裝置；尺寸可變, 2020
混沌系統和分形是數學研究中最前沿的領域，很可能是塑造我們世界的隱藏規則。
当人们认为自己掌握了有关這個世界的知识时，便会尝试扮演上帝的角色。 从人工生命到另一个生物圈，人类正在模仿，或创造另一个，自然。
這個作品旨在創造一個生成圖像和聲音的身臨其境的空間，從而對環境，溫度，濕度的變化，人/動物的活動做出反應。記住那些理論告訴我們的是：任何微不足道的行動都會導致更光明的未來或人類/人性的滅絕
無法打開YouTube點這裡
In Liz’s 麗姿酒吧
Leung Man Tao: “Naai Gong” or “Gang Du”
2021, webpage/software
Below is a embedded version of the work, might need a few seconds to load.
This is a work related to the social movement in Hong Kong in 2019. It is also about the subtle effects brought by the fact that there is different spoken languages and writing script of Chinese, especially in the context of Hong Kong and Mainland China.
The source text is written by Leung Man Tao (梁文道). A writer and critic who is active in Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. He was attacked by some people online from both Hong Kong and Mainland China for his neutral stand in the social movement in 2019. He’s the only public figure I know that received attacks from both regions, and after reading posts from the attackers, I noticed that, although the people who attacked him from Hong Kong and Mainland have very different ‘political stands’, behind the stands, they have very similar logics and ways of thinking. This work, to some degree, tries to show, explore, and raise questions about these similarities.
I collected Leung’s essays published in 2019 (the ones in traditional Chinese are published in Hong Kong, and the ones in simplified Chinese are published in Mainland China), tokenized the essays into sequences of words with a customized Chinese tokenizer (which is based on CC-CEDICT dictionary) and put them into a simple Markov model to generate new paragraphs.
Most of Leung’s articles in 2019 are about serious topics like politics, culture, and art, but after going through the Markov model, the generated text appears to be, somehow, meaningless, absurd, confusing, and ridiculous. I like this contrast because it somehow reminds me of the fact that the Internet (which is also the space where the attacks happened) is deconstructing discussions. That is not necessarily a good thing or necessarily a bad thing. It all depends on how we react. With the deconstruction, can we jump out of the existing perceptions and stereotypes? And after deconstructing, can we find a way back to the original question and settle down on an answer?
Reflect on one essay in the input of Leung about Cantonese, and the fact that in recent years Cantonese has been given a kind of political meaning. I wrote an algorithm to randomly choose two words in the text, replace one of them with a word that sounds similar to it in Mandarin (in simplified Chinese), and do the same to the other but with Cantonese (and traditional Chinese), then repeat the process every few seconds. Due to historical reasons Mandarin, simplified Chinese, and Mainland China are closely bound together, and so are Cantonese, traditional Chinese, and Hong Kong, although there is a population in Mainland China that speak Cantonese and write in simplified script and vice versa in Hong Kong. This impression, or stereotype, of spoken languages and writing scripts, creates boundaries for people to discuss and understand.
The algorithm makes the text change slightly over time. After a while, because of the replacements, the text becomes more and more senseless in terms of the literal meaning of the characters, but since the replaced words share the same or a similar pronunciation with the original ones, the visitors can still guess what words were in the places before and then get a fuzzy idea of the unreplaced text.
What happened to the text is a metaphor for what happened to Leung (and others) in real life: people quote, then ‘interpret’ and twist, what he (and they) wrote/said to support their opinions on him (and them), then A’s twisted quotation is quoted by B, and B’s by C… The meaning of the words in their quotation goes further and further away from the original one. Thus, it is harder and harder for people to get to the original idea of the text.
It is also a metaphor for the more and more divided society. With algorithms on social media and the instigation from some individuals and groups, the space for neutral opinions is lost. You are either part of us or the enemy. There is no place in between, and there is nothing in common between “us” and the enemy. Thus, the possibility of discussion and negotiation is gone. Only hate and attack are left.
Pronunciation data collected from open Cantonese dictionary, CC-Canto database and CC-CEDICT database, pre-processed by me.
ScreenShots (Click on the picture to view the original resolution version)
In Liz’s
2021, game/digital literature
In Liz’s is an experiment to combine two common techniques used in digital writing: hypertext (via Twine2) and context-free grammar (via RiTa).
The work tries to explore the possibility of merging two kinds of experiences brought by these two techniques in one story.
Please feel free to explore it below first, more descriptions will be shown when you finish the story.
Click here to open it in a new tab.
I really recommend you to play the game and experience the story. Here is just a screenshot of (one of) the beginning paragraph(s) to give you an idea of how it looks like (in case that the embedded content above is not working).
梁文道是“奶共”還是“港獨”
2021, 網頁/軟件
下面是embedded的版本，需要一段時間載入
這是一個關於2019香港社運的作品。它同時也是一件關於一國兩文兩語所帶來的微妙遺產的作品。
源文本來自梁文道，一位活躍於中國內地，香港和台灣的作家和評論家。由於他在2019年的社會運動的中立立場，他同時遭到了部分香港人和部分內地人的攻擊。他是我認識的唯一一個受到來自兩個地區的攻擊的公眾人物。在這之中我觀察到，儘管香港和內地的攻擊他的人有著非常不同的“政治立場”，在他們的立場背後，是非常相似的邏輯和思維方式。這個作品試圖在某種程度上展示，探索和詢問這些相似之處。
梁文道在2019年發表的大多數文章都有關嚴肅的話題，比如政治，文化和藝術。但是經過Markov模型的重塑之後，所生成的文本在某種程度上是無意義，荒謬，令人困惑和可笑的。這在我看來是互聯網消解嚴肅討論這一事實的影射。這不一定是好的，也不一定是壞的。這完全取決於我們的反應。通過解構的過程，我們可以跳出現有的觀念和陳規嗎？而在解構之後，我們能否回到問題本身並找到一個答案？
回應源文本中一篇討論廣東話和普通話的文章以及以及近年來廣東話被賦予了某種政治意義的這一事實，我寫了一個算法，每隔數秒，將生成的文本中的兩個詞，一個替換為在普通話中同音或近音的詞（替換為簡體中文）， 一個替換為廣東話中同音或近音的詞（替換為繁體中文）。由於某些歷史原因，普通話，簡體字和大陸綑綁在了一起，廣東話，繁體字和香港亦然（雖然在大陸有大量講廣東話寫簡體字的人口，在香港亦有大量講普通話/國語寫繁體字的人口）。這種語言和文字的固有觀念或是偏見，實際上為兩地人的互相溝通和理解帶來阻礙。
算法使文本隨著時間的流逝漸漸變化。一段時間後，由於詞的替換，文本在字面上變得越來越無意義，但是由於被替換的詞與原來的詞具有相同或相似的發音，因此觀眾仍然可以猜到以前在那個地方的詞是什麼，並對原本的文本有一個模糊的概念。
文本所發生的事情是對梁文道（及其他人）在現實生活中所遇到的事情的隱喻：人們引用，並「解釋」與扭曲，他寫/說的內容，來支持他們對他的看法，然後乙引用甲的引文，而丙引用乙的引文……所以他們口中的作者的話語的意義與作者本身想表達的意義越行越遠，而人們亦越來越難以從中讀出作者原本的思想。
這也是對這個越來越分裂，“二極管化”的社會的隱喻。 社交媒體的算法以及一些個人和團體的煽動，使得中立意見的空間丟失了。 你要么是“我們”的一部分，要么是“敵人”的一部分。 不存在兩者之間的位置，“我們”和“敵人”之間也沒有任何共同點。 這樣，討論和談判的可能性就沒有了。 只剩下仇恨和攻擊。
讀音數據收集自粵語開放詞典，CC-Canto和CC-CEDICT，經過處理
截圖（點擊查看大圖）
點此前往其GitHub頁面
Over Growth 瘋狂蔓延
（計畫書）為ICC創作的影片，2020
“在建築物上瘋狂蔓延的藤蔓是不斷擴張蠶食荒野的城市的甜蜜復仇”
根據特殊算法生成的動畫圖像，通過立面在表面上顯示出來，以抽象形式表示巨型藤蔓可能如何在摩天大樓的表面上生長。
通過使藤蔓爬上ICC塔，我想表現人與自然，城市與野生，我們與其他人之間的衝突。這些圖像使我們想起了衝突的可能結局，一個我們無法與自然建立和諧關係的未來。
大自然永遠贏。我們只是其中的一部分。
無法打開YouTube點這裡
Wifi Killer 2000
一個十分煩人的機器人， 2020
簡而言之，WiFi Killer 2000是一個交互式WiFi干擾器，它可以追趕人們並將附近的WiFi信號干擾，它是從一個舊的WiFi路由器修改而來的。
我不反對擁有在線生活，老實說，我也將大部分時間都花在網上，尤其是在2020年。但這是一個事實：斷開連接或離線生活現在要困難得多，不需要與10年相比以前，只需與2015年或2016年還沒有物聯網和如此多社交媒體的日子相比。
在我看來，WIFi Killer 2000是個小玩笑。對於一直在開會的人來說，被移動的WiFi干擾器追趕的經歷可能會有些煩人，但我認為這總的來說很有趣。我希望人們在試圖逃離它時也可以考慮以下兩個問題：“我為什麼要這樣做？”和“它為什麼要這樣做？”
不能打開YouTube點這裡
又一個工作日
卡比
雕塑,亞加力,木材,紙, 2021
與趙文然，梁宇，葛靜怡，丘詩樺合作
光線，形狀，圖像… 將人體部分變形3D模型的真實比例激光切割切片與相應的一對一比例圖紙和數據可視化圖案相結合，我們組裝了一個卡比。
它可以涉及到很多方面的問題：比如視覺感知，性別問題，人體機制等等，但我們對此不予置評。
不能打開YouTube點這裡
Wifi Killer 2000
A very annoying robot, 2020
In short, the WiFi Killer 2000 is an interactive WiFi Jammer that can chase people and jam the WiFi signal nearby, modified from an old WiFi router.
I am not against having online life, to be honest I spend most of my time online, too, especially in 2020. But it is just a truth that disconnecting, or living offline is much more harder now, not need to compare to 10 years ago, just compare to the days in 2015 or 2016 when IoT and social media are not such huge things.
In my vision, WIFi Killer 2000 is a light joke. The experience of being chased by a moving WiFi jammer might be a bit annoying for those who have business meetings all the time but I believe it is over all funny. I hope when people are trying to run away for it they can also think about these two questions: “Why am I doing this?“ and “Why is it doing this?”