我鳗鱼 也是一只自由泳的小鸟 @[email protected]

@QuantumBubbleTea @mengminghan 我感觉她就像那种骗子，拿很离谱的条件来筛选不太会拒绝的人，然后她就可以得寸进尺了​​

@QuantumBubbleTea @turquoise 靠，她要知道这个干嘛，参考一下为什么别人的房子租得出去而她的租不出去吗

@KaltesBlut 确实可以望文生义但是我没想到这个词可以这么用！我还去查了下那个软件的名字是怎么来的，结果查到的好像是创始人洗澡的时候 for no obvious reason 就想到了​​大为失望

@KaltesBlut powerpoint 震惊到我​​

@knockknock @anothersalticid 就是扣完保险之后 1500。医疗保险的话是收入的 16% 左右，公司会替你交一半，你交另一半，交完之后的钱到手上就是净工资。1500 够不够看城市了，我是学生的时候 1000 欧就够。

@[email protected] 嘿嘿，我在看 Thinking, fast and slow 这本书，第十九章大概就是讲人成功大多靠的是运气！有两段摘抄一下：
“Consider the story of how Google turned into a giant of the technology industry. […] On one memorable occasion, they were lucky, which makes the story even more compelling: a year after founding Google, they were willing to sell their company for less than $1 million, but the buyer said the price was too high. Mentioning the single lucky incident actually makes it easier to underestimate the multitude of ways in which luck affected the outcome.”
“A very generous estimate of the correlation between the success of the firm and the quality of its CEO might be as high as .30. […] In a well-ordered and predictable world, the correlation would be perfect (1), and the stronger CEO would be found to lead the more successful firm in 100% of the pairs. If the relative success of similar firms was determined entirely by factors that the CEO does not control (call them luck, if you wish), you would find the more successful firm led by the weaker CEO 50% of the time. A correlation of .30 implies that you would find the stronger CEO leading the stronger firm in about 60% of the pairs—an improvement of a mere 10 percentage points over random guessing, hardly grist for the hero worship of CEOs we so often witness.”