略投资,除极特别的情况,通常不能实现普通财务投资人的套现退出,一锤子的买卖,实属高危投资的典范。 
  分大类讲,女性分三种主要投资模式。 
1、绝大部分女性属于较成熟的VC投资人,即:投资目标是具有基本盈利能力且具有高度成长性的男人。这类男人在生命周期中属于发展期,前景广阔且目前价值低估。 
2、当然,不排除有部分女性作为天使投资人去选择一个一穷二白看不到未来的男人,但是罕有成功案例(2000多年前卓文君投资司马相如属于经典成功案例)。 
3、还有少量女性只关注极品蓝筹股,即:盈利能力达到巅峰的男人,比如豪门公子与顶级富豪。这类投资人大多拥有极致的资本(如,极品美女、影星、选美皇后等),但是投资人之间竞争十分激烈血腥,大多铩羽而归,就算成功也是无法控股的小股东。 
   没有专注于pre-IPO的PE投资类女性。一旦男人IPO变成公众持股,则手上的股权尽管市值暴增,但无法100%控股专属,且股东之间战斗激烈,大股东也搞不定小股东,因此即便此类情况比比皆是,但是毕竟不是女性投资之初衷。 
   
二、对男人的估值 
  估值是投资成败的基石。这里介绍几种基本估值方法,供占绝大多数的第一类女性投资人参考采用。 
1、市盈率估值 
  当前价值估值必须结合市盈率的概念。市盈率就是男人市价与盈利的比率:市盈率=市价/盈利。
  e.g. 假如其他女性投资人愿意为一男付出的所有(包括感情时间金钱肉体)总体打包折价为100万元,而该男本年EBITDA(息税折旧摊销前利润,即该男年度毛收入,包括奖金工资投资收益上街捡皮夹等等)为10万,则该男市盈率为10倍。 
  估值逻辑:参考行业平均市盈率。即看其他女性投资人为类似职业、收入的男人付出多少倍市盈率。平均大于10则该男价值低估,小于10则该男价值高估。
  注意:若该男特帅、特幽默、特体贴、特文艺、特有内涵,则给予一定市盈率溢价。建议一般不宜溢价过多,毕竟上述因素过于主观,难以量化和持续。 (注:直观来理解,市盈率的倒数就是折旧率,高市盈率等于低折旧率。由于实际上很多项目很难估算盈利,甚至不能用盈利来估算,所以实际比较可行的方法应该是拆分来看,细分男人的各项指标(金钱、权力、身体...),分别给以不同的折旧率 (因此可以有负的折旧率,如果某项指标是随年龄增长的话。),然后乘以当前的各项分数,最后按权重求和,得到整体估值。)  
2、价值+成长的估值公式 
  拥有巨大投资价值的男人必然是价值与成长性的结合,结合二者的估值方法避免了市盈率估值的静态。应用一个很简单的公式如下:(价值+1年内成长)/2=当前价值 
  拓展为:(今年业绩×市赢率+明年预测业绩×市赢率)/2=当前价值 
  e.g. 一男2007年收入是10万元,2008年预测收入是12万元。行业平均市赢率是15倍,他很帅很幽默很温柔很体贴是好男,看高3-5倍,按20倍算,计算结果是:(10×20+12×20)/2=220万元。 
  然后看他的市价,如果其他女性只愿意付出100万的资源去收购他,你简直就是大马路上拣钱,果断付出120万的资源买进不做空;在120—180万之间的震荡调整区,这里应该若即若离暧昧暧昧做高抛低吸;超过200万就应该出货,不要再考虑什么未来成长,出价高被套牢就完蛋了。 
  但大家要记得,这种算法只试用于当前就有价值的成长男。目前没稳定收入的、失业的、事业职业走下坡的无视。价值+成长,缺一个都不行。另外,如果要计算该男超过3年以上的预期成长,应该考虑到无风险收益率和通货膨胀因素,选择合理的贴现率进行贴现。鉴于其复杂性,就不展开讲了。 
(注:这个方法看来可操作性更低,倒不如应用投资上的PEG方法,用来给市盈利(也就是折旧率)估值,那么这一条可以整合到第一条去。)
3、收益率估值法 
  该估值方法又多被称为“可比系数”法,即简单应用一些标准系数来确定男人价值。这种估值的基本理论基础是:男人的收入不会全部用到女人身上,女性能享受到的合理收益才对各位女性投资人更有意义。 
  首先,如何定义男人的收入至关重要。目前有多种说法,包括:自由现金流EBITDA(息税折旧摊销前收入),息税前收益(EBIT),税后收益(EAT),息税折旧摊销后收入(EAITDA)。为避免各位女性投资估值偏差,建议使用EAITAD,即:Earning after interest,tax,depreciation and amortization。 
  收益率= 实际支付收益/ EAITAD 
  e.g. 一男在在支付完信用卡利息、车房贷利息、税、孝敬父母兄弟、给领导送礼、抽烟喝酒应酬等一切开销,以及他以前购买的房车耐用消费品折旧摊销后的年收入为2万元,今年用到你身上的钱(包括请吃饭送东西旅游约会开房间等等)为1万5千元。则: 
  收益资本化率=15000/20000=0.75 
  若与你上任男友在一起时你的收益率为0.5,则该男估值更高;若行业普遍收益率(和你差不多的女性投资人收益)在0.1~0.3之间,则该男为买入评级,普遍收益率在0.8以上,则该男为卖出评级。 
4、基于资产估值法 
  资产估值在当前比较流行,即基于一男现有资产的价值对其进行估值。资产估值的方式有很多种,包括公平市价法(fair market value),公允价值法(fair value),账面价值法和清算价值法等。 
  各位女性投资人对此估值方法比较熟悉,主要提醒几个估值要素: 
(1)变现能力折扣 
  对于一男拥有的资产要详加分析,如其拥有大量受限资产,比如交易受限类股票资产,都要乘以相应的折扣系数。 
  e.g. 一男持有市值2000万公司股权但不能交易,市场平均受限交易股票折扣系数为33%,则该男子实际该部分资产价值=2000*0.33=660万元。 
(2)账面价值与公允价值 
  e.g.一男于2008年以60万元购入奥迪汽车一部,以200万元购入上海长宁区住宅一套,则根据市场公允价值,(预计未来一年内汽车折旧50%,房产增值200%)计算:
    当前账面价值=60+200=260万元 
  未来1年内实际估值=60*(1-0.5)+200*(1+2)=630万元 
  则女性投资人在当前投入相当与260万元的资源对该男进行平价收购,将在未来1年内获取370万元的资产溢价收益。因此有车无房的男人并不是良好的投资对象,有房者资产溢价前景十分良好。 
(3)财务报表的误区
  以账面价值估值的最大风险来源于男人财务报表分析不透彻。特别需要注意的是以下几个科目;
A、“非经常性损益”
    比忽悠年收入10万,实际包含撞狗屎运上街捡的5万,该收益不可持续。
B、“主营业务利润”/“营业利润”
    如一男当咨询顾问年入6万,晚上出去卖唱年入10万,则要详查他主营业务到底是卖唱还是干咨询的。然后才能用相应行业的平均市盈率进行估值。
C、对投资类损益和资产的剥离
    炒股炒房炒期货黄金外汇艺术品国库券红木家具普洱茶的,都属于刀口上舔血的,今天富明天穷。估值时候都应把相应科目剥离,规避风险。
    关于财务报表分析的技巧实在太多,难以详述了。

三、投资的艺术 
  上文粗略介绍了简单易用的四种估值方法,合理地进行综合应用可以大大提高女性投资人的投资成功率。但是估值从来就不是科学,绝大部分的结论都建立在对未来的估计和推测之上,因此也很难说精确;投资是一门艺术,很大程度上取决于投资人自身专业能力、估值理念、投资偏好和眼光。在此,还要引申几点对男人估值中应考虑到的问题。 
1、题材溢价 
  若男人具有相当的炒作题材,则市场估值将普遍看高一线。比如是名门之后,体貌无双,才艺出众,家务无敌,幽默诙谐,左右逢源,温柔专一等等,可以给予适当的估值溢价。因为这些题材带给女性投资人相当大的隐性收益。注意题材在估值中的占比确实不可过高,失败的案例包括杜十娘误投了李甲,王菲误投了窦唯,阿娇误投了陈冠希等等。
2、风险控制 
  任何投资都有风险,因为未来不可预测。这点即便是完美的估值也不能规避。包括:非可控风险与可控风险。非可控风险包括,男人的非正常死亡、重大疾病、战争、官非、经济崩溃等;可控风险包括:其他女性投资人暗箱操作、男人主动争取上市、财务报表造假、审计风险等等。通常情况是男人采取向另外的女性投资人定向增发的模式,则原股东股东权益被严重摊薄。 
  对于风险控制,只有三点建议:
(1)做好投资组合,不要把鸡蛋放到一个篮子里
    女性应投资相当部分的自身资源到自己的职业、爱好、朋友、亲人,以免投资男人失败就一无所有一败涂地;
(2)永远以低价收购
    评估自身的投资实力,只购入价值低估的男人,留出足够的利润空间,不要被高价进货被套死。
(3)投资资源分步到位
    女性投资人容易一出手就砸出所有资源,但是万一由于估值不准就无法退出。比如看好的男人只是在男朋友阶段,就少付出点时间精力体贴关爱,等签好投资协议之后(结婚)再倾其所有。 
3、投资后的整合 
  投资后的整合也是并购的成功关键因素。
    首先,男人都有父母,如何处理好与这两位原始股东的关系直接决定你男人的未来的经营效益。
    其次,作为投资人,如果女性能重新整合该男既有资产资源以发挥其整合效应(如协助男人经营人脉、搞好男人内控)等,将使投资人未来收益最大化。这就是具有高附加值的投资,十分有竞争力。
    第三,文化与管控。并购成败也取决与投资人与投资男二者文化软环境是否融洽,内部管控机制是否合理。和谐的关系可以最大限度降低男人IPO的冲动与其他女性投资人的冲动。还举这个例子:卓文君一纸文章打消出于盈利高峰的蔺相如引入第二位女性投资人意图,正是文化与管控的成功。 
4、退出机制 
  女性投资人一般不愿意考虑退出,但为部分有特殊需求投资者介绍以下退出方式:
(1)股权回购
    即男人以现金或资产向女性投资人进行股权回购,综合考虑女性投资人的付出(青春肉体爱情及其他)来支付对价。通常方式是付青春损失费和房子归女方。
(2)男人IPO后二级市场退出
    即男人变成公众持股后向其他女性投资人出售拥有的股权,并获取股权溢价收益。
(3)通过诉讼及其他非常手段强行退出
    包括离婚官司,雇佣私家侦探捉奸等等。
   
最后,祝各位女性投资人投资成功,恭喜发财!
(作者:佚名) 来源:http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_6301ba930102e6kj.html

2013年3月8日星期五

谁在推动香港政府修订规例限制奶粉出境?


政府于二零一三年二月二十二日在宪报刊登《2013年进出口(一般)(修订)规例》(修订规例),规定除非获工业贸易署署长发出许可证,否则禁止从香港输出供36个月以下婴幼儿食用的配方粉。修订规例将由二零一三年三月一日起生效。任何人若违反修订规例,即属犯罪,一经定罪,可处罚款50万元及监禁两年。

一个向从来以市场自由为傲的地方,竟然会专门修改法例限制奶粉商品买卖流动,确实匪夷所思。那么,这背后原因,除了一些一时买不到所需要牌子奶粉的市民会给政府施压外,还有哪些团体在背后起了推动作用呢?

根据香港食物及卫生局网站上给出的事前咨询意见资料 (修订《进出口(一般)规例》(第60章,附属法例A)立法建议 公众谘询 谘询期间收到的意见书 )一共收到15条团体(商家)反馈,35条个人反馈。15个团体中,除两家支持,其余全部反对限制 (注意:最热门的美素和美赞臣不在咨询之列)。至于35条个人意见,大概一半以上是支持限制的,但也有相当部分持反对意见。
现仅将团体意见简列如下:

001 Little Giant: 不同意限制,并提到奶粉商不愿意供货给他们
002 先驱集团有限公司:反对,绝大多数牌子奶粉都供应充足,政府不能只因为市场上个别牌子短缺就立法禁止。
003 志宏国际贸易有限公司:至死反对,并顺带吐嘈一堆。
004 域源企业有限公司:同意限制
005 欧陆食品检测服务香港有限公司:基本中立。并申明作为一家奶粉测试公司,有时候需要将奶粉样品送往国外或大陆检测,希望政府能给予特别处理。
006 身份保密:作为奶粉进口商,强烈反对,并认为香港政府公开提到7个短缺奶粉的牌子,等于用政府资源给这几个牌子做广告,有违公平。而且只因为7个牌子的供货短缺就立法禁止所有奶粉出境,更加不公平。
007身份保密:反对,干扰正常商业行为。
008 港九药房总商会有限公司:反对,并搬出数据来说明市场上整体并没有出现奶粉短缺,出现短缺假象是因为信息流动不畅、资源错配等。
009 Ming Hui Trading Ltd: 反对,并报料说所谓奶粉短缺的现象是因为那两个牌子奶粉公司故意限货等到年末,同时还造成他们家奶粉最受欢迎的印象。
010 香港零售管理协会:反对,并非对症下药,而且有违《基本法》中保障货物、资本自由流通的声明。
011 雀巢香港有限公司:反对,除了个别牌子,其它都供应充足。
012 惠氏(香港)控股有限公司: 反对,同上。
013 消费者委员会:支持限制
014天一环球有限公司:反对,有违公平。
015 美国雅培制药有限公司:反对,短缺的只是个别牌子在某些时间某些地区供应不足,其它都供应充足。

2013年3月7日星期四

干支纪年以立春还是新年为分界?

干支纪年的岁首,当然不在西元的元旦,但到底是在立春日还是正月初一,似乎不是那么清楚。 比如今年(癸巳)立春是在西元201324日,而农历正月初一是在西元 2013210日,那么在西历24~10日之间这些天是该属于癸巳(蛇)年还是壬辰(龙)年

凡候歲美惡,謹候歲始。歲始或冬至日,產氣始萌。臘明日,人眾卒歲,一會飲食,發陽氣,故曰初歲。正月旦,王者歲首;立春日,四時之(卒)始也。四始者,候之日。 --- 《史記天官書》

由此可清楚看出,岁始其实有好多种算法:冬至、腊八,正月初一、立春这些都各有意义,不过官方的规定还是以正月初一为始的。至于历史上实际施行的纪年,相信从各朝官方正史、实录,历代私人文集、笔记都不难找到实例佐证,确实是从正月初一算起。归结起来就是:

1)正史、帝王官家之纪年都以正朔为终始。农历正月初一是新的一年的开始,干支、生肖属相都当以此为例。

2)黄历、命理术数以立春来定岁始。由于农历闰月的不确定,要想方便确定历史上任意一年农历的正月初一是很困难的,相反确定立春就容易多了。这是为方便变通计。