關於 man day計算 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【旅行隨筆】第一次大白天喝伏特加喝到吐😨 一切都要從昨天從 Khiva 搭乘 450公里的共乘車子開始說起...🚘

不知道為什麼本來查到的火車班次是因為淡季沒開，還是票賣完了。我們必須從古城 Khiva 搭40分鐘的共乘車（USD$1）到下個大城市 Urgench（中途碰到一位剛好今天要飛要去蘭州留學三年的男子，用很不標準的中文跟我們對話～）🚘

接著再搭乘每人 USD$10 的車資前往下個距離這裡430KM 的主要城鎮 Bukhara 🚕 共乘車子就是這樣，有時候你是最後一組客人，一上車就可以走了😆

等到我們司機接到其他四位客人，已經過了一個多小時了...我們九點半就離開了旅館，十二點才發車...重點是私人 Taxi 才 USD$40🤣 人家說在中亞就是要共乘車子才有趣，果然不錯...😅

下午我們停到一家餐廳，直接進去廚房！廚房內居然有個巨大的魚池，裡面的魚都超大！在英文不通的狀況下，真不知道這是要買魚還是吃午餐😐 「一公斤五美金。」司機用計算機打出來。由於當下我以為要買魚回家，馬上說 NO。

於是大家又上車開到另一家餐廳，又直接進去廚房看魚！這家餐廳跟前家比起來根本沒人，於是我們又回到第一家😅

「跟當地人吃應該不會被坑了吧...」我們悄聲與對方說。

一坐下去就麵包、茶水、居然還有沾麵包的番茄醬（以前都沒有）🍅 這時烏茲別克叔叔們點了伏特加，想說可以消毒，就喝了一杯😛

應該是說他們是用飲茶大小的碗來喝酒，而且都是全滿。剛喝下去還好，接著不知道為什麼就被灌了四杯😅 完全沒料到後勁超強 😂 叔叔還指著可樂的顏色說我的臉跟可樂一樣紅了😳

酒量好的 York 當然沒事啦！連續開了三瓶 😲 這時叔叔從一個小包裝拿出一些葉子，要他把嘴巴張開放到舌頭後面。「像這樣子嗎？」他大嘴巴的說。

突然他神色一變，表情變化多端。「天啊！我完全酒醒，這該不會是古柯鹼吧？」「古柯鹼應該是粉不是葉子吧...🍃」

叔叔在耳朵旁比了旋轉的手勢，York 說他整個耳朵在響，趕快跑去洗手台吐掉😝 而烏茲別克叔叔們都在大笑，很滿意的看著我們。看來我們成功不靠語言就交了朋友？叔叔們不時關心我如何，告訴我等下上車就會直接睡到目的地🚘

確實沒錯... 我站起來出去外面透透氣，不到兩秒就把食物吐出來了！我的魚...😭 而且是廁所都還沒有走到，就吐在餐廳的花圃上...🌹

接下來的車程我真的是睡死...醒來頭也超痛的... 這餐真的吃太飽，兩人吃一公斤的魚肉含酒才 USD$7！果然在古城被坑很大 🙄 就這樣... 結束了我們在烏茲別克第一個有趣的體驗😂

#烏茲別克 #希瓦 #布哈拉

First time getting drink on Vodka in broad daylight ☀️ Projectile vomited across a flower bed😨🌹 Slept through a 450KM car ride while walking up with massive headache 🚘

Uzbeks are crazy drinkers! Never again!!!!

So the day started with us taking a shared taxi from Khiva to Urgench for USD$1 each on a 40 min car ride🚖

Then we negotiated another shared taxi to Bukhara which is 430KM away for USD$10 per person. As we were the first passengers, we waited for an hour before the driver found 4 other ppl then he's finally ready to go!

Mind you, a whole private cab is only USD$40...😐 However, they say shared taxi are part of Central Asia experience and they not wrong🤣

We visited two restaurants along the way and headed straight into their kitchen😶 Had no idea what's happening as no one speaks English but there were MANY fishes swimming inside this large pond😲🐟

Turns out they were deciding which restaurant was fresher. One kilogram of fish was USD$5, this clearly shows that our food in Khiva was a rip off🙄

The fried fishes were delicious but the highlight was probably the local men kept pouring vodka for us and guess we bonded that way...???😂

York had like 7 BOWLS of straight vodka while I had 4 😆 Had to run outside to use the toilet but really I was vomiting out the food...🤢

Between 4 or 5 of us, we finished 3 bottles of Vodka 😲 No joke... THEN... this man got out a packet of tobacco (?) Or leaves of some sort and told York to put it underneath his tongue 👅

Within a few seconds he sobered up! With ears ringing through his ears👂 It was quite crazy LOL. He whispered to me asking me if it was cocaine, I'm like I thought cocaines are powders not leaves???🌿

Anyways... We truly bonded with the them thanks to York who's able to tolerate alcohol 😛

Didn't get rip off for food as those fresh fishes were only USD$7 for two of us including bread, tea and drinks🍸 Finally, a decent meal in Uzbekistan after so many days!!!

Slept like a baby in the car ride...No shit 😂

Ps. I think "York" means "No" in Uzbek, in Russian "Neh!"

#Uzbekistan #Khiva #Bukhara

根據計算，100萬人遊行隊伍要從維多利亞公園排到廣東；200萬人遊行則要排到泰國。

順道一提香港15～30歲人口約莫100出頭萬人。以照片人群幾乎都是此年齡帶來看，兩個數字都是明顯誇大太多了。

另一個可以參考的是1969年的Woodstock Music & Art Fair，幾天內湧進40萬人次，照片看起來也是滿山滿谷的人。（http://sites.psu.edu/…/upl…/sites/851/2013/01/Woodstock3.jpg）

當年40萬人次引發驚人的大塞車，幾乎花十幾個小時才逐漸清場。

而香港遊行清場速度明顯快得多。

順道一提，因此運動而認定「你的父母不愛你」的白痴論述也如同文化大革命時的「爹親娘親不如毛主席親」般開始出現：

https://www.facebook.com/SaluteToHKPolice/videos/350606498983830/UzpfSTUyNzM2NjA3MzoxMDE1NjMyMTM4NjY3MTA3NA/

EVERY MAJOR NEWS outlet in the world is reporting that two million people, well over a quarter of our population, joined a single protest.
.
It’s an astonishing thought that filled an enthusiastic old marcher like me with pride. Unfortunately, it’s almost certainly not true.
.
A march of two million people would fill a street that was 58 kilometers long, starting at Victoria Park in Hong Kong and ending in Tanglangshan Country Park in Guangdong, according to one standard crowd estimation technique.
.
If the two million of us stood in a queue, we’d stretch 914 kilometers (568 miles), from Victoria Park to Thailand. Even if all of us marched in a regiment 25 people abreast, our troop would stretch towards the Chinese border.
.
Yes, there was a very large number of us there. But getting key facts wrong helps nobody. Indeed, it could hurt the protesters more than anyone.
.
For math geeks only, here’s a discussion of the actual numbers that I hope will interest you whatever your political views.
.
.
DO NUMBERS MATTER?
.
People have repeatedly asked me to find out “the real number” of people at the recent mass rallies in Hong Kong.
.
I declined for an obvious reason: There was a huge number of us. What does it matter whether it was hundreds of thousands or a million? That’s not important.
.
But my critics pointed out that the word “million” is right at the top of almost every report about the marches. Clearly it IS important.
.
.
FIRST, THE SCIENCE
.
In the west, drone photography is analyzed to estimate crowd sizes.
.
This reporter apologizes for not having found a comprehensive database of drone images of the Hong Kong protests.
.
But we can still use related methods, such as density checks, crowd-flow data and impact assessments. Universities which have gathered Hong Kong protest march data using scientific methods include Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, University of Hong Kong, and Hong Kong Baptist University.
.
.
DENSITY CHECKS
.
Figures gathered in the past by Hong Kong Polytechnic specialists using satellite photo analysis found a density level of one square meter per marcher. Modern analysis suggests this remains roughly accurate.
.
I know from experience that Hong Kong marches feature long periods of normal spacing (one square meter or one and half per person, walking) and shorter periods of tight spacing (half a square meter or less per person, mostly standing).
.
.
JOINERS AND SPEED
.
We need to include people who join halfway. In the past, a Hong Kong University analysis using visual counting methods cross-referenced with one-on-one interviews indicated that estimates should be boosted by 12% to accurately reflect late joiners. These days, we’re much more generous in estimating joiners.
.
As for speed, a Hong Kong Baptist University survey once found a passing rate of 4,000 marchers every ten minutes.
.
Videos of the recent rallies indicates that joiner numbers and stop-start progress were highly erratic and difficult to calculate with any degree of certainty.
.
.
DISTANCE MULTIPLIED BY DENSITY
.
But scientists have other tools. We know the walking distance between Victoria Park and Tamar Park is 2.9 kilometers. Although there was overspill, the bulk of the marchers went along Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, which is about 25 meters (or 82 feet) wide, and similar connected roads, some wider, some narrower.
.
Steve Doig, a specialist in crowd analysis approached by the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), analyzed an image of Hong Kong marchers to find a density level of 7,000 people in a 210-meter space. Although he emphasizes that crowd estimates are never an exact science, that figure means one million Hong Kong marchers would need a street 18.6 miles long – which is 29 kilometers.
.
Extrapolating these figures for the June 16 claim of two million marchers, you’d need a street 58 kilometers long.
.
Could this problem be explained away by the turnover rate of Hong Kong marchers, which likely allowed the main (three kilometer) route to be filled more than once?
.
The answer is yes, to some extent. But the crowd would have to be moving very fast to refill the space a great many times over in a single afternoon and evening. It wasn’t. While I can walk the distance from Victoria Park to Tamar in 41 minutes on a quiet holiday afternoon, doing the same thing during a march takes many hours.
.
More believable: There was a huge number of us, but not a million, and certainly not two million.
.
.
IMPACT MEASUREMENTS
.
A second, parallel way of analyzing the size of the crowd is to seek evidence of the effects of the marchers’ absence from their normal roles in society.
.
If we extract two million people out of a population of 7.4 million, many basic services would be severely affected while many others would grind to a complete halt.
.
Manpower-intensive sectors of society, such as transport, would be badly affected by mass absenteeism. Industries which do their main business on the weekends, such as retail, restaurants, hotels, tourism, coffee shops and so on would be hard hit. Round-the-clock operations such as hospitals and emergency services would be severely troubled, as would under-the-radar jobs such as infrastructure and utility maintenance.
.
There seems to be no evidence that any of that happened in Hong Kong.
.
.
HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS?
.
To understand that, a bit of historical context is necessary.
.
In 2003, a very large number of us walked from Victoria Park to Central. The next day, newspapers gave several estimates of crowd size.
.
The differences were small. Academics said it was 350,000 plus. The police counted 466,000. The organizers, a group called the Civil Rights Front, rounded it up to 500,000.
.
No controversy there. But there was trouble ahead.
.
.
THINGS FALL APART
.
At a repeat march the following year, it was obvious to all of us that our numbers were far lower that the previous year. The people counting agreed: the academics said 194,000 and the police said 200,000.
.
But the Civil Rights Front insisted that there were MORE than the previous year’s march: 530,000 people.
.
The organizers lost credibility even with us, their own supporters. To this day, we all quote the 2003 figure as the high point of that period, ignoring their 2004 invention.
.
.
THE TRUTH COUNTS
.
The organizers had embarrassed the marchers. The following year several organizations decided to serve us better, with detailed, scientific counts.
.
After the 2005 march, the academics said the headcount was between 60,000 and 80,000 and the police said 63,000. Separate accounts by other independent groups agreed that it was below 100,000.
.
But the organizers? The Civil Rights Front came out with the awkward claim that it was a quarter of a million. Ouch. (This data is easily confirmed from multiple sources in newspaper archives.)
.
.
AN UNEXPECTED TWIST
.
But then came a twist. Some in the Western media chose to present ONLY the organizer’s “outlier” claim.
.
“Dressed in black and chanting ‘one man, one vote’, a quarter of a million people marched through Hong Kong yesterday,” said the Times of London in 2005.
.
“A quarter of a million protesters marched through Hong Kong yesterday to demand full democracy from their rulers in Beijing,” reported the UK Independent.
.
It became obvious that international media outlets were committed to emphasizing whichever claim made the Hong Kong government (and by extension, China) look as bad as possible. Accuracy was nowhere in the equation.
.
.
STRATEGICALLY CHOSEN
.
At universities in Hong Kong, there were passionate discussions about the apparent decision to pump up the numbers as a strategy, with the international media in mind. Activists saw two likely positive outcomes.
.
First, anyone who actually wanted the truth would choose a middle point as the “real” number: thus it was worth making the organizers’ number as high as possible. (The police could be presented as corrupt puppets of Beijing.)
.
Second, international reporters always favored the largest number, since it implicitly criticized China. Once the inflated figure was established in the Western media, it would become the generally accepted figure in all publications.
.
Both of the activists’ predictions turned out to be bang on target. In the following years, headcounts by social scientists and police were close or even impressively confirmed the other—but were ignored by the agenda-driven international media, who usually printed only the organizers’ claims.
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION
.
Skip this section unless you want additional examples to reinforce the point.
.
In 2011, researchers and police said that between 63,000 and 95,000 of us marched. Our delightfully imaginative organizers multiplied by four to claim there were 400,000 of us.
.
In 2012, researchers and police produced headcounts similar to the previous year: between 66,000 and 97,000. But the organizers claimed that it was 430,000. (These data can also be easily confirmed in any newspaper archive.)
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION TOO
.
Unless you’re interested in the police angle. Why are police figures seen as lower than others? On reviewing data, two points emerge.
.
First, police estimates rise and fall with those of independent researchers, suggesting that they function correctly: they are not invented. Many are slightly lower, but some match closely and others are slightly higher. This suggests that the police simply have a different counting method.
.
Second, police sources explain that live estimates of attendance are used for “effective deployment” of staff. The number of police assigned to work on the scene is a direct reflection of the number of marchers counted. Thus officers have strong motivation to avoid deliberately under-estimating numbers.
.
.
RECENT MASS RALLIES
.
Now back to the present: this hot, uncomfortable summer.
.
Academics put the 2019 June 9 rally at 199,500, and police at 240,000. Some people said the numbers should be raised or even doubled to reflect late joiners or people walking on parallel roads. Taking the most generous view, this gave us total estimates of 400,000 to 480,000.
.
But the organizers, God bless them, claimed that 1.03 million marched: this was four times the researchers’ conservative view and more than double the generous view.
.
The addition of the “.03m” caused a bit of mirth among social scientists. Even an academic writing in the rabidly pro-activist Hong Kong Free Press struggled to accept it. “Undoubtedly, the anti-amendment group added the extra .03 onto the exact one million figure in order to give their estimate a veneer of accuracy,” wrote Paul Stapleton.
.
.
MIND-BOGGLING ESTIMATE
.
But the vast majority of international media and social media printed ONLY the organizers’ eyebrow-raising claim of a million plus—and their version soon fed back into the system and because the “accepted” number. (Some mentioned other estimates in early reports and then dropped them.)
.
The same process was repeated for the following Sunday, June 16, when the organizers’ frankly unbelievable claim of “about two million” was taken as gospel in the majority of international media.
.
“Two million people in Hong Kong protest China's growing influence,” reported Fox News.
.
“A record two million people – over a quarter of the city’s population” joined the protest, said the Guardian this morning.
.
“Hong Kong leader apologizes as TWO MILLION take to the streets,” said the Sun newspaper in the UK.
.
Friends, colleagues, fellow journalists—what happened to fact-checking? What happened to healthy skepticism? What happened to attempts at balance?
.
.
CONCLUSIONS?
.
I offer none. I prefer that you do your own research and draw your own conclusions. This is just a rough overview of the scientific and historical data by a single old-school citizen-journalist working in a university coffee shop.
.
I may well have made errors on individual data points, although the overall message, I hope, is clear.
.
Hong Kong people like to march.
.
We deserve better data.
.
We need better journalism. Easily debunked claims like “more than a quarter of the population hit the streets” help nobody.
.
International media, your hostile agendas are showing. Raise your game.
.
Organizers, stop working against the scientists and start working with them.
.
Hong Kong people value truth.
.
We’re not stupid. (And we’re not scared of math!)

【US ARMY PFU Shorts x Weekend getaway at 饅飽 MAN BAO】
-
DAY 6.
［週六小憩-自我對話日常」

「走在探訪你的路上，我不帶任何一束花
我只是覺得累了，就走著走著，來到你的方向
你會說我又在遊蕩，快回到該待的地方
我就不想，就像你離開時一樣不爽」
好樂團GoodBand - 蒸發

這是我週六走在街道耳機循環播放的歌曲，
週末適合帶上耳機，
找到能沈澱自己的歌曲並循環播放。
不通知任何朋友、
不發佈任何動態，
只有這樣與自己的相處，
才能夠與深層的自我對話。

你最近喜歡循環播放的歌曲是哪一首呢？

———————
【夏天跟著愛頭動ㄘ動：全民運球篇】開跑啦！
-
活動時間：0616（一）~0623（日）
參加辦法：

Step 1
來店跟店員說「教練！我好想打籃球。」

Step 2
店員將會計時「20秒鐘」並錄影
（若不想露頭會後製處理）

Step 3
計算成績，並於下週一0624公佈此活動冠軍

計分方式：
以球繞頭或繞腰或繞小腿一圈為五分
來回胯下運球一組（左右腳各一）為15分
（以上計分動作示範請參照影片）

*一人限定挑戰一次，不得擇日再戰
公佈結果：0624公佈此活動冠軍，獲得獎品：M51 Parka！（若有最高同分者，就用抽獎方式）

IG : www.instagrem.com/headxlover
蝦皮 : shopee.tw/headxlover2018
Line@: https://line.me/R/ti/p/%40obf9841b