桜色の夢 (Deemo Movie)

0:00 Lonely Deemo
0:25 Falling Girl
1:34 Budding
2:04 Growing
2:23 I Miss My Home
3:11 Blossom／桜色の夢／櫻花色的夢／Cherry-Colored Dream

PIKETTY’S INEQUALITY STORY IN SIX CHARTS

In this week’s magazine, I’ve got a lengthy piece about “Capital in the Twenty-first Century,” a new book about rising inequality by Thomas Piketty, a French economist, that is sparking a lot of comment and debate. (Brad DeLong has a useful summary of some early reviews.) I’ll go further into that discussion in future posts, but first I thought it might be useful to portray the gist of Piketty’s story in a series of charts.
full text:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2014/03/piketty-looks-at-inequality-in-six-charts.html

中譯文：法國經濟學家 Piketty 用六張圖講清楚、說明白「貧富鴻溝」
http://techorange.com/2014/05/09/piketty-looks-at-inequality-in-six-charts/

為何同工不同酬？

但真的是同工嗎？
酬，是報酬，當然是依據個人所付出的價值，對方所願意給付的報酬；
而不是單純以做什麼事來決定一個人所付出的值價，更不是只以時間來衡量。

以下內容節錄自 http://winston-zh.attlin.com/2014/03/50.html
同工不同酬？年薪 50 萬美金的工程師到底作哪些工作啊？

新聞報導總是很喜歡忽略很多真實的細節，這篇年薪 50 萬的報導就忽略掉『汗水並不等價』這個部分。二類勞工願意突破現狀，孤獨地，有時候可能還要挨餓一小段時間來引入村子賴以維生的水源，一類勞工則是用自己完成的工作與技能去交換薪水，兩者最主要的差異是冒險，而且不保證一定會回收。

如果你可以擁有一間公司，你想要鴻海還是蘋果？

以下內容節錄自 http://winston-zh.attlin.com/2014/03/blog-post_23.html
我不贊成服貿的理由：如果你可以擁有一間公司，你想要鴻海還是蘋果？

民間投資整個弱掉不行，從台灣 GDP 中所佔的比例不斷縮水，從1980年33%，逐年縮水到2013年的 19.7%，那你覺得這幾年年輕人的慘痛，經濟不振，世界末日是為什麼？

是因為沒有企業想投資台灣！

民間投資不振有兩個可能：

1. 企業主不把盈餘投資回來，只看短期利益，把錢全都放到口袋理收著。
2. 企業主選擇投資國外，銀根一根根向外抽，如果是投資國外的話，你覺得台灣企業投資哪國最多？不正是我們簽服貿的對象嗎？

戒急用忍政策以後，整個台灣中小企業真的只想用『更便宜』的工人與設備，把成本降低搶單，根本沒有人想要投資產業升級，搬到中國與東南亞去，反正我便宜就有人買，根本不用研發創新，根本不需要產業升級，肥我個人就好 @@

最可怕的是，我們的主管機關連上列最簡單的經濟學都不懂，竟然還聽信這群廠商遊說的鳥話，相信開放可以帶來最好的明天？讓這些台商把銀根一支支抽出台灣，幫別人的經濟體辦事，然後再回來跟人民說：我們還不夠開放，所以我們的經濟不好！

就算我們未來真的進了區域性的國際經濟組織，你覺的那 3% 或是 5% 的稅務減免，會進到誰麼口袋？會投資回台灣這塊經濟體嗎？

留在台灣的資金呢？通通都跑到房地產上面去了，真是有出息！

你這樣，我要怎麼相信你你會幫我們看好門啊？！

我不是個支持服貿的人！尤其對那些認為加入國際經濟組織就可以振興經濟這種人很不以為然。因為我始終認為台灣的產業升級與產業策略才是解決台灣經濟停滯不前的根本方案，『我們比較便宜』創造的價值絕對不會有『我們創造出獨特價值』還要多，還要久，還要徹底。試問夠簽合約，讓產品再便宜 3% 所產生的效益能有多久？

講句芭樂的話，蘋果的東西從來就不便宜，但是他毛利率比鴻海多的 10 倍不只，全世界欣賞與消費他們的價值，所創造出整個企業的規模，比鴻海大太多太多了。鴻海可以取代，但是沒有人可以取代蘋果。

蘋果方式的經濟體，才是已開發國家的生存之道。

國際組織或是區域經濟要加入，但是那絕對不是可以賭上整個國家經濟政策的方式，用這種開外掛，飲鴆止渴的方式，只會讓大家覺得很想邀功，很沒誠意。更別說那種身為總統回應學生的方式與態度，真的是覺得很失望（嘆）。

若服貿過了，的確是可以補強一些民間投資的部份。台灣經濟體整體而言的資金『有可能』會比較充裕，但是我們要小心，因為那裡面牽扯了更深的政治問題，總體而言我還是不贊成的。


 在文章回應區，看到一則可以參考的回覆
Jeffrey Cheng · Senior Manager at Trend Micro

不管是 GDP 或是 GDP (PPP) 都無法反應實際的狀態，因為在 GDP 上揚的同時，對個人實際購買力的影響，卻無法用一個有效的經濟指標來評估。簡單說，無法反應貧富差距。而用來計算貧富差距的 Gini Coefficient 指數也沒有跟 GDP 相連結，導致大家都各說各話、各自表述。換句話說，GDP的上升，伴隨的可能是基層公民的痛苦指數上升，因為分配不均。

香港 2011年的Gini指數是0.537，台灣2010年是0.342。我相信，不管服貿簽不簽，台灣會跟所有自由經濟國家一樣，慢慢趨近香港。力挽狂瀾的作法並不是服貿，而是居住正義，或是社會主義。也就是房屋持有的代價要變高，讓有錢人手中太多的錢，不要過度以房地產的形式帶動基本的生活物價，加劇貧富的不均。

Read, Talk and Laugh :)

之前介紹Capital in the Twenty-First Century的網誌，提到財富分配的問題。

這個問題還真是存在已久，且似乎沒有一個執政者敢動手解決這個問題，

我認為的原因是「官商勾結」，細節先不談；

不過，可以參考我的另一篇網誌《難怪台灣貧富不均》

來說說今天看到的新聞，

朱立倫說「真正的問題在財富分配，在於企業主、老闆賺錢之後願不願意跟員工分享。」企業賺錢的結果，一進老闆口袋、二是員工薪資、三需繳稅，政府除道德勸說調薪，也應調整財稅制度，讓企業在賺錢之後更樂意與員工共享，否則可能要繳更多稅。

《朱立倫：企業不加薪就繳稅》http://news.rti.org.tw/news/detail/?recordId=106417

應該還有四！

四、檯面上合法的政治獻金，私底下還有一堆不合法的賄賂。重點是這合法的政治獻金裡不含有官商勾結的成分嗎？

回到新聞本身，基於中央政府對在基層工作民眾的不照顧(以消費者物價指數漲幅3%作為調漲基本工資的標準)，以及企業硬是不調高薪資，朱立倫的想法算不錯，不過，對企業加稅，政府因此增加的稅收，到底用在哪了呢？是會回饋到基層勞工身上？還是會回流到企業廠商的手裡呢？

另一則好笑的新聞：

宋楚瑜在北京會見中共總書記習近平時，批評國民黨的兩岸服貿協議政策是「黑箱作業」，國民黨發出嚴正聲明隔海駁宋，並痛批「言過其實」。國民黨強調，服貿協議可說是立法院透明程度最高的議案之一，......。《宋批服貿黑箱 引爆國親大戰》http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/focus/paper/777498

透明度最高的議案，也就是說有很多議案都不夠透明、很多黑箱作業囉！這就是所謂的不打自招。XD

Capital in the Twenty-First Century

Piketty：資本主義本身便會使社會在財富分配上越來越趨於不平等，但一旦貧富差距過大，便會因為資源、知識與財力的懸殊差距，開始造成社會與政治地位的不平等，造就出用金錢雕刻出來的無能候選人，進而對民主政治的公平與正義造成衝擊。
這件事已存在很久了，似乎也如同Piketty的觀點，「資本報酬率可能永遠超過經濟成長率；人類史上大部分時間都是如此，而且有理由相信未來仍將如此。」
相信未來仍將如此，繼續造就出更多無能的候選人，除非有新的政治思想與政策，例如Piketty提出的「貧富不均本身並非不能接受，但前提是必須能激發個人創新及創造財富，再配合累進稅率及其他措施，而使整個社會生活更加富裕。」

Capital in the Twenty-First Century / Piketty
此書目前超熱門，網路上的介紹文寫著「造成亞馬遜頻頻缺貨，目前依舊一本難求。」
博客來網頁上也是寫著「限量商品」
看網路上的介紹文章，對此書產生滿大的興趣，
雖然沒看過此書，還不清楚作者的觀點，但我想先說，
這世界上，每個社會，都沒有絕對的平等與公平，更沒有只存在正義社會。
就像是，這世界上有好人，喜歡幫助弱勢者，也有壞人，騙錢、搶劫、殺人、官商勾結....。
Piketty是法國經濟學者，經濟學真的是一門很複雜的學問，因為與它牽扯的事物太多太廣，萬物都可與其有關。
所以，就看自己要站在什麼立場？用什麼角度？去解讀這世間萬物。
以我來說，我是為了讓自己更懂得這世界、更瞭解這社會，而讓自己可以過得好、過得開心，進而希望能幫助淨化社會黑暗面，改善社會陰暗角落，促進社會和諧，簡而言之，就是希望世界和平囉。

連教宗都說讚的暢銷書《廿一世紀資本論》：社會本就貧富不均
http://techorange.com/2014/05/07/a-french-economics-book-is-dominating-amazon-right-now/
法經濟學者：貧富不均更惡化
http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR2/8625373.shtml

France Could Create A Developer Visa To Support French Startups

French Secretary of State for the digital economy Axelle Lemaire announced in an interview with Le JDD that the French government will work on a developer visa for highly skilled employees.

While the French government already announced that it plans to create a so-called startup visa for entrepreneurs and investors, Lemaire wants to extend this visa to engineers. According to French governmental agency Pôle emploi, hiring developers is the most difficult hiring process in France. And it’s not over — tech companies will be looking for 36,000 new developers in the next five years.

French engineering schools are very good but won’t be able to make up for this increase in job openings. Moreover, many engineers choose to move to the U.S. and work for American tech companies. You can see this phenomenon by looking at French tech engineers alumni networks, such as While42.

Previously, the plan for the startup visa only concerned entrepreneurs and investors who wanted to create jobs in France. Following Tariq Krim’s report on French developers, Lemaire wants to provide the same advantages for developers as well. Starting in 2015, everybody working for a startup, from founders to developers, will get a visa and be able to work for four years in France.

Finally, Lemaire will work on France’s educational system when it comes to computer science. French engineering schools are among the best engineering schools in the world, but many average students are not good enough at math or physics to pass the competitive exams. Contrarily, there are very few computer science schools that only teach you how to code.

France needs more computer science schools for anyone with a baccalauréat and a passion for startups. With the current dearth of talent, these students will easily find a job.
http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/28/france-could-create-a-developer-visa-to-support-french-startups/?ncid=tcdaily


沒簽證擠不進矽谷的開發者，法國全都要了
http://techorange.com/2014/05/06/france-could-create-a-developer-visa-to-support-french-startups/

科技新創團隊正夯，「人才」是關鍵競爭力，而且不管是自家人，還是外國人，只要是人才就是值得留下來的人，但工作簽證卻是一件很麻煩的事（矽谷也不例外）。 若想抓住各國人才，工作簽證的相關政策就得精心琢磨了。

矽谷、Google 等之所以會成功，肯定少不了外來的聰明腦袋。美劇 The Big Bang Theory 和 The Newsroom 就分別出現一位天文物理學家與電腦高手，他們都來自印度，可見移民對歐美科技和學術的貢獻已是普遍認定的事實。

集結各國高階人才可以創造更多產值，和生態多元的道理相同，基因庫越大，就越有競爭力。

法政府出招，擁抱外來程式設計師
為了網羅更多科技人才留在法國，法國數位經濟助理部長 Axelle Lemaire 日前於法煤 Le JDD 的訪談中宣布，法政府將推動高階技術員工的工作簽證，尤其著重程式開發。

法政府早先已表示正在規劃「新創團隊簽證（Startup Visa）」，企業家和投資人能因此受惠，因為他們創造了就業機會，而 Lemaire 希望能進一步納入程式設計師。2015 年起，只要在法國當地的新創公司工作，從創辦人到程式開發員，人人都能享有 4 年的工作簽證。

法國科技菁英外流矽谷
現在許多法國電腦工程師選擇移居美國，投身美國科技業，「法國科技工程師校友社群平台」While42 即可一窺這股趨勢。

擴張資工教育，培育本土人才
法國就業服務局（Pôle emploi）指出，該國聘用程式開發員的手續繁雜，而預計在未來 5 年，科技公司還會需要 36,000 名新進程式開發者。法國的資工校系雖然是世界前段班，但畢業人數不足以填補這個大缺口，而且許多程度中等的學生難以應付競爭激烈的入學考試，因為數學和物理的成績不甚理想，而只教 Coding 的理工學校寥寥無幾。

因此，除了放寬工作簽證限制，Lemaire 還會調整法國的資工教育。法國需要設立更多資工學校，只要高中會考（baccalauréat）合格、對新創圈有熱忱，人人都可以入學。如今法國大鬧工程人才荒，資工學系畢業的學生根本不愁沒有工作。

擁抱人才移民，提升國家競爭力
未來幾年，電腦工程勢必依舊是兵家必爭之地，看到法國的政策已開始調整，台灣更應思考自身的人口結構與產業需求，制定合適的移工政策，才能立於不拜之地。移民不一定是來搶飯碗，高階技術移民反而能替台灣創造就業機會。

李斯於 < 諫逐客書> 中寫下「泰山不讓土壤，故能成其大；河海不擇細流，故能就其深；王者不卻眾庶，故能明其德。」就是在說明廣納各界之力以強健國家體質，法政府已釋出招賢攬才的誠意，台灣也該急起直追了！

地球上每年有660萬名兒童活不過5歲

許多物資充足的地區，人們過著吃飽喝足又浪費的生活。不論美國還是台灣，也包括許多其他國家，其中有著許多人，每天都在過度消秏與浪費食物，甚至是浪費醫療資源。

在此同時，地球上每年卻有660萬名兒童活不過5歲！！

根據聯合國兒童基金會資料顯示，每年有660萬名兒童的母親，承受著孩子因著生產併發症、腹瀉、營養不良等可預防或可治癒的疾病，而無法活過5歲的傷痛。世界展望會自2009年發起「兒童健康‧立刻行動」，至今已幫助全球超過3,500萬名兒童改善健康，全球5歲以下兒童死亡數亦從2009年的880萬，降至2013年的660萬，世界兒童的健康現況，透過世界展望會與對各國政府的政策倡導，已在全球看見轉變的曙光及成果。 

　然而在最偏遠及弱勢的地區，仍有許多孩子無法健康活過5歲，台灣世界展望會籲請大眾持續關注兒童健康議題，並一同響應「搶救兒童健康 SUPER超級任務」，加入全球倡議「兒童健康‧立刻行動」的行列，讓每個孩子都能享有基本醫療資源，順利健康長大！GROUPON台灣亦於母親節前夕發起募款活動，邀請民眾捐款100元，幫助孕婦獲得健康照護，能夠陪伴孩子健康長大。 

　世界展望會發起倡導行動 籲各國關注全球660萬名兒童的健康危機 

　根據聯合國兒童基金會統計，全球每年有660萬名5歲以下兒童死亡，其中多數死於可預防或可治癒的疾病。世界展望會於5月發佈的最新報告〈未曾受關懷與未曾獲登記的兒童〉(Unreached and Uncounted：The Unseen children who could be saved by better data)指出，在偏遠及貧困的地區，由於當地政府缺少健全的出生登記系統，讓許多孩子的健康及就醫權益受到忽略，健康遭受威脅。 

　目前全球5歲以下兒童之中，有約2.3億名沒有取得出生證明，佔全體的三分之一(資料來源：聯合國兒童基金會)。世界展望會表示，這群孩子對健康的需求和其他兒童並無不同，但因著醫療制度的不足，導致這些兒童無法享有基本的醫療服務。因此，讓每一位兒童，包括最弱勢、易受忽略的孩子們，都能享有最基本的醫療資源，是世界展望會長期關注與投入的焦點與行動。 

　世界展望會自2009年11月起，在全球發起為期5年的倡導行動─「兒童健康‧立刻行動」，目標在2015年之前，促使各國領袖從地方、國家、全球三個層級，全面降低兒童及孕產婦可預防疾病的死亡率。5年來，世界展望會積極參與多項與兒童健康相關的國際政策倡導文件的制定，至今已成功改變在世界各國、乃至國際上的128項政策，幫助全球超過3,500萬名兒童，改善健康與營養。 

　「兒童健康‧立刻行動」匯聚各國力量 改善3,500萬名兒童的健康 

　台灣世界展望會除了參與全球倡導行動，更匯聚台灣資助人及捐款人的捐款，在台灣愛心幫助的國外計畫區推行因地制宜的兒童與母親健康醫療方案，以及「兒童健康‧立刻行動」倡導方案，實行如母乳餵養、疫苗注射、腹瀉護理、瘧疾預防及求醫、訓練合格的助產士、設立營養教室、培養社區健康保健員、設立行動診所等服務計畫，讓基本的健康照顧措施能落實至家庭及社區。2013年，分別在緬甸、印度、馬拉威、尚比亞、馬利、玻利維亞、薩爾瓦多、阿富汗、亞美尼亞9個國家展開兒童健康與照護等服務方案，共計有613,902人受益。 

　在台灣愛心資助的海地塞卡拉梭（Cerca-la-Source）計畫區，22歲的希爾薇娜（Sylvina Mathurin）是世界展望會「媽媽社團」的倡導志工，她所撫養的姪女伊黛卡（Idelca）曾經體重過輕，飽受腹瀉之苦，「那時我們以為她會過世，但護士教我們如何為她準備口服液以補充水分，當她的病情逐漸好轉，我們就加入了媽媽社團。」世界展望會透過媽媽社團，教導父母如何利用既有食材做出營養均衡的餐點，同時也發放玉米、米、油、糖和豌豆等食材，改善當地兒童營養不良的景況。 

受訓結束後，希爾薇娜成為倡導志工，持續與其他父母分享所學到的兒童營養知識，「我很感謝世界展望會成立了媽媽社團，幫助我們的孩子更加健康茁壯。」希爾薇娜說。透過健康醫療方案，世界展望會持續改善偏遠及貧困地區兒童的健康景況，讓每個孩子都能擁有健康長大的機會。 

詳全文 Survive 5！兒童健康‧立刻行動-生活消費新聞-新浪新聞中心 http://news.sina.com.tw/article/20140505/12357084.html

WHY YOU NEED TO STOP BRAGGING ABOUT HOW BUSY YOU ARE

AUTHOR BRIGID SCHULTE SAYS COMPANIES SHOULD STOP REWARDING OVERWORKED EMPLOYEES AND FOCUS ON PRODUCTIVITY INSTEAD.

Do you rush through the morning paper, barely skimming the headlines while answering emails and making kids’ lunches? Do you compete with coworkers over how late you stay at the office each night?

When journalist Brigid Schulte found herself immersed in one of the most hectic, time-crunched industries, she, like many of her busy coworkers, was feeling overworked and overwhelmed by the demands of her work and home life.

“I was just feeling so busy and holding on by my fingernails through every day, trying to work crazy hours, not only being good at what I did, but great and amazing at what I did, and then [at home] I was trying to be supermom,” she says. Baking cupcakes until 2 a.m. and hosting professional interviews while sitting on the floor outside her kids’ dental office was the norm for Schulte.

LOGGING IN LONG HOURS AND COMPLAINING ABOUT NOT HAVING ANY TIME IN THE DAY IS CONSIDERED A STATUS SYMBOL AND A SIGN OF SUCCESS.

Yet even though she was working as though her hair was on fire, she felt unproductive and inadequate. Schulte had bought into a “culture of busy." That is, a work environment where logging in long hours and complaining about not having any time in the day is considered a status symbol and a sign of success.

Now, in her new book Overwhelmed: Work, Love and Play When No One Has the Time, Schulte argues a workplace culture that rewards those who are overworked is flawed and she challenges managers, business owners and leaders to adopt a new attitude of work, one where performance rather than time, and a life outside of work rather than a life consisting of work is the norm.

A CULTURE OF BUSY

“In our workplace culture, we reward people who work all hours, are completely work-devoted, and don’t care if they have a life [outside of work],” says Schulte.

This culture of busyness began in the 1980s as economic uncertainty set in and white collar workers began logging in more hours, trying to make themselves stand out amongst the regular 9 to 5ers. “There are many workplaces that still measure hours and not performance even when hours aren’t really what matter.”

LEISURE TIME WHERE THE BEST IDEAS ARE BORN

In her book, Schulte recounts a study by Florida psychologist Anders Ericcson who wanted to understand what it took to be the best at something. He went to Berlin to examine the time logs of the most successful musicians and discovered that the virtuosos were those who practiced the hardest for no more than 90 minutes and took more breaks and naps than the musicians who weren’t as good.

"THERE’S SUCH GREAT EVIDENCE THAT WORKING ALL OF THOSE HOURS REALLY DOESN’T GET YOU WHERE YOU WANT TO GO."

“In the breaks, that’s where the ‘aha moment’ comes,” says Schulte. It’s in the moments of leisure time that the brain is working to solve issues so you can begin your next burst of intense work with a renewed perspective.

“When you look at human performance science, there’s such great evidence that working all of those hours really doesn’t get you where you want to go,” says Schulte. While you may be able to work a few 60-hour weeks, eventually you will be so burnt out that you lose the ability to be creative and innovative.

ADOPTING A NEW WORKPLACE CULTURE THAT DEVALUES BUSYNESS

Schulte sought out real-life examples of workplaces that implemented this theory in practice and found it in one of the most shocking places--the Pentagon. Long hours at the office were leaving Pentagon staff burnt out and struggling to balance the demands of family and personal time. Alternative work schedules and flexible work policies were implemented that reflected a fundamental shift in cultural values.

“People were no longer bragging about long hours. If they bragged at all, it was about how they got their work done more efficiently,” says Schulte. After this cultural shift that invalidated busyness rather than rewarding it, the Pentagon noticed the quality of work improve and thinking became sharper."

"IF YOU CANNOT FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO YOUR JOB IN 40 HOURS, WE WILL FIRE YOU."

Schulte also examines a software company, Menlo Innovations, where staying late at the office is viewed as a sign of inefficiency and can result in dismissal. “[This company says] if you cannot figure out how to do your job in 40 hours, we will fire you,” says Schulte. This from a company in an industry that is notorious for overworking employees.

THE BOSS HAS TO GO HOME FIRST

Rewiring a company culture to value leisure time rather than busyness makes economic sense, but Schulte warns, it’s a process that is top-down. “The culture is set by what the leadership does. If you work crazy hours, even if you [tell employees] to go home and be with their kids, no one will do that. They’re going to work how the boss works,” says Schulte.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3029294/work-smart/why-you-need-to-stop-bragging-about-how-busy-you-are

譯文

別再吹噓你整天忙碌加班，那只證明你其實非常無能

http://techorange.com/2014/05/06/why-you-need-to-stop-bragging-about-how-busy-you-are/

Rivalry helps fruit flies maintain brainpower

作者把中文的標題下得很露骨，但我覺得下得很好哦。
以及，這篇文章不只適用果蠅，也適用於人類(我在說廢話，為得是接下一句話..)，
而且不只適用男性，也適用於女性，我先不說為什麼，希望你也可以想想囉~ :P


好好把妹，努力求偶，確保子孫不會越來越笨？！

各位男士們小心！不努力把妹，小心子孫越來越笨～

這篇剛剛出爐在《皇家學會報告：生物科學》的研究可有趣了！為了探討求偶的競爭過程會不會透過演化而影響到男性的心智能力，瑞士洛桑大學的科學家霍利斯（Brian Hollis）和卡維基（Tadeusz Kawecki）強制配對果蠅，讓牠們一夫一妻。公果蠅因此不用費力求偶，樂得輕鬆！

沒想到，繁衍 100 代之後，出現的果蠅後代們，整個腦殘了！！（話說，這研究真是又苦又長啊，實驗中果蠅每一代花 2 天交配、3 天產卵、再加 10 天孵化，這樣 100 代大概要四年多吧。）

這些沒有經歷求偶競爭的果蠅後代，變得比正常繁衍的果蠅後代要笨很多。例如，公果蠅的求偶能力變差，分不清環境中哪隻母果蠅在受孕期。而且，牠們的學習能力也下降。

（小聲說：重點是，只有公果蠅變笨，母果蠅無差啊！）

好，那要何看出求偶能力變差呢？簡單！研究人員讓這兩種公果蠅的後代（ 100 代後的孫子們）參加「求偶大賽」，看看哪一種公果蠅比較能夠獲得正常母果蠅的青睞。所謂的 「求偶大賽」，就是兩種公果蠅各派出五隻，然後分別和另外五隻正常公果蠅與五隻正常母果蠅關在一起，最後看看哪一種公果蠅能產下較多的後代！結果發現，沒有經歷求偶競爭的公果蠅孫子，被有經歷過求偶競爭的公果蠅孫子完敗（成功當爸爸的機率差了30%）。

那為什麼沒有經歷求偶競爭的公果蠅 100 代孫子，會被完敗呢？難不成，是因為母果蠅有血輪眼，可以一眼看出牠們是魯蛇，而不想與之交配？結果發現，事實並非如此，因為如果把單獨一隻母果蠅跟這種沒有經歷求偶競爭的公果蠅 100 代孫子關在一起，牠們的交配行為一切正常，母果蠅似乎不會排斥牠們。

嗯，那究竟是怎麼一回事呢？原來，這是因為這種沒有經歷求偶競爭的公果蠅孫子變笨了，笨到無法判斷出哪一隻母果蠅是處女蠅！研究人員發現，當這種笨公果蠅的 100 代孫子和一隻處女蠅以及五隻非處女蠅關在一起 20 分鐘後，找到處女蠅交配的成功率，比有經歷求偶競爭的公果蠅 100 孫子低了 26%，而且，成功找到處女蠅交配所花的時間（取中位數），則慢了 19 分鐘！

此外，這種沒有經歷求偶競爭的公果蠅 100 孫子的學習能力也下降（氣味 – 電擊關聯學習表現差），因此，說他們變笨，真的一點都不為過！

由此可知，如果一個社會中每個男性都不用努力求偶就能找到老婆，子孫可能會越來越笨喔！

從演化上來看，這項研究說明了求偶競爭對雄性心智能力的重要影響。在求偶過程中，如果不夠聰明，無法判斷女性的受孕狀況（套在人類身上，大概就是笨男無法判斷一個女生是否有男友、是否有老公，死會了還要硬追？），可能就會徒勞無功，被完敗打趴，淪為魯蛇慘遭淘汰。最後，只有聰明的求偶者得以成功繁衍後代。

轉貼自http://pansci.tw/archives/59292




Rivalry helps fruit flies maintain brainpower

Males dim mentally after generations without competitors
(轉貼自 https://www.sciencenews.org/arti ... maintain-brainpower)
Magazine issue: April 5, 2014

The demands of outmaneuvering other guys when courting may help male fruit flies stay mentally sharp.

After more than 100 generations in the lab without male competition, male fruit flies didn’t do so well in a standard test of learning, reports evolutionary biologist Brian Hollis of the University of Lausanne in Switzerland.

The male Drosophila melanogaster still courted with normal enthusiasm and success when alone with a female. But in groups, the long-sheltered males lagged when competing with another strain of males in siring young. A series of other tests suggests that the competition-free populations faltered not because of physical weakness but because they had lost some of their smarts for coping with complex mating crowds. Male competition and other forms of sexual selection may be unappreciated evolutionary forces for maintaining a species’ smarts, Hollis and Tadeusz Kawecki of Lausanne propose February 26 in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

The results don’t mean that “monogamy makes men dumb,” Hollis says. The fly experiments create a “caricature” of monogamy to study an evolutionary question. Real-world demands of reproducing, for humans as for many other animals, involve much more than being alone in a lab vial with one member of the opposite sex.

Pairing fruit flies with just one partner is how the researchers created their artificial world without male competition, starting in 2007. After 100 generations of such solitude males were still courting lone females as successfully as normal flies.

Fruit flies usually mate in crowds drawn to food. Virgin females may accept male advances after merely 10 or 20 minutes of courtship moves such as face-to-face stares and intense wing vibrations. A female who has already mated, however, is much harder for a male to persuade. “She’ll kick at him, or vibrate her wings in a characteristic way,” Hollis says. “There are lots of rejection behaviors. A male can spend hours.”

Other research has shown that males learn signs of rejection from their early attempts at courtship. When the Lausanne researchers mixed an inexperienced male from the noncompetition group with one virgin female and five mated ones likely to reject him, he did seem to learn a bit. After 20 minutes, these males were more likely to focus attention on the receptive females. But males from the normal polygamous population became even more likely to focus.

The researchers also tested learning ability with odor. They gave fly vials an earthquake shake during exposure to one odor but not when a different one wafted by. The noncompetition fruit flies didn’t score as well as the regular flies in learning to flee the earthquake smell.

Females of the noncompetition population, however, matched the odor-learning performance of regular females. Maybe the challenges of egg-laying or some other aspect of female reproduction had preserved their mental edge, the researchers speculate.

The results from the male flies run counter to research on vertebrates. Among bats and nonhuman primates, scientists found species investing more resources in brainpower when they faced less intense pressures of courting and competing.

“Primates are highly intelligent and very social; flies are not,” says evolutionary anthropologist Michael A. Schillaci of the University of Toronto Scarborough. He’s not sure the flies shed much light on primates, but they could help scientists understand mammals that don’t display a lot of social complexity.