直播:KOTEN、《給十九歲的我》與陳橋、劉細良《鏡頭下的歷史》爭議破障

  Рет қаралды 142,208

Gavinchiutalk

Gavinchiutalk

Ай бұрын

趙氏曾任教於美國Bryant University 、北京理工大學珠海學院、深圳大學、香港樹仁大學、臺灣中央研究院近史所,歷任客座教授、副教授、研究員、助理教授、高級訪問學者;現任國立中山大學臺港研究中心研究員(兼任)。
2018年獲中國經濟思想史優秀(一等)著作獎,研究題目包括經濟思想、經濟史、政治經濟學,出版著作二十一部,論文三十餘篇。英國權威出版社 Routledge給予 "中國和西方頂尖學者(leading Chinese and Western scholar)" 的評價。
《趙氏讀書生活》,一個歷史學者的平台,分享學術、社會、政治經濟觀察,請以每月5元美元獲取收費平台Patreon的參考資料、獨家專欄、史學和哲學短講分享:
/ chiusreading
或於KZfaq 上按加入成為會員,可獲影片的參考資料
/ @gctalk
/ drgavinchiu
PayPal.me/chiusreading
工作洽談:higavinchiu@gmail.com
Wise開戶連結:wise.com/invite/u/sinc262
virgin 上網連結:aklam.io/lRJws0
octopus電媒連結:share.octopus.energy/straw-li...
Gavin Sin Hin Chiu (趙善軒) is a well-known academic with expertise in the areas of economic thought, economic history, and political economy. He has taught at several universities, including Bryant University in the United States, the Zhuhai College of Beijing Institute of Technology, Shenzhen University, Hong Kong Shue Yan University, and the Institute of Modern History at the Taiwan Central Research Institute. He has also served as a visiting professor, associate professor, researcher, assistant professor, and senior visiting scholar.
In 2018, Dr. Chiu was awarded the first-class award for outstanding works in the history of Chinese economic thought. He has published twenty-one books and more than thirty papers, and the UK's authoritative publisher, Routledge, has evaluated him as a "leading Chinese and Western scholar."
In his book, "The Political Economy of the Han Dynasty and Its Legacy," Dr. Chiu and co-author S.C. Kwan examine monetary thought in the Han Dynasty and Three Kingdoms period (220-280 BCE). In the article, "The 'Cold War' between Ho Ping Ti and Academia Sinica. The Changing Political Identity of the Overseas Chinese," Dr. Chiu examines the political and intellectual conflict between Professor Ho Ping Ti and Academia Sinica during the period of 1967-1990.
Dr. Chiu is also the co-author of "The Income of the Customs during Late Ming and Early Qing," a book review of the "Note of the Customs Duties in the Qing Dynasty, 1644-1911," and the editor of "Search from the Beginning: The Intellectual Thought and Education in pre-Qin and Qin-Han Dynasties."

Пікірлер: 696
@gctalk
@gctalk Ай бұрын
《趙氏讀書生活》,一個歷史學者的平台,分享學術、社會、政治經濟觀察,請以每月5元美元獲取收費平台Patreon的參考資料、獨家專欄、史學和哲學短講分享: www.patreon.com/Chiusreading
@yyds4141
@yyds4141 Ай бұрын
劉生單嘢真係好精彩😆😆😆
@ExcitedClownfish-nn4ut
@ExcitedClownfish-nn4ut Ай бұрын
睇岳不群
@loharry8002
@loharry8002 Ай бұрын
上次果單其實係「恰十九歲的我」;而今次呢單,截至目前所有相關人士提出嘅「證供」,大可稱為「恰九十歲的他」。
@Helgagaist
@Helgagaist Ай бұрын
😂
@rebchuchu1
@rebchuchu1 Ай бұрын
很同意趙博說法。劉細良件事比我學到嘅教訓係失德行為被揭露,快快真誠道歉,事情通常可完結。但以謊言狡辯,只會讓自己更多醜事被揭露,令自己更難堪。這不能怪人揭發,只能怪自己確做過失德事。我很喜歡聽細良分析時局,但喜歡歸喜歡,與分清是非黑白是兩回事。很同意趙博說我們要保持獨立思考,我們追求的是民主,唔好盲目追捧任何人做自己的教主。細良這次的做法,不論是出書一事或是鼓動粉絲出征,都令我十分失望。無論他的時局評論帶給聽眾多大裨益,也不是他作失德行為的擋箭牌,兩者不能混為一談。做了失德事能認錯反思,仍是君子。砌詞詭辯拒絕反思,只會把自己推向魔道。請細良好好反省,不要成為自己常批評的那類人。當然,因細良對陳橋一事的回應,引致許多媒體人吐露不少細良的往事,也令我加深認識這個人。希望他不要成為一個知識淵博的懦夫,好自為之!
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
我睇醫生係睇佢醫術是否高明,佢朝三暮四唔關我事!
@vancheeliu6794
@vancheeliu6794 Ай бұрын
為了減肥睇醫生,會不會找個大肥佬身材的醫生?
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
@@vancheeliu6794 如果佢同好多人減到肥,當然會搵佢,佢肥嘅原因可能係先天因素。
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
@@vancheeliu6794 如果佢好叻減肥,當然會!
@rebchuchu1
@rebchuchu1 Ай бұрын
@@EverGreen-ce6cm 佢出面濫交就唔關我事,但行騙就關我事,因為佢嘅誠信會影響我對佢嘅信任度。
@cherryleung1804
@cherryleung1804 Ай бұрын
謝謝分享長知識👍👍
@vennicalee1918
@vennicalee1918 Ай бұрын
Thanks for sharing ❤
@hclee1651
@hclee1651 Ай бұрын
Thanks!
@MAYCHAN-cd6yi
@MAYCHAN-cd6yi Ай бұрын
多謝趙博士中肯評論!
@lihenry2392
@lihenry2392 Ай бұрын
💪💪💪❤😎👍👍👍多謝趙博❤
@marglego9079
@marglego9079 Ай бұрын
Glad that you finally talk about this conflict, since you usually avoid
@jamescheng4299
@jamescheng4299 Ай бұрын
Gavin strikes me as a amicable guy. When it comes to contemporary public figures, he doesn't want to take sides and try to play it and softens it blow.
@susannaku3321
@susannaku3321 Ай бұрын
100% agree. Nobody is perfect. But trustworthiness is a pretty fundamental value.
@wwcheung09
@wwcheung09 Ай бұрын
多謝你公道既評論,事件真相越嚟越顯現眼前,有啲人埋沒良知,連老人家家都欺騙,等天收
@linzhang2762
@linzhang2762 Ай бұрын
多谢你的节目,扼要明瞭,真相越来越清晰,观众自己判断,不愧是赵博。
@johnnylau2541
@johnnylau2541 Ай бұрын
多謝趙生
@yinmingho6812
@yinmingho6812 Ай бұрын
多謝趙老師分析!🙏保重!㊗️🧧
@Betty-cf2rd
@Betty-cf2rd Ай бұрын
劉有證據的話,以佢聲大大,一早已反擊啦。
@user-pu7wl5hs8c
@user-pu7wl5hs8c Ай бұрын
無錯,講來講去都無正式證據
@sis1974
@sis1974 Ай бұрын
Thx
@vincentkblau
@vincentkblau Ай бұрын
Agree your points!
@Ansonxd
@Ansonxd Ай бұрын
最後幾句說話可以話係全年網台界入面最佳既說話👏👏
@Wen12300
@Wen12300 Ай бұрын
趙博解釋得比其他大部份我看到的 yt 清楚。 大部分人談「相片 」copyright,少有也談「書本」的 copyright。 文字,排板,etc 抄到咁足。 點會冇問題?
@waipingho3265
@waipingho3265 Ай бұрын
說話不會牽連是非,說出理據,喜歡聽你說話。👍👍👍👍👍
@user-kr5hm2ft7v
@user-kr5hm2ft7v Ай бұрын
多謝趙博破障🎉🎉
@andychoi3942
@andychoi3942 Ай бұрын
Thanks
@aryas5273
@aryas5273 Ай бұрын
多謝趙博 💐
@LouisWong-mu8ht
@LouisWong-mu8ht Ай бұрын
支持!完全支持!分析得非常好。
@user-cv4mj8xk3h
@user-cv4mj8xk3h Ай бұрын
趙博夠實力,講完不怕劉粉unsubscribe or unlike 佢
@Asuka-dp9cp
@Asuka-dp9cp Ай бұрын
講真,聽得劉世良或趙博既,應該都係會理性討論既人,盲信或盲從既就唔會識揀兩位黎聽,所以唔覺得有你講既問題。
@KL-gc2hx
@KL-gc2hx Ай бұрын
大家3唔識7,都系欣賞佢地節目內容先至訂閱,至於人品全部系道聽途說,這種程度的負面新聞不見得會對粉絲基本盤有多大影響
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
@@KL-gc2hx 到目前為止,你這評論係我在網上看到最精警嘅,華人多數將「道德」及「能力」混為一談(太嚴厲),看看美國人對「侵侵」態度就知道分別。
@waichunleung3531
@waichunleung3531 Ай бұрын
你用過往出書經驗實例來分析講解這件事,非常之好,令我哋對坊間不少謬誤或某某自圓其說,更有判斷力分辨真假虛偽 !謝謝你!👍🙏
@nanchilee6678
@nanchilee6678 Ай бұрын
完全同意趙博。版權爭議應該法律解決! 做生意每件事,不管是租約合約,都必須做得清清楚楚,均均真真,不應該取決於什麼人情,口頭講,朋友不朋友,生意就是生意。感謝趙博的意見!
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
「Google 大把相片,考慮埋代溝,好少人會花兩三百元去買,所以「南早」豁免版權費(知道冇錢賺),估計細良做此事純粹希望悼念當年被「左仔」殺死咗果五十多人(包括名咀 林斌),估唔到今日被人有組織地借題發揮,將件小事煲到咁大!😅
@lobonoxxxx
@lobonoxxxx Ай бұрын
支持趙博. E家真係扑朔迷離
@kwokwahho2317
@kwokwahho2317 Ай бұрын
趙博👍👍
@kwokchufung931
@kwokchufung931 Ай бұрын
👍👍👍
@mannylam3891
@mannylam3891 23 күн бұрын
多謝趙老師有関陳橋事件評論
@kenneth_ng
@kenneth_ng Ай бұрын
Well,用十九歲的我要apply喺陳橋版權事件實在對陳橋先生不敬。陳先生可是一個已經喺行內活過半百年,飽經歷練,閱人無數。點可以跟一啲未成年嘅女孩相比,保護兒童並不是為了公益,而係身之為人嘅責任。唔係話死咗就唔可以追究,而係當眾多陳橋先生朋友、行內人知悉事件嘅時候,唔明點解大家當時點解可以忍氣吞聲?!點解大家當時唔群起口誅筆伐?依家就要相信一班忽然大義凜然嘅正義記者所講嘅嘢,邏輯上係唔係有問題呢?唔通當年佢哋個個都怕咗劉氏,驚傷及個人利益,而選擇忍氣吞聲,投鼠忌器,官官相衛。點解咁講!?因為佢哋所謂嘅記者成日話自己係專業,乜唔係要即時報導事實真相,架咩!?而家大家只不過係五十步笑百步。我唔識做記者我唔識劉氏唔識法律唔識版權又唔係行內人,但係當大家個個都係單憑記憶,都唔係講緊真相全部嘅時候,又點樣去話邊個啱邊個錯。最後嘅目的咪又係公審。我並唔覺得自己可以係八卦事件中學到啲乜嘢,花生就大把。
@fungyeequeenieho7314
@fungyeequeenieho7314 Ай бұрын
多謝分析
@teresaay832
@teresaay832 Ай бұрын
From this case, it gives me a better picture on the mentality and quality of different ‘old HK’ KOL. Despite the personality of Simon Lau, I look at the incident on the effectiveness of UFW in Canada. My response is triple my monthly sponsor to Singjai. Yet, my support to those who are fighting for the elderly and voiceless is unlimited.
@yums.9895
@yums.9895 Ай бұрын
🙏🙏
@orkwunyim4287
@orkwunyim4287 Ай бұрын
💪💪💪💪
@kwokleungcheung2623
@kwokleungcheung2623 Ай бұрын
趙生,好波。 (我怪錯你,因祇聽10min就comment)
@graceyu4258
@graceyu4258 Ай бұрын
👍👍
@thisisnottheend4392
@thisisnottheend4392 Ай бұрын
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
@jolenetsang1802
@jolenetsang1802 Ай бұрын
👍
@kft3693
@kft3693 Ай бұрын
衹有蕭若元和劉細良兩人才知道他們對話的內容,從片段上看,蕭若元的語氣,身體語言,大有暗示給劉細良一個訊息:愛莫能助。
@samlee9041
@samlee9041 Ай бұрын
蕭生都都係骗徒一種。
@kenmak8678
@kenmak8678 Ай бұрын
因果
@carriepoon7058
@carriepoon7058 Ай бұрын
同意趙博傾向於從不同角度去討論熱門話題,所以出片一般比其他網台慢一步。現今網台的生態環境已陷於惡性兢争邊緣,很多網台對時下發生的事不論大小,亦不論網主有無足够预備工夫,均争相第一時間高談闊論。作為聽眾,應等侯更多證據浮出,以獨立思考能力去分析,然后再决定哪些討論值得参考,哪些實屬花生之談。
@yatsinsun6470
@yatsinsun6470 Ай бұрын
趙博比其他網台慢幾拍,只因睇風向需時咋!
@alexanderlewis1556
@alexanderlewis1556 Ай бұрын
@@yatsinsun6470搜集資料需時,知識係要用時間去累積架
@yatsinsun6470
@yatsinsun6470 Ай бұрын
@@alexanderlewis1556 搜集咩资料呀?來來去去咪聽吓有份me too嘅KZfaqr點樣講,睇吓撐邊一便最有利囉!呢啲嘢談得上知識咩?你唔好当人白痴啦!
@lotto88lot
@lotto88lot Ай бұрын
趙博有名你叫啦😂
@lungwong9756
@lungwong9756 Ай бұрын
網軍又出動了
@chinahighcc
@chinahighcc Ай бұрын
老蕭講嘢經常無查證,從呢件事都係咁,所以佢成日都估錯做燈神 !
@wailingyuen-435
@wailingyuen-435 Ай бұрын
燈神係啲網民取笑佢。
@danyu8472
@danyu8472 Ай бұрын
有關關聯式考中手指研究可從Adrian Raine有關暴力研究有講,可參考他的書(Anatomy of Violence)
@archiekleung
@archiekleung Ай бұрын
Present
@manwai6496
@manwai6496 Ай бұрын
要睇10分鐘廣告先至開始, 頂唔順!
@pakcarmen4787
@pakcarmen4787 Ай бұрын
@KK-zp9cx
@KK-zp9cx Ай бұрын
多謝你的分析見解,人本是惡,容易做出錯事,要警戒自己行為。
@kft3693
@kft3693 Ай бұрын
絕對不是批評,趙先生到現階段,開始多角度地去討論這事,滲透著行公義的undercurrent. 大有可能安全感提升了,考慮他的立場(露面的公眾人仕),是值得我們去理解的。
@vincentcheng5709
@vincentcheng5709 Ай бұрын
祈福夫婦
@Asuka-dp9cp
@Asuka-dp9cp Ай бұрын
引述南早前總編羅恩惠先生,當時只係批准印刷最多5000本,所以唔可能不停翻影呢本書黎賣。不過已經唔關錢事,係個人操守問題。
@Lisa-mi5ib
@Lisa-mi5ib Ай бұрын
羅恩惠係女士呀唔係先生
@clevontwang4924
@clevontwang4924 Ай бұрын
羅恩惠女士是導演
@chunyeecheng1840
@chunyeecheng1840 Ай бұрын
原來做出版咁好利潤,有成對本對利,我都做了印刷二三十年,不過不是印書出版,只是印彩盒,每單有15%利潤都不知幾開心,一般都是10%喳,仲要望有番單才有多少賺,早知我也學人做出版。
@gctalk
@gctalk Ай бұрын
要做直銷先有咁高利潤,如果交俾發行當然唔會有,但問題唔係有幾多人有能力做直銷
@patrickyk1900
@patrickyk1900 25 күн бұрын
Chan family should explore the market for reprinting the book. Obviously, the large format version is preferable.
@lemon7213
@lemon7213 Ай бұрын
欣賞趙博氣量, 今次係難得良機, 可以同劉正白兵和解同仇敵愾, 為公眾利益發聲🙏🙏
@YTChan-ic7uc
@YTChan-ic7uc Ай бұрын
他膜拜的許冠三亦曾因中大出版社陸國燊未得其授權或同意而讓內地出版其珊改版的《新史學九十年》而狀告中大
@gctalk
@gctalk Ай бұрын
YES
@ritayuen5007
@ritayuen5007 Ай бұрын
趙博,其實粉絲嘅言論乜嘢都有,又唔需要太介意,但徐少華以自己過去恩怨力證事件真偽就太唔應該,過去事件唔代表乜嘢架!點解要講呢?佢要證實應該講論點講合理,其實幫陳老先生重新以精裝出版新相集,相信老先生係高興嘅好事,一個攝影師當然想將還未刊登嘅相片放入歷史記錄當中,相信佢哋當中接洽同計劃應該係融洽嘅,所以交手指比劉細良搞係合理嘅推測,而新相集和舊相集一樣,相信係慳設計費嘅問題,如果以陳老先生嘅角度,將留下嘅相片載於歷史相集內一定重要過其他,佢哋冇可能唔商討過本書點樣印,聽蕭生講佢哋原本打算將賺到嘅錢用嚟開相片展覽,但後來唔知點解開唔成,至於細良有冇留低呢啲過程記錄等就難講,話晒移民會盡量放低就放低,對隻狗佢就會不離不棄,呢啲人品真係有咁差不直得信任?會呃咗陳老先生嘅手指自己賺錢?如果當時全個過程陳老先生都同意,只係去到最後利益有分岐,至而家死無對證,大家再從頭審視細良申請程序有冇犯錯做漏,甚至話佢開一個騙局呃陳老先生公平嗎?我絕對相信陳老先生係好想完成呢件事,唔係為咗賺錢至去重新出版,一本記載歷史嘅相片係佢心血,每張相片對老先生都係重要,佢哋點會冇傾好?真係唔成理由架,但而家就不斷否定呢件事,要處於高地挑剔一件事,一定揾到挑剔嘅地方,字係死人係活,記者要查冊一架車嘅資料,有時都會揾其他理由,唔係每一個情節都做足,最重要係冇犯法同冇傷害人,將件事順利完成,有啲事只有佢哋兩個知道,希望各人冷靜啲處理啦!大家都係文化界分子,誰人喜歡呢啲事發生呀!
@user-pk5ri5wz8y
@user-pk5ri5wz8y Ай бұрын
欺詐南早!
@pw2.038
@pw2.038 Ай бұрын
唔係喎恰19歲的我嘅時候好兇狠㗎喎
@dordorfromhk-hj5vo
@dordorfromhk-hj5vo Ай бұрын
咁我就同你地講下道理。 劉細良有冇show任何證據, 證明佢支付咗任何版權費畀橋叔? 呢啲相係橋叔一生嘅心血,點解會畀你一個識咗一年都唔夠嘅人去賺錢?你答我?比你用1日腦去回答呢條常識題。
@evang1895
@evang1895 Ай бұрын
作為聽眾我只看評論內容有冇養份。人沒有完美,就算劉世良待人接物不圓滑或有缺失,除少驊作為文人因私人恩怨,要開幾集去評論劉世良亦不是好東西,成個八婆咁亦不見是一位君子!
@user-pk5ri5wz8y
@user-pk5ri5wz8y Ай бұрын
@@evang1895 劉專呃朋友,冇誠信!
@fridayhappy545
@fridayhappy545 Ай бұрын
而家dse我就唔知喇 我果個年代係hkcee 同hkale 的確係有拉curve 黎樣野 不過係全港成績計 而且 得率果堆只係由f 夾硬差少少拉到變e 本身考開a b 成細果d 作用不大
@qq7698
@qq7698 Ай бұрын
十九歲有苦主伸訴私隱被公開,而擁有版權的學校不作為。兩者不能類比
@andychoi3942
@andychoi3942 Ай бұрын
每次破𥕞都講出重點,太正❤😊
@leorockamsterdam
@leorockamsterdam Ай бұрын
講呢啲 提議 趙博士 講吓 打完實驗針 被騙後的感覺吖?! 🍀🙏
@checkitout4544
@checkitout4544 Ай бұрын
想請問現正陳橋長女有什麼要求?
@minusone787
@minusone787 Ай бұрын
真係唔知 冇講賠償冇要求道歉 一直由羅恩惠代為出征🤷🏼‍♂️
@paulawong6829
@paulawong6829 Ай бұрын
討公道
@checkitout4544
@checkitout4544 Ай бұрын
才能和德行是兩個無乜直接關係,至於應否注重其一便或要兩者兼備便視孚用家 - 古代是帝皇或老闆而現代是老闆或大衆。個人意見㙯人或運動員只要有才能,但教師的德行被他的才能更重要因爲他們太多機會接觸到心志末成熟的人。個人誠信則是長久成功便須的條件。因為即使有人能暫時蒙混過關遲早都會被識破,尢其是現今社會資訊極流通。
@user-de3qv1sz1v
@user-de3qv1sz1v Ай бұрын
請問如何解讀劉7分鐘影片4.25 第8點?Thanks
@alexanderlewis1556
@alexanderlewis1556 Ай бұрын
即係乜嘢?
@user-de3qv1sz1v
@user-de3qv1sz1v Ай бұрын
@@alexanderlewis1556 份約第8點講all rights exclusively 喺南早。 另外僱主在合約亦可能要求僱員受僱放棄署名權。請看我之前嘅留言。所以南早可clarify. 我純粹想從法律層面上理解多d, 增進知識。😅 希望趙博幫忙解讀🙏
@alexanderlewis1556
@alexanderlewis1556 Ай бұрын
​@@user-de3qv1sz1v​呢點我之前都有用另一個point同人拗,但善軒老師就破左我障,因為依家本書嘅版權唔係南早,而係陳老師同中僑嘅,所以就算佢攞到相嘅版權,但書名排版同作者名佢都唔可以沿用重印
@aaaapple803
@aaaapple803 Ай бұрын
要南早解釋與陳橋的合約才知道。 僑叔是攝影師,問題係在工餘時間佢自己影嘅相片是否全屬公司版權? 這是合法方面。 合情是無論如何,劉應該視陳橋為所有照片的創作人,這是對他的尊敬。 現在不合理的地方係劉只向南早取版權而沒有向陳橋取簽名…大意還是刻意?
@user-vm4jx5jw4m
@user-vm4jx5jw4m Ай бұрын
民事糾紛,控辯雙方都有擧証責任
@yuetkuilam9894
@yuetkuilam9894 Ай бұрын
係呀!我爸爸係潮安人,祖上兩家上係認識李嘉誠祖上的,所以父親來香港。後去西璟李寶龍台附近,去李嘉試打工;他比家父细廿年,'家父外父加埋認識的,我父好亦唔喜歡學老人!話佢地話佢地惡野蠻,又唔肯肯去 學習,又成日冒充做潮洲人,我细细個我也不服父親,對學佬人有偏見
@chesif5415
@chesif5415 Ай бұрын
可唔可以講下arthur koo
@pchan3625
@pchan3625 Ай бұрын
趙博拿著那本學術記念集, 既然是記念集, 估計不用付版權費, 趙博說此書售價$200. 我一聽, 再想, 這本文字書, 體積比劉那本小, 劉那本是相片集, 印刷費一定遠高於趙博手中的書, 印刷相片集, 單是紙張要求都遠比文字書高, 加上要將60-70年代的照片印刷成高清, 印刷成本不會低, 趙博那本是平裝書, 也賣$200 (估計也是不用付版權費), 劉那本是精裝版書, 也只是賣$300, 為什麽網上的人會以為劉會因為出照片集大賺一筆? 真是難明!! 正如趙博說,2017年這類書不"heat", 能否全賣出1000本也難說, 賣不出的書找地方儲存也是成本, 這類小眾書, 出版成本高, 風險也高, 竟然網上一窩風說劉是騙子, 令人搖頭嘆息!! (後記: 羅恩惠在FB 比較2017年版與2006年版的照片集, 批評劉的書體積小, 留白小, 但是, 2006年版那本照片集, 相片像一個白內障病人眼中的世界, 而劉那個版本的相片集, 就像做完白內障手術後眼中的世界, 高下立見, 但羅恩惠不看相片質量,只談照片集大小, 羅之無知, 令人失笑)
@edacheung5207
@edacheung5207 Ай бұрын
趙sir 起初本人都認為劉陳事件該由觀眾自己定案 大家應該在未有進一步新資訊前先放下 但是看完老蕭直播的對話 真是心中有火 劉世良不但不把事情對公眾攪清楚 現在更用人格謀殺說老人家要求巨款 事實可能有但不能無頭無尾就只說一句要錢 劉只要一句話交帶書售後的收益到了何處 希望你們不要就這樣止步 這一刻我好像也有一點心同感受老人家的氣難平 謝
@Victor81282
@Victor81282 Ай бұрын
陳橋1985年退休,退休金已洗哂
@lindachung810
@lindachung810 Ай бұрын
@@Victor81282 車,你又知?
@TheSimpy1997
@TheSimpy1997 Ай бұрын
陳橋為什麼找劉世良而不是中橋再版他的相集?猜想:陳橋開始時冇講過要收錢, 只提出印書, 舉辦相片展覽, 而劉細良覺得此事有意義, 也可作為投資的嘗試, 遂以最低成本作預算(這種書鎖量有限, 有錢賺係好彩, 況且已是再版).......但事成之後起了變化, 有人提出要收取大錢(蕭若元提及), 關係鬧疆, 相片展是否亦告吹?至於陳橋為什麼不找中橋再度合作?(常理應當如此), 政治過不了關是最接近的答案......印書再攪相片展, 不可能是免費午餐, 唸落就知所謂的「道理」不應是一面倒的.
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
@@TheSimpy1997 Google 裡面大把有關照片,考慮埋年代隔閡,冇幾多人會花兩三百蚊去買一本,正常人都想得到,所以唔覺得會員有謀利動機,估計細良動機係揭露當年左仔惡行(特別係殺咗唔少人:56個如冇記錯)而作一種悼念記錄,估唔到今日俾人有組織地抹黑,就咁簡單!
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
@@TheSimpy1997 Google 大把相片,考慮埋代溝,冇乜人會花兩三百元去買,可以排除「利益」因素,估計細良做此事純粹希望悼念當年被「左仔」殺死咗果幾十人(包括名咀 林斌),估唔到今日被人有組織地借題發揮,冇政治操作至奇!
@nicklok2448
@nicklok2448 Ай бұрын
趙博講何生何太嗰 part 好搞笑 何太有過人之處,有特殊技能,有意想不到地方...😅
@ggff8385
@ggff8385 Ай бұрын
00:00 koten 事件開始 19:02 陳橋事件開始
@bennylam1023
@bennylam1023 Ай бұрын
好想請問主持 你又開始學在節目初段就要揸杯飲嘢 仲要發難聽的吞嚥咕咕聲 感覺上好不禮貌 所以中途也轉了頻道 因最近在網上看到好多中老年嘅kol 在主持節目時初段開頭冇耐相繼續就揸杯飲啖水 請問是否是種跟風動作 thx
@josephlee3126
@josephlee3126 29 күн бұрын
Gavin, you talked about communication incl. editing requirements between the 2 parties concerned. Under normal situation, you are probably correct for any publications heavily involving writings. However, we are talking here a " reprint" of largely photographs based on the original version involving SUCCESS, the degree of editing would be minimal since any writings therein would be confined to the Preface and brief notes against each photo most likely taken from the original version. As such, it cannot be compared with any of your books published with heavy emphasis in writings. The need and degree for communication is also minimal assuming Mr. Chan had indeed agreed, verbally or otherwise, to Mr. Lau to proceed based on the original version from SUCCESS. Would you agree with such rationale?
@gctalk
@gctalk 29 күн бұрын
正如我解釋予,重印的權利在之前的出版機構,不不在作者和SCMP
@josephlee3126
@josephlee3126 29 күн бұрын
@@gctalk My response was only prompted by your explaining at lengths in your talk how editing and communication would be required for such publication. I am fined with your admission as a scholar whom I respect, unlike some of your buddy KOL's who are only good at personal attack.
@raymondwong2555
@raymondwong2555 Ай бұрын
任何時候聽趙博,都能破障
@user-bz8lc2ku4u
@user-bz8lc2ku4u Ай бұрын
趙博都係讀書人,歷史學者,以播道、傳播知識而自居。對於咩人想保存歷史,咩人不斷埋藏改寫歷史,應該好清楚。睇吓《鏡頭下的歷史》呢本書嘅內容。就明白,點解有人用咁嘅手法,走去再版一本圖冊。又點解有人發現咗本圖冊被人再版後,會做咁多野。
@WK-yj5cq
@WK-yj5cq Ай бұрын
陳劉事件建議趙博可以講下砌生豬肉嘅典故。
@kwokleungcheung2623
@kwokleungcheung2623 Ай бұрын
不值講係吾會講!
@franceschong4037
@franceschong4037 Ай бұрын
定x不是事時評論、他是數每個人背後是非和錯事
@user-yw5hz8pr4f
@user-yw5hz8pr4f Ай бұрын
"小時偷針 大時偷金" 這個故事的意思是 , 偷嘢無論大與小 , 都是偷 !
@wingcheongcheung8027
@wingcheongcheung8027 Ай бұрын
我當然相信新何太和何伯佢哋口講話真愛,尤於我時常信住人,所以受傷總是我!
@Vicleafman
@Vicleafman Ай бұрын
將人比己,若果發生在趙老師身上,别的所謂朋友把你的作品翻印出版圖利,而這祗是在花言巧語下。
@yilinghu5870
@yilinghu5870 Ай бұрын
👍👍🌷身為趙博和蕭生的fans, 蕭生對這件事的分析有小小偏幫劉細良,蕭生把風向帶著去劉細良的太太身上,講佢老婆情緒不穩定可能係劉太的問題.
@bellamills7366
@bellamills7366 Ай бұрын
吾係嘛 以為佢IQ and EQ 好高 不要信慢慢深呼吸
@lindachung810
@lindachung810 Ай бұрын
網上已有講,$由佢老婆管理,即是想替流洗白
@WK-yj5cq
@WK-yj5cq Ай бұрын
南華當日授權劉,你覺得南華咁大間公司版權咁重要嘅事會完全冇搵陳確認?如果陳覺得版權有問題,你信唔信陳咁多年冇去過南華投訴。而咁多年南華咩都冇做過。而家出黎講野嘅所謂知情人仕,都係單方面接觸陳。但前提係陳既認知和陳述是否事實的全部?
@chanfk3811
@chanfk3811 Ай бұрын
當初點傾無人知,人好多時憑感覺做事做決定,一時一樣.
@aaaapple803
@aaaapple803 Ай бұрын
劉自己做出版竟然漏咗向陳橋取簽字? 咪天真啦
@chinahighcc
@chinahighcc Ай бұрын
當初劉話係為陳僑賀壽,係呃埋南華早報 !
@WK-yj5cq
@WK-yj5cq Ай бұрын
@@chinahighcc 南早這樣大公司對版權點會咁兒戲。根本完全唔合理。出書後發生糾紛陳同人講肯定包括南早。咁多年南早咩都冇做。根本南早就要出黎解䆁佢地正常點處理版權。
@yeetaktse8036
@yeetaktse8036 Ай бұрын
點解要有公共性先可以發言,公開平台我鍾意講乜又有乜問題?唔觸及犯法基本冇問題.
@tommywan622
@tommywan622 Ай бұрын
如果你係開補習社,佢同你簽約,然後又違約跳槽去第二間補習社。你告佢,佢又將資產轉哂俾老婆,技術性離婚。你吹佢唔漲,咪知味道囉。你同佢無利益衝突,梗係覺得佢無問題。不過啲補習社見佢有違約前科都照簽佢,就本身都唔妥。
@stevoxyzstevoxyz5961
@stevoxyzstevoxyz5961 28 күн бұрын
專業就係要有書信來往,以防後顧之憂,以他的人生經驗又怎會不知道,早知結果,何必當初。
@ClassicPoetry491
@ClassicPoetry491 Ай бұрын
china has no copyright is its problem but HK should not be the same, please clarify
@jellybeanrbf
@jellybeanrbf Ай бұрын
咁隻usb而家去左那裡?
@SENGLAl
@SENGLAl Ай бұрын
趙博.書名權???署名權???衛斯理作者是倪匡叔.版權者出衛斯理再版新版.可以印上作者是倪匡嗎???
@fortie57
@fortie57 Ай бұрын
趙博,每個人都有做錯的時候。但流哂涼就是個慣犯!是令人髪指的慣犯!
@chiwaipang9052
@chiwaipang9052 Ай бұрын
睇過佢節目幾次就冇睇,佢樣貌及說話感覺係陰險老狐狸
@Handel-Lok
@Handel-Lok Ай бұрын
趙博唔係補習社韋小寶,反而koten先係。一定要安個渾號比趙博,可以係補習社馮道。
@happyface1414
@happyface1414 Ай бұрын
不管劉細良在這件事上賺的錢是多或少,他這次的行為明顯就是欺騙,更顯示他是什麼一個怎樣的為人!
@user-wc6zb7yu9u
@user-wc6zb7yu9u Ай бұрын
你係知情人士 咁你應該拿出證據嚟先有指證人啦 唔好人雲亦雲
@happyface1414
@happyface1414 Ай бұрын
@@user-wc6zb7yu9u 其實只要劉細良提供到陳橋給他的授權證明,全世界會立即收口!
@-d336
@-d336 Ай бұрын
@@user-wc6zb7yu9u 如果係清白, 佢就快D攞証據出黎, 吾好以清者自清呢回事不了了之, 呢個係涉及欺騙
@SENGLAl
@SENGLAl Ай бұрын
趟博.編輯版權???是個人定公司的???🙏🙏🙏
@gctalk
@gctalk Ай бұрын
公司
@SENGLAl
@SENGLAl Ай бұрын
​​​@@gctalk趙博.大廈.追龍兩本萬書再出版.可否印作者倪匡的!!!🙏🙏🙏署名權???書名權???
@SENGLAl
@SENGLAl Ай бұрын
@@gctalk 書名權???有本叫追龍的小說出版.內容是求龍.追龍版權商因為書名被侵權!!!趙博書名權應該是作者定公司的???🙏🙏🙏
@alexanderlewis1556
@alexanderlewis1556 Ай бұрын
劉細良啲fans 都係九唔答八架
@wanggok
@wanggok Ай бұрын
細良終於還擊班小人了,佢有三十四萬有理性擁躉,整吾死佢的
@Asuka-dp9cp
@Asuka-dp9cp Ай бұрын
你一定唔係趙博fans,因為趙博主張講道理而唔係人生攻擊。
@samlee9041
@samlee9041 Ай бұрын
劉細良fans 正傻西😂
@samlee9041
@samlee9041 Ай бұрын
再畀錢佢洗,粉絲正白痴😂
@EverGreen-ce6cm
@EverGreen-ce6cm Ай бұрын
從細良主動找陳橋出書到「南早」豁免收取版權費,各方人士已經知道此書不大會暢銷及賺到錢(在Google內已有大量相片,你們有多少人有興趣購買),所以有關人等對此事都不大有興趣及重視,結果初版祇賣得數百本(自然冇錢賺),其後陳橋主動去找細良再印精裝版(李慧玲說),留意係陳橋主動,細良都願意幫佢,結果都係賣得幾百本,當然又係冇錢賺,整件事牽涉十零萬收入,扣除成本及時間,唔蝕本偷笑,但成班人事後變身正義超人起哄,奇唔奇怪先?
@Feu7331
@Feu7331 Ай бұрын
意圖影響他人聽唔到listening 這動機已經好有問題,無論係教果個定買果個。
@pchan3625
@pchan3625 Ай бұрын
趙博說,陳橋本書, 每本$300 , 印1000本, 拜托, 搞錯啦, 系只有100本精裝書賣$300, 其他是平裝書, 平裝賣多少錢不知道, 只知曾在網上看過序言有售, 片中劉說"希望在佢(橋叔)90歲生日送尼本書俾佢, 作為對新聞工作者敬意" 其實成條片只有5分14秒, 不過趙博士大忙人, 100本精裝(請看1:11) , 精裝售$300 (請看3:00) 趙博, 如果你搞錯了, 會否出片更正?
@3sankychung840
@3sankychung840 Ай бұрын
問題是賀生日,劉做過什麼?
@pchan3625
@pchan3625 Ай бұрын
趙博都話本書題材根本唔 heat, 賣無賣到1000本都成問題, 出錢出力冒賠錢風險幫你出書, 唔系生日禮物? 陳家六兒女, 無一個肯幫老爸出書呀!
@fluteaw
@fluteaw Ай бұрын
The fundamental problem with the analysis is its so many years ago. There is a very good reason for the limitation period for bringing an action- when its so many years ago, and the evidence would likely be lost or memories distorted, it is simply procedurally unfair to try to deduce a conclusion from such distorted evidence. The amount of documents that can be lost over years is more than you can imagine- whatsapp doesnt necessarily save up everything on cloud (esp. back in 2006). Laptops can be lost or broken. Cloud was not such a thing (if at all) back then. This would be similar to someone allege you were part of the fraud (re investment) 10 yrs from now, and then claim you do not have "full record" to prove your innocence. Of course, if there is cogent evidence of such fraud, then the limitation period may be different- but still the burden is on the claimant not respondent, for the simple logical reason that it is impossible to prove the non-existence of a pink elephant in the room.
@QRQR777
@QRQR777 Ай бұрын
對別人批評,應有的是留有餘地,以理而說,保有一定疑問;劉世良一事曹總與徐說出他們的恩怨,沒有看,一般對恩怨事情,祇是一面之詞,人大多數是說自己道理,人性也!我還是聽到趙博論說,才知道大概。
@user-dj7cr1lq6i
@user-dj7cr1lq6i Ай бұрын
官方送建議,睇完呢條片對趙博有所改觀
@user-dj7cr1lq6i
@user-dj7cr1lq6i Ай бұрын
真的像一念天堂一念地獄
@PiasCanteen
@PiasCanteen Ай бұрын
佢有討論過給19歲的我
FOOLED THE GUARD🤢
00:54
INO
Рет қаралды 49 МЛН
ИРИНА КАЙРАТОВНА - АЙДАХАР (БЕКА) [MV]
02:51
ГОСТ ENTERTAINMENT
Рет қаралды 1,9 МЛН
Balloon Stepping Challenge: Barry Policeman Vs  Herobrine and His Friends
00:28
Increíble final 😱
00:37
Juan De Dios Pantoja 2
Рет қаралды 87 МЛН
直播: 香港國安47人案與卡斯特羅:「歷史將宣判我無罪」
1:31:45
Gavinchiu趙氏讀書生活
Рет қаралды 90 М.
2024 投資月論壇:2024 投資月論壇
2:00:05
RTHK 香港電台
Рет қаралды 10 М.
FOOLED THE GUARD🤢
00:54
INO
Рет қаралды 49 МЛН