The other night, my child refused to do his weekend homework and even questioned it, saying his teacher told him to “study hard when it’s time to study and play hard when it’s time to play.” But since he hadn’t had enough playtime over the weekend, why should he do homework? I was at a loss. I almost blurted out, “You need to ‘fa dian hen’ (exert some effort) when studying,” but then I thought, he’s only seven years old—maybe such words aren’t necessary yet. Instead, I shared my own experience: when I was little, even light bulbs often didn’t work, so I would light a long bamboo strip for illumination to do my homework, and only by ‘ban man’ (persisting through difficulty) could I finish it.

Recently, the clause on “sealing detention records” in the “Public Security Administration Punishment Law” has suddenly become a hot topic of public opinion, with discussions quickly focusing on the “management of drug users.”

I have written several articles recently and mentioned multiple times that after this incident, the legal community has remained largely silent, including the legislative bodies and public security organs at the center of the controversy, who have also maintained their silence. This implicitly suggests to readers that there is clearly an unusual logic behind this unusual situation.

This morning, as usual, Lao T opened his RSS reader and came across three consecutive news articles about mobile phone bans in primary and secondary schools. Surprisingly, they originated from different countries: the United States, France, and Singapore. It’s strange—why does it suddenly seem like everyone is banning phones in schools?

Recently, the clause in the revised draft of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law regarding the sealing of public security detention records has drawn widespread attention and discussion from all sectors of society. An answer by Lao T on a Q&A website also received hundreds of comments, with many netizens raising the question: How is our sense of security guaranteed after records are sealed?

Recently, I stumbled upon a peculiar computer on Hacker News: the ThinkPad X210Ai. The model number immediately struck me as odd—I hadn’t seen such a naming style on ThinkPads in years, as they now typically follow patterns like ThinkPad X13 or P15. The X210Ai looked like a Frankenstein creation, but upon clicking the article, I realized it was actually a modified version of the 20-year-old ThinkPad X200. This got me thinking: why would anyone still mod a two-decade-old computer, outfitting it with the latest laptop CPUs and components?

Recently, the provisions on “record sealing” in the revised draft of the Public Security Administration Punishments Law have been like a boulder dropped into the pond of public opinion, stirring up far more widespread attention and heated debate than other legal clauses. Among them, Article 136, which establishes the system for sealing records of public security violations, has triggered extensive societal discussion. The controversy reflects not just differing interpretations of a single legal provision but, more profoundly, reveals the complex public sentiment within the process of legal system development.

Yesterday afternoon (November 28), Old T reposted my previous article, “Why Has a Public Security Punishment Record Sealing Clause Silenced the Legal Community?” verbatim on Zhihu. The result left me stunned—almost every comment was questioning it.

These past few days, the clause in the amended “Public Security Administration Punishment Law” regarding the sealing of violation records has caused quite a stir online, with almost all mainstream media weighing in. Especially, cultural and tourism accounts and anti-drug accounts from various regions have pushed public opinion to its peak. However, upon closer examination of this round of discussion, an interesting phenomenon stands out: the legal community seems to have collectively fallen silent. Apart from a sporadic interview with a professor from China University of Political Science and Law, other prominent figures in the legal circle have almost all remained quiet.

Over the years, I’ve attended numerous training programs at Party schools and universities across the country. Due to my legal profession, I’ve frequently visited political and legal institutes at various levels. However, this was my first time stepping into a police academy within such an institute, and I took the opportunity to document this unique experience of participating in legal training there.

Recently, at the invitation of my daughter’s classmate’s parents, I had the opportunity to visit three small and medium-sized enterprises—two in traditional manufacturing and one in new materials. Unlike previous corporate visits confined to meeting rooms and office buildings, this time I explored every corner of the factory floors, gaining a clearer and more direct understanding of China’s most common production and manufacturing processes.