Well, after some reader feedback, I have decided to adopt a new style of writing.
I call it the first-line approach.
How it works is that you read every first line of each paragraph.
And basically you can work out what the entire post is about.
For those of you who like reading, you can read the rest of the paragraphs to get a clearer picture.
And you might have noted that I deviously wrote only one sentence per paragraph...
Which in essence means you must have read everything. Of course this is quite a short post, so did you read this second sentence?
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Monday, October 30, 2006
Ah well, might as well add this
Haha. Well, this being the second of two posts today (which is Sunday to me as I havent gone to sleep since waking up Sunday morning although ironically both posts will be recorded as being written on Monday due to the technicality of time - past midnight - which is pretty much past my bedtime, meaning I'm going to be pretty tired tomorrow), I thought I would like to post the following quote.
"Do you really believe that what you believe is really real?"
I think this quote best sums up the question some of you may be wondering about why this blog seems to have a Christian focus half of the time - I still do have my random moments about stuff in life, except that I havent had time to reflect on those with the pile of homework and all (there really is a lot of work, even at my maximum productiveness)
Let me add one last bit to it, for those of you who may understand it to reflect on.
"If you really believe that what you believe is really real, why do you act as if it is not real?"
I think that oftentimes, I fail to realise that. So I made a conscious decision that with this blog of mine, well I'm going to write what's on my heart, which is utterly convinced of the truth of that which I write (random posts aside that is).
Anyways, there was another interesting quote which I picked up earlier this week from my camp.
"He is no fool, who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"
"Do you really believe that what you believe is really real?"
I think this quote best sums up the question some of you may be wondering about why this blog seems to have a Christian focus half of the time - I still do have my random moments about stuff in life, except that I havent had time to reflect on those with the pile of homework and all (there really is a lot of work, even at my maximum productiveness)
Let me add one last bit to it, for those of you who may understand it to reflect on.
"If you really believe that what you believe is really real, why do you act as if it is not real?"
I think that oftentimes, I fail to realise that. So I made a conscious decision that with this blog of mine, well I'm going to write what's on my heart, which is utterly convinced of the truth of that which I write (random posts aside that is).
Anyways, there was another interesting quote which I picked up earlier this week from my camp.
"He is no fool, who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"
Disclaimer
It's pretty late. I know I haven't um got on with my daily posting. Blame it on that pile of work I was referring to. Photos are going to come later too.
Anyways, this is a disclaimer for the previous post. It seems that my ex-girlfriend has been getting quite a few calls regarding it. So I'll just like to say a bit about what happened, without giving away too many of the details.
What was written in the previous post is the accumulation of quite a bit of my thoughts over the past two years or so, as I sought to search for the all pervading reason for BGRs nowadays.
I pinpointed it down to two factors, one being it a cultural fit-in kind of thing - it's like everyone has a boyfriend or girlfirend and only a 'loser' will not have one; the other is the need for a void to be filled inside.
For my previous post, I chose to focus on the latter reason. The former reason is, well, although relevant, kind of a foolish reason for dating someone, so I don't have much to say about it except that those people who are looking for someone for that reason, you better rethink your course of action.
Anyways, what I was looking to do was to question the necessity of having a partner at this point of life where marriage only looks a possiblity at the very least 6 years from now from my age(though this depends on the age of my readers). And so I answered with an emphatic "NO". Because I felt that as much as the emotional pull of hormonal changes has to be recognised, you can blame it on my mental maturity that this isn't really the appropriate age to be dating, especially as you can spend your time wisely making friends and getting to know other people without being tied down by time commitments, or seen as being tied down and thus less approachable.
So tackling this issue from my Christian background, and in light of certain events, I was looking to point out that well most people have this 'void' which they want to be filled - after all a void always looks to be filled - and that something better could fill it (for more details refer to previous post, just to make sure you've been reading).
And therefore this line of reasoning has actually been developed over the course of the past two years. The reason for my breakup can simply be traced back to the fact that well at that time I think I outgrew my infatuation. And I guess for months it was more the enjoyment of freedom (sorry Julie, hehe) that held me back from pursuing another relationship, rather than the reason developed in the previous post. But God has shown me a better path, for now.
So uh yes, the speculation may have been fun and all, but I hope this quashes some of that, being the spoilsport that I am.
Anyways, this is a disclaimer for the previous post. It seems that my ex-girlfriend has been getting quite a few calls regarding it. So I'll just like to say a bit about what happened, without giving away too many of the details.
What was written in the previous post is the accumulation of quite a bit of my thoughts over the past two years or so, as I sought to search for the all pervading reason for BGRs nowadays.
I pinpointed it down to two factors, one being it a cultural fit-in kind of thing - it's like everyone has a boyfriend or girlfirend and only a 'loser' will not have one; the other is the need for a void to be filled inside.
For my previous post, I chose to focus on the latter reason. The former reason is, well, although relevant, kind of a foolish reason for dating someone, so I don't have much to say about it except that those people who are looking for someone for that reason, you better rethink your course of action.
Anyways, what I was looking to do was to question the necessity of having a partner at this point of life where marriage only looks a possiblity at the very least 6 years from now from my age(though this depends on the age of my readers). And so I answered with an emphatic "NO". Because I felt that as much as the emotional pull of hormonal changes has to be recognised, you can blame it on my mental maturity that this isn't really the appropriate age to be dating, especially as you can spend your time wisely making friends and getting to know other people without being tied down by time commitments, or seen as being tied down and thus less approachable.
So tackling this issue from my Christian background, and in light of certain events, I was looking to point out that well most people have this 'void' which they want to be filled - after all a void always looks to be filled - and that something better could fill it (for more details refer to previous post, just to make sure you've been reading).
And therefore this line of reasoning has actually been developed over the course of the past two years. The reason for my breakup can simply be traced back to the fact that well at that time I think I outgrew my infatuation. And I guess for months it was more the enjoyment of freedom (sorry Julie, hehe) that held me back from pursuing another relationship, rather than the reason developed in the previous post. But God has shown me a better path, for now.
So uh yes, the speculation may have been fun and all, but I hope this quashes some of that, being the spoilsport that I am.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Love and relationships, the Christ-like way
Whoa. So what are my credentials on this subject? Well, I don't have a degree or anything but I certainly do have my trusty Bible and my trusty analytical brain.
I was going to post this sometime later, but a few things have hasten this post.
So here's the main question I'll try to address. When is it right to date?
We can answer this question from several angles. Firstly, I think dating has to be done with your parents' consent. This is the key point. If your parents aren't happy with it, then you should honour their wishes, which is a biblical command. After all, while you're under their roof and fully dependent on them, you should obey them. What you choose to do with your life once you're fully independent with a job and a house is up to you. But the readers of this post are more likely to be secondary students or college students so this does apply to you.
But parents shouldn't meddle in our private lives is the counter argument I get. Well, here's the situation. The bible commands us to be good witnesses to other people, and if we can't even keep the basic command of obeying our parents, then the power of our witness is seriously undermined. Note that it is a command. It isn't a plea. It isn't advice. It's a command.
But dont just blindly follow what the bible says. There is always a logical reason for it. And here's one I can think of right now.
Relationships which begin before the age of 18 have a very low chance of surviving. Why? Because your tastes change over time. Before 18, in most cases, you won't have the maturity to understand what you require in life. And dating, after all, should be done with a long term view of marriage. The fact is that the person you're pouring out your life to should be your life partner. If not a lot of secrets will be flying about after you break up.
There are many other reasons why relationships before 18 dont last. One is a lack of understanding of what a relationship requires. One thing is time. While you're still at school, you're bound to what your parents ask you to do. That is to focus on your school work. Focus on church. Focus on Jesus. Not that very lovely girl sitting across the room.
Another reason is that there is a lack of understanding of the biblical view of relationships. Relationships are at all times to be Christ centered - He brings people together, not us. If not a relationship will never prosper. So if you have that nagging feeling that you're doing something you shouldn't be doing, follow it! Who runs a red light, when there are huge busses and lorries driving past one either side? Very few of the lucky ones get through the mess, but many end up all banged up and well hung out to dry. Those that get through, get through by the mercy of God. Those that fail, still can turn to God who'll pick them up and put them on their feet again. But why go to all that trouble?
Your parents, in most cases, understand this very well, plus the fact that they realise your priorities should be, and indeed are, your studies (after God that is). So listen to them and don't get involved if they don't approve.
But of course, people still go into relationships regardless. And rebel against their parents. Why? Here's the number one reason: love. And I'm not going to be cynical about this. Everyone needs love, to be loved by somebody. But things go wrong when we invest our love in the wrong things.
"And now I will show you the most excellent way...
Love does not envy. That's a huge one. And this quality can be linked to that of love always trusts. In a relationship, the love between the parties should be full of trust, devoid of suspicion and envy. If you feel that creeping into a relationship, then well it's best that both of you talk to each other and come up with a way to resolve it, otherwise this will tear the relationship apart. Because although relationships are never perfect, it is a goal to work towards too, a goal which is achievable when a couple is united through Jesus. I mean why do we have holy matrimonies after all? If you pay attention to the words next time, maybe you'll understand what I mean.
Love always perseveres. This one's interesting as well. The key word here would be always. If you truly love that girl or guy, then you should with absolute certainty look for a relationship where love perseveres, through the bad and good. Because when a relationship no longer has love, well I have nothing else to say. If there is even the slightest doubt that it will fail, then well, work it out between the both of you. If not..well I'll leave it up to you to decide the outcome.
Love rejoices with the truth. I think this is a key quality. God is truth and so what He says is truth. Therefore, if we truly loved a person, we would do it in a Christ-like manner, following His guidelines. So that brings us back to the command of "Honour your parents". Well if you love your parents, then honour them.
And this ties in to one final quality which I would like to point out. I think it's an essential one in this argument. Love is not self seeking. The implications of this phrase, I believe, are huge. A lot of love we have today is very much self seeking. Love of money. Love of self - pleasure is good. Loving others in order to find that satisfaction and happiness you long for.
You know I sometimes wonder what God would say about BGRs and the breakups they cause nowadays. He would probably nod knowingly and say, "If only they understood how much I love them."
Paul, who wrote quite a number of the letters of the New Testament was a smart man indeed. He would be in the same class as famous people we know like Hawkings, Von Neumann, Einstein, Newton. He had a breadth of understanding and a depth of knowledge very much unparalleled by his peers. But one thing he championed above all, and that was love. For such a smart man who could have argued his opponents flat down, he instead chose to focus on love. It says a lot about the importance of love. So much so that he prayed for the Ephesian church of his time - "that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge - that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God" - a prayer very much relevant today.
Because that's how love works. The ultimate source of perfect love is God, whose love is so wide, so long, so high, so deep, that we can't even possibly begin to grasp it. There is so much of it, that when we choose to receive it, we can't contain all of it, so much it is that it overflows, whether into the life of a friend, or the life of someone more special. Those that seek love in other things will often meet a disappointing end, but love that comes from God is something special, that would make a relationship ever more meaningful I believe.
I know this argument isnt exhaustive, and I'm partly waffling, cause I'm certainly not very coherent so late at night. But i think with respect to when dating is alright, I really do want to point out important guidelines, like obeying what your parents have to say about it, and really understanding that a relationship is about love. And when those key characteristics aren't present or aren't being worked towards, you're heading for disaster. Coupled with the fact that we're pretty much undecided during our teenage years, yearning for a source of comfort and satisfaction and happiness, and attempting to find it in someone else, is well from a biblical perspective, foolish. But I'm not here to condemn; I only want to point out that there's a better way.
So if this issue has become a stronghold in your life, something that's really pulling you away from God, don't try to justify it. Listen to that urging deep within you. The struggle is really within you. And it's not unsurmountable. Because it's is your conscious choice to struggle with that conflict of emotions. So open up your heart to what He has to say. Trust the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding, in all your ways acknowledge Him and He'll make your paths straights. When Solomon wrote that, I think it was a piece of timeless wisdom. Listen to what God has to say. I've found my joy in the Lord.
And He offers that to everyone as well.
I was going to post this sometime later, but a few things have hasten this post.
So here's the main question I'll try to address. When is it right to date?
We can answer this question from several angles. Firstly, I think dating has to be done with your parents' consent. This is the key point. If your parents aren't happy with it, then you should honour their wishes, which is a biblical command. After all, while you're under their roof and fully dependent on them, you should obey them. What you choose to do with your life once you're fully independent with a job and a house is up to you. But the readers of this post are more likely to be secondary students or college students so this does apply to you.
But parents shouldn't meddle in our private lives is the counter argument I get. Well, here's the situation. The bible commands us to be good witnesses to other people, and if we can't even keep the basic command of obeying our parents, then the power of our witness is seriously undermined. Note that it is a command. It isn't a plea. It isn't advice. It's a command.
But dont just blindly follow what the bible says. There is always a logical reason for it. And here's one I can think of right now.
Relationships which begin before the age of 18 have a very low chance of surviving. Why? Because your tastes change over time. Before 18, in most cases, you won't have the maturity to understand what you require in life. And dating, after all, should be done with a long term view of marriage. The fact is that the person you're pouring out your life to should be your life partner. If not a lot of secrets will be flying about after you break up.
There are many other reasons why relationships before 18 dont last. One is a lack of understanding of what a relationship requires. One thing is time. While you're still at school, you're bound to what your parents ask you to do. That is to focus on your school work. Focus on church. Focus on Jesus. Not that very lovely girl sitting across the room.
Another reason is that there is a lack of understanding of the biblical view of relationships. Relationships are at all times to be Christ centered - He brings people together, not us. If not a relationship will never prosper. So if you have that nagging feeling that you're doing something you shouldn't be doing, follow it! Who runs a red light, when there are huge busses and lorries driving past one either side? Very few of the lucky ones get through the mess, but many end up all banged up and well hung out to dry. Those that get through, get through by the mercy of God. Those that fail, still can turn to God who'll pick them up and put them on their feet again. But why go to all that trouble?
Your parents, in most cases, understand this very well, plus the fact that they realise your priorities should be, and indeed are, your studies (after God that is). So listen to them and don't get involved if they don't approve.
But of course, people still go into relationships regardless. And rebel against their parents. Why? Here's the number one reason: love. And I'm not going to be cynical about this. Everyone needs love, to be loved by somebody. But things go wrong when we invest our love in the wrong things.
"And now I will show you the most excellent way...
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love."
The above excerpt is taken from 1 Corinthians. Some of you might know it from A Walk to Remember, where the passage was quoted at the end.
Love does not envy. That's a huge one. And this quality can be linked to that of love always trusts. In a relationship, the love between the parties should be full of trust, devoid of suspicion and envy. If you feel that creeping into a relationship, then well it's best that both of you talk to each other and come up with a way to resolve it, otherwise this will tear the relationship apart. Because although relationships are never perfect, it is a goal to work towards too, a goal which is achievable when a couple is united through Jesus. I mean why do we have holy matrimonies after all? If you pay attention to the words next time, maybe you'll understand what I mean.
Love always perseveres. This one's interesting as well. The key word here would be always. If you truly love that girl or guy, then you should with absolute certainty look for a relationship where love perseveres, through the bad and good. Because when a relationship no longer has love, well I have nothing else to say. If there is even the slightest doubt that it will fail, then well, work it out between the both of you. If not..well I'll leave it up to you to decide the outcome.
Love rejoices with the truth. I think this is a key quality. God is truth and so what He says is truth. Therefore, if we truly loved a person, we would do it in a Christ-like manner, following His guidelines. So that brings us back to the command of "Honour your parents". Well if you love your parents, then honour them.
And this ties in to one final quality which I would like to point out. I think it's an essential one in this argument. Love is not self seeking. The implications of this phrase, I believe, are huge. A lot of love we have today is very much self seeking. Love of money. Love of self - pleasure is good. Loving others in order to find that satisfaction and happiness you long for.
You know I sometimes wonder what God would say about BGRs and the breakups they cause nowadays. He would probably nod knowingly and say, "If only they understood how much I love them."
Paul, who wrote quite a number of the letters of the New Testament was a smart man indeed. He would be in the same class as famous people we know like Hawkings, Von Neumann, Einstein, Newton. He had a breadth of understanding and a depth of knowledge very much unparalleled by his peers. But one thing he championed above all, and that was love. For such a smart man who could have argued his opponents flat down, he instead chose to focus on love. It says a lot about the importance of love. So much so that he prayed for the Ephesian church of his time - "that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge - that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God" - a prayer very much relevant today.
Because that's how love works. The ultimate source of perfect love is God, whose love is so wide, so long, so high, so deep, that we can't even possibly begin to grasp it. There is so much of it, that when we choose to receive it, we can't contain all of it, so much it is that it overflows, whether into the life of a friend, or the life of someone more special. Those that seek love in other things will often meet a disappointing end, but love that comes from God is something special, that would make a relationship ever more meaningful I believe.
I know this argument isnt exhaustive, and I'm partly waffling, cause I'm certainly not very coherent so late at night. But i think with respect to when dating is alright, I really do want to point out important guidelines, like obeying what your parents have to say about it, and really understanding that a relationship is about love. And when those key characteristics aren't present or aren't being worked towards, you're heading for disaster. Coupled with the fact that we're pretty much undecided during our teenage years, yearning for a source of comfort and satisfaction and happiness, and attempting to find it in someone else, is well from a biblical perspective, foolish. But I'm not here to condemn; I only want to point out that there's a better way.
So if this issue has become a stronghold in your life, something that's really pulling you away from God, don't try to justify it. Listen to that urging deep within you. The struggle is really within you. And it's not unsurmountable. Because it's is your conscious choice to struggle with that conflict of emotions. So open up your heart to what He has to say. Trust the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding, in all your ways acknowledge Him and He'll make your paths straights. When Solomon wrote that, I think it was a piece of timeless wisdom. Listen to what God has to say. I've found my joy in the Lord.
And He offers that to everyone as well.
Metamorphosis, October 23-25 2006
When we look at this word, we often associate it with the stage by which a caterpillar becomes a butterfly.
Well, we decided to choose this theme for our camp this year, calling it Metamorphosis, with the tagline "My Life, My World"
And although it was quite a short camp - 3 days 2 nights - I think we were indeed blessed with a metamorphosis, or in the original Greek language, metamorphoo - which can be roughly translated to the word 'transformation'
But let's go back to the start.
The vision for this camp became a reality in September, whereby the camp was first officially announced and the registration forms released. October saw a more hectic schedule, especially in the last week or two when the committee had to work their socks off and pull a few late nighters in the last few days towards camp in order to ensure everything was in order. On the day itself, while everyone boarded the bus, which we intentionally asked to drive slower - hehe, sorry guys - , the committee got into the van and we started to complete a few last minute preparations, like the opening powerpoint, and the activity materials. Stayed up late during the camp nights to prepare for the next day as well, so we were pretty much occupied.
So yeah, that gives you an idea of the preparatory work and long hours.
The organisational aspect of camp itself came off good. We had nightly worship sessions, morning devotion times, afternoon activity periods, a morning movie, and generally lots of free time :) I think it's impossible to play beach soccer - so tiring. On the spiritual side of things, we got a tremendously positive response from the campers, and God was really present throughout, so thanks be to Him who makes all things possible. Had quite a nice time talking to other people as well :)
Anyways, I'll post up a collage of pictures first opportunity I get. The camp pictures (and short clips) are scattered over several laptops, and we have so many they dont even fit on a DVD. So there's going to be a lot of raking through to sort out pictures and the like. Don't expect the collage anytime soon.
Adios! I have to go finish my pile of work now.
Well, we decided to choose this theme for our camp this year, calling it Metamorphosis, with the tagline "My Life, My World"
And although it was quite a short camp - 3 days 2 nights - I think we were indeed blessed with a metamorphosis, or in the original Greek language, metamorphoo - which can be roughly translated to the word 'transformation'
But let's go back to the start.
The vision for this camp became a reality in September, whereby the camp was first officially announced and the registration forms released. October saw a more hectic schedule, especially in the last week or two when the committee had to work their socks off and pull a few late nighters in the last few days towards camp in order to ensure everything was in order. On the day itself, while everyone boarded the bus, which we intentionally asked to drive slower - hehe, sorry guys - , the committee got into the van and we started to complete a few last minute preparations, like the opening powerpoint, and the activity materials. Stayed up late during the camp nights to prepare for the next day as well, so we were pretty much occupied.
So yeah, that gives you an idea of the preparatory work and long hours.
The organisational aspect of camp itself came off good. We had nightly worship sessions, morning devotion times, afternoon activity periods, a morning movie, and generally lots of free time :) I think it's impossible to play beach soccer - so tiring. On the spiritual side of things, we got a tremendously positive response from the campers, and God was really present throughout, so thanks be to Him who makes all things possible. Had quite a nice time talking to other people as well :)
Anyways, I'll post up a collage of pictures first opportunity I get. The camp pictures (and short clips) are scattered over several laptops, and we have so many they dont even fit on a DVD. So there's going to be a lot of raking through to sort out pictures and the like. Don't expect the collage anytime soon.
Adios! I have to go finish my pile of work now.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
I'm backkkk!!
Anybody miss me? Hehe. That sounded quite big-headed.
Anyways, over the next few days, when i finally find the time amidst all the stacks of homework i have to complete, i shall write up a comprehensive post about my church youth camp, which was a really enjoyable and memorable experience, in addition to a post on the mechanics of dating in a Christian context.
In the meantime, having operated on an average of 4-5 hrs for the past three nights, I think I'm going to crash right NOW.
Anyways, over the next few days, when i finally find the time amidst all the stacks of homework i have to complete, i shall write up a comprehensive post about my church youth camp, which was a really enjoyable and memorable experience, in addition to a post on the mechanics of dating in a Christian context.
In the meantime, having operated on an average of 4-5 hrs for the past three nights, I think I'm going to crash right NOW.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
Cambridge
Well well. My 'tests' are now over.
So, what does it take to get into Cambridge?
After my pretty puzzling interview, and that extremely long Thinking Skills Assessment, I have arrived at this conclusion:
If you have Cambridge written all over you, you'll get in no matter what you do (unless you really mess up the entrance examination, and even then...)
And if you are not Cambridge material, then you'll never get in no matter what you do.
There it is. The secret of Cambridge.
Lol. Well, wait till my reply letter comes back sometime later - I have no idea when - before I make any further conclusions. Right now, I have a 50-50 chance, because I have no idea how their admissions process works.
Btw, someone mentioned to me today that there are 40 people applying for economics in Malaysia. And they're only accepting around 8 - which is the 1-in-5 ratio that's often quoted. So yeah, what is it with economics that everyone wants to do it?
I think I'll stop at that.
So, what does it take to get into Cambridge?
After my pretty puzzling interview, and that extremely long Thinking Skills Assessment, I have arrived at this conclusion:
If you have Cambridge written all over you, you'll get in no matter what you do (unless you really mess up the entrance examination, and even then...)
And if you are not Cambridge material, then you'll never get in no matter what you do.
There it is. The secret of Cambridge.
Lol. Well, wait till my reply letter comes back sometime later - I have no idea when - before I make any further conclusions. Right now, I have a 50-50 chance, because I have no idea how their admissions process works.
Btw, someone mentioned to me today that there are 40 people applying for economics in Malaysia. And they're only accepting around 8 - which is the 1-in-5 ratio that's often quoted. So yeah, what is it with economics that everyone wants to do it?
I think I'll stop at that.
Short of time
I don't have much time to compose my thoughts and write something. But do stay tune for the following:
1) How my Cambridge interview and written exams went.
2) My perspective on dating - when should someone start, what is the purpose of going out with someone, what limits should be imposed, what should there be in such a relationship, is it really necessary, what to do when things go wrong, what are the alternatives, and many more answers to even more questions
I would also like to inform all my faithful readers that I will be absent from Monday to Wednesday as I'll be leaving for my church youth camp. Anyhow, I WILL be back with even more after that. In the meantime, enjoy your holidays! (Although the extent to which that is possible is debatable with the current haze situation - maybe I should post on possible solutions to that problem)
1) How my Cambridge interview and written exams went.
2) My perspective on dating - when should someone start, what is the purpose of going out with someone, what limits should be imposed, what should there be in such a relationship, is it really necessary, what to do when things go wrong, what are the alternatives, and many more answers to even more questions
I would also like to inform all my faithful readers that I will be absent from Monday to Wednesday as I'll be leaving for my church youth camp. Anyhow, I WILL be back with even more after that. In the meantime, enjoy your holidays! (Although the extent to which that is possible is debatable with the current haze situation - maybe I should post on possible solutions to that problem)
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Homework, that dastardly affair...
Homework. Who enjoys homework really? (Yes, I don't really fancy it myself despite all the jokes that are cracked about me going home and opening up a huge textbook and reading it)
Well, since we can pretty much rule out that homework is for one's pleasure, unless you're that interesting individual who loves doing homework more than anything else, what is the purpose of homework?
The purposes, I believe, are as followed:
1) To help consolidate what we have learnt through continuous practice, e.g. math
2) To expose us to potential examination questions and help develop our skills of answering them - after all our exams results are a major factor on which we are judged
3) To prepare for the next lesson by reading, researching or other methods
4) To evaluate our progress in the subject as judged by the quality of our submitted work
Of course, I would have to include some of the other not so positive theories:
1) Sadistic teachers seek to drown us with stacks of sheets that they laughingly know we can't finish
2) Revenge after being put through similar toil by their previous teachers
3) Conspiracy to make us mindless zombies through the repetitiveness of homework
Ok..The last one was pushing it. But really do suggest some more outlandish theories if you have them.
But anyways going back to the subject, we've more or less established the purpose of why homework is given, but that is pretty irrelevant isn't it? I mean, who cares why there's homework - what matters more is "Is there too much of it? And what can we do to reduce it?", noting the implicit assumption in the second question that there is already too much homework.
So is there really too much homework? I've always wondered about this. And I think the answer can be found in the question: Is there really too much homework - too much compared to what? Therefore we need to look at our utilisation of our most precious resource, time. The argument here is that too much of our time is taken up doing homework. Let's examine what truth there is behind that statement.
To begin, let's see what else we do with our time, and by this I mean actual distractions like TV or the computer or going out all the time. Is it the case that there is too much homework, or too many enjoyable distractions? I'm not sure about this, but it seems that I have a habit of talking online while doing my homework. I once read somewhere that teenagers today may not be learning and benefiting as much from homework due to the fact that their brains are in a million places at once, and equally they are becoming less productive and are thus spending more time finishing a task.
Ahhhh...I think there is some semblance of truth to that statement, because I can be guilty of that at times. But I don't think it's all our fault. Some teachers unreasonably expect us to have all the time in the world just for their work, and they expect us to spend our whole day doing work and not enjoying ourselves, an opinion which I also feel is quite true.
Or is it? There are many conjectures a person can come up with when talking about the workload but I think some empirical evidence, some solid evidence has to be brought into the picture. So I thought, what better way to do this than to see the amount of time it would take me to complete a task, and the amount of time I would spend dallying before starting on that task.
I loved my results. On average, for every hour of solid work I do, I have 1 hour of unfruitful time. And people still ask where all the time goes.
So in answer to the question of whether there is too much homework, I am dubious to concede ground, because if the answer is no, then that means I’ve been procrastinating quite badly when I could have finished my work efficiently. But the answer may seem to lean towards yes, because talks with adults have revealed that the workload has not changed much.
Instead distractions have increased many-fold. And none more powerful than that of the internet, or that nifty device called a handphone come to think of it.
Thus the question is more this: There is too much homework - because too much of our time is simply being taken up by other 'activities'. Therefore, what can we do to minimise those distractions?
Well, I think the key word here is really discipline. I think focus is needed. And I think it's a habit that has to be cultivated. If we repeat this methodology of finishing our homework first and not allowing distractions to hinder productivity, it will become ingrained in us and we become more efficient. Simple economics - specialisation can lead to increased productivity, thus creating a more efficient outcome.
Of course, discipline is never easy, so in the first few months, we might have to resort to pulling out that internet wire, or turning off that beeping handphone. But I think the returns might be more spectacular than you can imagine.
However, before I end, I would like to add a disclaimer. Although I have pointed out that the reason why we seem to have too much homework is that a lot of our time is being taken up for other activities, most of which might be distractions that are unnecessary, there are situations where these activities may be necessary. However, if the problem, of not being able to catch up on your work, while the rest of the class seems to be doing fine, does persist in the long run, then it may be wise to reassess your priorities and free up your schedule slightly. Because I think that in most cases, in the long run, your workload balances and if you put in full effort, no task cannot be complete. In the short run, extended deadlines might be necessary but don't push your luck (although doing really well at the start of the year does earn you some leeway later in the year, all from personal experience)
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Back again
Haha. One day hiatus. But relative to the frequency of my posting (every day), that's quite significant right?
So what 'interesting' topic do I have in mind today?
*READERS HAVE TO BE ABOVE 13 - DISCRETION STRONGLY ADVISED*
Vulgarity. Otherwise defined as #@$*.
Ahh. Interesting topic, no? What makes a person want to swear all the time?
I think the best way to answer this topic would be from my own experience. Here are several reasons for the increasing use of vulgarity in everyday language:
1)Media influence. This comes in the form of movies, books and musics. 50 years ago, this would be unheard of but lately if you can't put one bad word in a movie, then you cant seem to sell them. The action heroes always have to say four-letter words to sound 'manly' and 'action-oriented'. Strange huh? I thought the big guns and muscles would say enough.
2)Peer influence. Friends pass it on to you. People think that it sounds cool to say it. "Oh! He's so mature and cool and using that 4-letter word. Well if I want to be a teenager, I'd better act more like him and find a way to use that #@$*ing 4-letter word"
Ahh. I think that's it. It's all about influence isn't it? It's so much a part of teenage vocabulary that people no longer think twice about those words.
Well. Perhaps it's time to take a proper look at those words. Although I don't intend to type them out here. Highlight the empty spaces to see the meanings. A common one in fact means to have sexual intercourse with someone. Interesting. Another common one means illegitimate son. Another one we hear just means faeces. Wow. So mature, these words. Let's see how we can use them in a sentence. (Highlight the chunk below in order to make it visible)
"Don't be such a have sexual intercourse with someone illegitimate son".
"I can't take this have sexual intercourse with someone faeces"
"Have sexual intercourse lah!"
Yes. I can imagine someone going around saying that. So mature. So cool.
So what makes a person swear?
Immaturity.
The desire to forge a spoken identity of themselves as perceived of those older than them. But little do people realise how insensitive the use of such language is. People often treat such language as commonplace everyday words, but it is indeed disturbing language to hear from people as young as 12.
Why must you express yourself in such indecent language?
What makes you think that saying that makes you 10 years older or something?
The english language is vast. People have invented emphasis words like 'super'. I dont think to have sexual intercourse with was ever intended for that purpose.
To Christians, neither did God intend for such foul language to come out of your mouth. The tongue is a reflection of what's in the heart. And we should certainly keep our words pure and devoid of such indecency, a true reflection of He who resides in our hearts. So clean up your act - cos I'm certainly trying to do so on my side. I know it's not easy, and there's a slight 'withdrawal' phase where you attempt to adjust your language mindset, but it's worth it.
And yes, I do understand justifications that words like dang and crap are used to express a moment of exasperation or a mistake, because I certainly do use those from time to time.
But are they really necessary?
That's something I need to go think about now.
So what 'interesting' topic do I have in mind today?
*READERS HAVE TO BE ABOVE 13 - DISCRETION STRONGLY ADVISED*
Vulgarity. Otherwise defined as #@$*.
Ahh. Interesting topic, no? What makes a person want to swear all the time?
I think the best way to answer this topic would be from my own experience. Here are several reasons for the increasing use of vulgarity in everyday language:
1)Media influence. This comes in the form of movies, books and musics. 50 years ago, this would be unheard of but lately if you can't put one bad word in a movie, then you cant seem to sell them. The action heroes always have to say four-letter words to sound 'manly' and 'action-oriented'. Strange huh? I thought the big guns and muscles would say enough.
2)Peer influence. Friends pass it on to you. People think that it sounds cool to say it. "Oh! He's so mature and cool and using that 4-letter word. Well if I want to be a teenager, I'd better act more like him and find a way to use that #@$*ing 4-letter word"
Ahh. I think that's it. It's all about influence isn't it? It's so much a part of teenage vocabulary that people no longer think twice about those words.
Well. Perhaps it's time to take a proper look at those words. Although I don't intend to type them out here. Highlight the empty spaces to see the meanings. A common one in fact means to have sexual intercourse with someone. Interesting. Another common one means illegitimate son. Another one we hear just means faeces. Wow. So mature, these words. Let's see how we can use them in a sentence. (Highlight the chunk below in order to make it visible)
"Don't be such a have sexual intercourse with someone illegitimate son".
"I can't take this have sexual intercourse with someone faeces"
"Have sexual intercourse lah!"
Yes. I can imagine someone going around saying that. So mature. So cool.
So what makes a person swear?
Immaturity.
The desire to forge a spoken identity of themselves as perceived of those older than them. But little do people realise how insensitive the use of such language is. People often treat such language as commonplace everyday words, but it is indeed disturbing language to hear from people as young as 12.
Why must you express yourself in such indecent language?
What makes you think that saying that makes you 10 years older or something?
The english language is vast. People have invented emphasis words like 'super'. I dont think to have sexual intercourse with was ever intended for that purpose.
To Christians, neither did God intend for such foul language to come out of your mouth. The tongue is a reflection of what's in the heart. And we should certainly keep our words pure and devoid of such indecency, a true reflection of He who resides in our hearts. So clean up your act - cos I'm certainly trying to do so on my side. I know it's not easy, and there's a slight 'withdrawal' phase where you attempt to adjust your language mindset, but it's worth it.
And yes, I do understand justifications that words like dang and crap are used to express a moment of exasperation or a mistake, because I certainly do use those from time to time.
But are they really necessary?
That's something I need to go think about now.
Monday, October 16, 2006
What ought to be and what is
This is going to be a long one.
What ought to be and what is. Interesting statement. What I'm refering to here is a situation called the 'divergence of morality and ethics'. This might get extremely controversial for some people. This is after all a Christian worldview so some people might feel irked. But I am utterly convinced that this is the truth and I do not intend to offend anyone; hence I apologise right here and right now.
Morality is what ought to be. For example, God detests homosexuality, not because of some sadistic toss of the coin but because it is a true reflection of His nature. Ethics is what is. Our culture today tolerates homosexuality because it is apparently a 'norm', a statistical majority. Might makes right. In America, 51% of the votes made this right.
A saddening fact of today's world is that instead of looking for what is in what ought to be, people have turned to find what ought to be from what is. To clarify that statement, let me introduce two more concepts, called the universals and particulars. The universals are governing laws, for example in football, one of the universal laws is that you're not allowed to touch the ball with your hand. But to a complete amateur, who just sees the person touching the ball with every other part of the body, he may not make the connection. He sees the particulars - a player controlling the ball with his feet, heading the ball, chesting the ball. But can he necessarily figure out the universal law from the particulars that he is observing?
The answer is yes, because a bit of observation is what it takes to realise that you can't touch the ball with your hand. But things aren't as clear cut in the world of ethics, when people cannot find the true universals.
And so they turn to other means. They attempt to construct them from the particulars. Pre-marital sex is accepted by the majority of the population, therefore it is correct. Homosexuality is accepted therefore it is correct. Divorce is accepted therefore it is correct. Vulgarity is accepted therefore it is correct.
A more common approach is to find it through spirituality. But this still leads to the question of "What is truth?" Sure, there are plenty of universals. But which is the true one?
This age old question was once asked by a Roman governer by the name of Pilate. "What is truth", he scoffed to the man before him, the man who had just seconds earlier answered him, "For this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth". Pilate then turned his back on the man and made the gravest error of his life. There before him laid the greatest authority of truth, and he failed to listen for the answer that could have changed his life.
What is truth? God is truth. And Jesus came into this world to testify to that truth. But today's world doesnt like God in the picture. We like to pretend He does not exist. It's scary isn't it, that God does exist and that He takes note of everything we do. That at the end of our life, we'll stand before Him and be judged. That all our actions are accountable. It's such a life changing thought, that many choose to look past it and pretend God doesn't exists.
So that is the prevalent culture of today, the problem of today. We choose to omit God from our lives, from our existence. We're just a product of the stuff in the box, merely a product of evolutionary forces. Or we opt for a smaller god, one that we can bend to our own liking. If we really believed in God. The God who created the universe. The God who created you and me. The holy and perfect God. The unchangeable God. The one and only God. The God who loves you and me. We would stop all our detestable acts, because we know that God is present and watching. Our lives would be lived to reflect what God desires.
But God gave us free will to choose. And we chose poorly - we chose to not choose Him. And the implications of a God-less world are huge. If there is no God or purposive force in the universe, that you're merely a link in the evolutionary chain, then there's no ultimate meaning in life. We substitute it with proximate meaning, a self created purpose. Because there is nothing outside your physical body, there is no free will, because you will be acting on human impulse, on instinct. There is no right and wrong, because that would again be determined by human nature. And it's a horrible world. Survival of the fittest. Where the strong survive and the weak die.
It sounds all so dark and gloomy. And indeed it is. Man is fallen. Man has a great capacity for evil, because we chose to kick God out of our lives. Except for one thing.
"For this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth." When Jesus said this, the truth He was referring to was not only the truth of God's word, but that God had given us a second chance at life. A second chance with Him. Jesus testified to the truth, right on the cross on which He hung for the sins of the world. And it was a testimony of truth, for He conquered death, the eternal damnation of hell, which Satan had cursed us with through his lies. And so we are redeemed, paid for, given a second lease at life. Free from the chains of the devil if we would only accept God's free gift of grace.
And we are now confronted with a second choice. In our first choice, we chose to kick God out of our lives. And what has this brought onto the world? In our second choice, God hopes that we choose wiser.
So choose wisely. And live out your choice.
What ought to be and what is. Interesting statement. What I'm refering to here is a situation called the 'divergence of morality and ethics'. This might get extremely controversial for some people. This is after all a Christian worldview so some people might feel irked. But I am utterly convinced that this is the truth and I do not intend to offend anyone; hence I apologise right here and right now.
Morality is what ought to be. For example, God detests homosexuality, not because of some sadistic toss of the coin but because it is a true reflection of His nature. Ethics is what is. Our culture today tolerates homosexuality because it is apparently a 'norm', a statistical majority. Might makes right. In America, 51% of the votes made this right.
A saddening fact of today's world is that instead of looking for what is in what ought to be, people have turned to find what ought to be from what is. To clarify that statement, let me introduce two more concepts, called the universals and particulars. The universals are governing laws, for example in football, one of the universal laws is that you're not allowed to touch the ball with your hand. But to a complete amateur, who just sees the person touching the ball with every other part of the body, he may not make the connection. He sees the particulars - a player controlling the ball with his feet, heading the ball, chesting the ball. But can he necessarily figure out the universal law from the particulars that he is observing?
The answer is yes, because a bit of observation is what it takes to realise that you can't touch the ball with your hand. But things aren't as clear cut in the world of ethics, when people cannot find the true universals.
And so they turn to other means. They attempt to construct them from the particulars. Pre-marital sex is accepted by the majority of the population, therefore it is correct. Homosexuality is accepted therefore it is correct. Divorce is accepted therefore it is correct. Vulgarity is accepted therefore it is correct.
A more common approach is to find it through spirituality. But this still leads to the question of "What is truth?" Sure, there are plenty of universals. But which is the true one?
This age old question was once asked by a Roman governer by the name of Pilate. "What is truth", he scoffed to the man before him, the man who had just seconds earlier answered him, "For this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth". Pilate then turned his back on the man and made the gravest error of his life. There before him laid the greatest authority of truth, and he failed to listen for the answer that could have changed his life.
What is truth? God is truth. And Jesus came into this world to testify to that truth. But today's world doesnt like God in the picture. We like to pretend He does not exist. It's scary isn't it, that God does exist and that He takes note of everything we do. That at the end of our life, we'll stand before Him and be judged. That all our actions are accountable. It's such a life changing thought, that many choose to look past it and pretend God doesn't exists.
So that is the prevalent culture of today, the problem of today. We choose to omit God from our lives, from our existence. We're just a product of the stuff in the box, merely a product of evolutionary forces. Or we opt for a smaller god, one that we can bend to our own liking. If we really believed in God. The God who created the universe. The God who created you and me. The holy and perfect God. The unchangeable God. The one and only God. The God who loves you and me. We would stop all our detestable acts, because we know that God is present and watching. Our lives would be lived to reflect what God desires.
But God gave us free will to choose. And we chose poorly - we chose to not choose Him. And the implications of a God-less world are huge. If there is no God or purposive force in the universe, that you're merely a link in the evolutionary chain, then there's no ultimate meaning in life. We substitute it with proximate meaning, a self created purpose. Because there is nothing outside your physical body, there is no free will, because you will be acting on human impulse, on instinct. There is no right and wrong, because that would again be determined by human nature. And it's a horrible world. Survival of the fittest. Where the strong survive and the weak die.
It sounds all so dark and gloomy. And indeed it is. Man is fallen. Man has a great capacity for evil, because we chose to kick God out of our lives. Except for one thing.
"For this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth." When Jesus said this, the truth He was referring to was not only the truth of God's word, but that God had given us a second chance at life. A second chance with Him. Jesus testified to the truth, right on the cross on which He hung for the sins of the world. And it was a testimony of truth, for He conquered death, the eternal damnation of hell, which Satan had cursed us with through his lies. And so we are redeemed, paid for, given a second lease at life. Free from the chains of the devil if we would only accept God's free gift of grace.
And we are now confronted with a second choice. In our first choice, we chose to kick God out of our lives. And what has this brought onto the world? In our second choice, God hopes that we choose wiser.
So choose wisely. And live out your choice.
Arguments adapted from "The Truth Project" by Dr Del Tackett
In or out?
Saturday was really random. Who else would write about Windows Messenger statuses?
Me.
Lol. So today I shall embark on a slightly more controversial topic.
The topic of social exclusion.
Which I have been guilty of as well in the past (and may unconsciously be still guilty of in which case I invite someone to inform me) .
Social exclusion sounds so bombastic. So in simpler terms, from my perspective, it refers to the formation of cliques, which in the process leaves out certain individuals. But of course, friendships are found on grounds of common interest most of the time, so what I'm refering to here is friendships that are never made despite the existence of common interests.
Why are these individuals left out? I believe the reason can lie with either party. It's either person X is either very anti-social, unable to make friends, or is not perceived as nice by other people, an image which he might have created. On the other hand, it could be due to the fact that he's not perceived as 'in'. And this is what i wish to focus on.
"In'. If you're not in then you're out. What are the criteria that makes you an 'in' person rather than an 'out' person? I'm not sure myself but here are several I've thought of:
1) The cool factor. Some people are just more attractive physically than others.
2) The gain factor. You have something to gain by being friends with certain people.
3) The fun factor. Some people are just more fun. (and funny too)
I was wondering how prevalent this phenomenon is. To me there always seems to be a 'loner' in every social strata. But just on a personal level, how concern are we with being 'in'?
I was thinking about this and realised that it's quite like what I read about segregation in a book recently. Minor individual preferences can be augmented at the aggregate level. In other words, if you were only marginally concerned with being in the 'in-group', i.e. if there were 9 people, and as long as 5 of those people, including you, were 'in', the status quo would be maintained. But if that balance shifted, so there were only 4 'in' people, this could just prompt a slight gravitation to a more 'in' group. So illustrating it, imagine a playing field of pixels. Taking the in people as blue pixels, and the out people as red pixels, the rules are as followed: pixels are only allowed to move to an empty square if the majority of the adjacent pixels are of a different colour. When this simulation was ran, in two moves, YES, TWO moves, a distinct segregation emerged.
Lol. That was a bit technical AND obscure. But what I'm trying to say is that even the slightest urge to be with the 'in' group, can result in many being left out. And what i wish to bring across is this: Don't let the in-factor destroy potential friendships. Don't let favoritism destroy the group harmony (or on a global scale, dont let the socially disadvantage be cast aside).
It is true that we'll never be friends with everyone, and that we'll be closer to those we have more in common with, but at the same time, don't scorn the person who's been left out.
And if you say this doesnt happen, I beg to differ. Next time you pick your team in sports, or when you are forced to leave your current circle of friends due to a change of state like entering college or uni or work, or when you leave on camp and choose your room mates, observe whether you end up in the 'in group' or get left on the 'out pile'.
NOTE: Author acknowledges that although this does happen, it's not always the case. Sometimes, we can get several groups of friends, where no single person is left out. IN that case, this does not apply. Also, the author's thoughts are a bit patchy at the moment, so he apologises for any confusion in the reading.
Me.
Lol. So today I shall embark on a slightly more controversial topic.
The topic of social exclusion.
Which I have been guilty of as well in the past (and may unconsciously be still guilty of in which case I invite someone to inform me) .
Social exclusion sounds so bombastic. So in simpler terms, from my perspective, it refers to the formation of cliques, which in the process leaves out certain individuals. But of course, friendships are found on grounds of common interest most of the time, so what I'm refering to here is friendships that are never made despite the existence of common interests.
Why are these individuals left out? I believe the reason can lie with either party. It's either person X is either very anti-social, unable to make friends, or is not perceived as nice by other people, an image which he might have created. On the other hand, it could be due to the fact that he's not perceived as 'in'. And this is what i wish to focus on.
"In'. If you're not in then you're out. What are the criteria that makes you an 'in' person rather than an 'out' person? I'm not sure myself but here are several I've thought of:
1) The cool factor. Some people are just more attractive physically than others.
2) The gain factor. You have something to gain by being friends with certain people.
3) The fun factor. Some people are just more fun. (and funny too)
I was wondering how prevalent this phenomenon is. To me there always seems to be a 'loner' in every social strata. But just on a personal level, how concern are we with being 'in'?
I was thinking about this and realised that it's quite like what I read about segregation in a book recently. Minor individual preferences can be augmented at the aggregate level. In other words, if you were only marginally concerned with being in the 'in-group', i.e. if there were 9 people, and as long as 5 of those people, including you, were 'in', the status quo would be maintained. But if that balance shifted, so there were only 4 'in' people, this could just prompt a slight gravitation to a more 'in' group. So illustrating it, imagine a playing field of pixels. Taking the in people as blue pixels, and the out people as red pixels, the rules are as followed: pixels are only allowed to move to an empty square if the majority of the adjacent pixels are of a different colour. When this simulation was ran, in two moves, YES, TWO moves, a distinct segregation emerged.
Lol. That was a bit technical AND obscure. But what I'm trying to say is that even the slightest urge to be with the 'in' group, can result in many being left out. And what i wish to bring across is this: Don't let the in-factor destroy potential friendships. Don't let favoritism destroy the group harmony (or on a global scale, dont let the socially disadvantage be cast aside).
It is true that we'll never be friends with everyone, and that we'll be closer to those we have more in common with, but at the same time, don't scorn the person who's been left out.
And if you say this doesnt happen, I beg to differ. Next time you pick your team in sports, or when you are forced to leave your current circle of friends due to a change of state like entering college or uni or work, or when you leave on camp and choose your room mates, observe whether you end up in the 'in group' or get left on the 'out pile'.
NOTE: Author acknowledges that although this does happen, it's not always the case. Sometimes, we can get several groups of friends, where no single person is left out. IN that case, this does not apply. Also, the author's thoughts are a bit patchy at the moment, so he apologises for any confusion in the reading.
Sunday, October 15, 2006
So much on my mind
Lol. Did that title scare you? Haha. The previous post was a bit long so I think it's time to take a bit of a breather. I wont post on anything significant today.
Anyways, things are getting a lot more hectic both in school and at church. But then its quite enjoyable to be in the thick of things - life can be a lot more interesting. And the hari raya holidays are just around the corner, so it's going to be a great break.
Oh yeah, in case anyone was still wondering, the title of this post is just to mislead you. Well, to a certain extent. I do want to talk on the topic of 'social exclusion' but I'll save that for another day.
In the meantime, hoped you enjoy the week and do look forward to another great one, because I'm certainly going to.
Note: Author would hope that readers do not equate his enjoying the week to them not being able to enjoy their week. AHEM, for example, "Without ME, it's just Aweso" man, no snide comments.
Anyways, things are getting a lot more hectic both in school and at church. But then its quite enjoyable to be in the thick of things - life can be a lot more interesting. And the hari raya holidays are just around the corner, so it's going to be a great break.
Oh yeah, in case anyone was still wondering, the title of this post is just to mislead you. Well, to a certain extent. I do want to talk on the topic of 'social exclusion' but I'll save that for another day.
In the meantime, hoped you enjoy the week and do look forward to another great one, because I'm certainly going to.
Note: Author would hope that readers do not equate his enjoying the week to them not being able to enjoy their week. AHEM, for example, "Without ME, it's just Aweso" man, no snide comments.
Three is a prime number...
Before I forget, here are three things I want to talk about:
1) The clarification of Windows Live Messenger, or equivalent, status-es (not sure what the plural of status is)
2) The basic principles of multi-tasking
3) The tenets of piracy
Lol. Sounds so bombastic. But here are three issues I remember from a long day today.
Wait. Didn't I have my SATs today? But who wants to know that? I'm sure you all rather hear about more useful stuff...
So let me start with the first. Upon flipping to Windows Live Messenger now, I see 5 modes. Well in reality 4, but I'll explain the last one. The first 4 are 'Online', 'Busy', 'Away', the bemusing 'Out to Lunch' at 12.40am and the fifth one is 'Appear offline', which you can't see but its existence is acknowledged. It's kind of like the flaw when people argue about whether God really exists. They claim that you cant prove what you cannot see. Well you can prove that appear offline is being used eventhough you cant see it.
Anyways, here's what they really mean in my dictionary of messenger slang.
'Online' - Hi. I'm supposedly on right now and you can just message me. But if I dont reply, that means I'm not really on, just that I left my messenger on and in fact I'm really away, so ignore the 'online' status.
BOTTOMLINE: Dubious status. More information needed.
'Busy' - Hi. I'm busy right now. So I shouldnt actually be saying hi because i dont have the time to talk. Anyhow, dont expect a reply. If you do get one, that means I'm currently on selective chat mode, in which I pick the convos i want to reply to or initiate the convos I'm interested in. But at the very least, I have informed you of the fact that I'm busy - or I'll be if i start talking to you, which is why you're not going to get that urgent reply you need.
BOTTOMLINE: I use this all the time. And it works. And the nudges dont vibrate your desktop or make loud noises.
DISCLAIMER : I understand that this status is shown by default when certain programs are running.
'Away' - This is an interesting one. It's probably quite similar to online. Possible differences could include use of a screensaver. Enlighten me if there are further activities that might automatically trigger the away mode. But here's what it says most of the time.
Hi, I'm away as you can see. So obviously dont expect any replies, unless I'm telepathic. Which I possibly am because there's a slight chance that I'll be away and reply to you. In other words, like Mr. Busy, I am possibly on 'selective chat mode'. But instead of being too busy to talk to you, I'm just too distant. As in you're standing together with me, but we might as well be standing on opposite sides of the universe.
BOTTOMLINE: The 'aways' are usually away. However, there are stray occasions where the away people are online. And the online people are usually away. So maybe a change of status is needed?
DISCLAIMER: Again, absence from the computer enables this mode by default. Also, some people leave their computers on all day and cant be fussed to change their mode.
'Out to Lunch' - I love this one. It's got to be the funniest one ever.
Hi. I'm out to lunch as you can see. I'm really jetlagged, which is why I'm eating lunch at 1am in the morning, or 7pm at night. Although I'm actually going to have breakfast/dinner now, I'm just going to put 'out to lunch'.
BOTTOMLINE: Should refrain from using this and petition messenger to put in 'eating' instead.
DISCLAIMER: Well, I do understand that some people like to dwell over lunch...
So after all that rambling, what was the point of all that ranting? Well there's really no point to having status-es. Because regardless of whether you are busy, away, online, or out to lunch, you're really something else. I like to call it 'confused'. Or there's always the alternative - 'appear offline'. This has got to be the best thing ever. Hate all those messenger convos that pop up? Just too popular? Well, with 'appear offline', you can now surf the web in peace without ever getting disturbed by those dumb friends of yours who have too much time to ping you.
Pointless rambling no.1 completed. hehe. Sorry if I wasted your precious time. But on to lucky number two.
Multi-tasking. Apparently a female-only ability. But i seem to possess it. This however does not equate with me being female. It's just that i have a different brain structure. (Although I did take this brain gender test on BBC once and it told me that i had a partial female brain)
Anyways here's how multi tasking works. At the most primitive level, in the virtual brain, we have sections A and B. Multi tasking works like hyper threading on a computer. You simply run two programs simultaneously in sections A and B. However, this poses a very interesting dilemma. What happens if something is occupying sector A, but sector B is free. What happens here, at least to me, is what I describe as a 'random walk'. Basically B decides to roam around, and if it so happens to intrude on A, then too bad A. Of course, you dont want B to shatter A's concentration. Therefore, you must engage B in something else. This is of course why I often doodle, or do something funny with my hands.
When it comes to further math though, A and B are both needed to tackle the problem at hand. Ahh....the limitations of processing power.
Third issue. Piracy.
Is piracy ever justified? They should ask this on the SAT paper, although the essay question was still pretty good. I cannot reveal it however, as I'm not meant to, or I might get disqualified.
Let me lay out a very basic right vs wrong case. Piracy is against the law, period. There's no right.
OK. So it's just a wrong case. Same with lies. Lies are definitely wrong. But then there's always that irksome word - 'justified'. Dont people in my history class just hate these phrases? How justified? How far? To what extent? Anyways I digress as usual.
Personally I like to take a long term view of piracy. In this case, I am specifically referring to the download of intellectual property, e.g. songs and videos. If it's good, and when I'm working with money to spend, I will indeed buy originals. But in my current status, I am unable to afford it.
Well actually I can, but this brings us to the economic concept of 'opportunity cost' - or the next best alternative forgone. By buying music, I am no longer able to buy other stuff, like food. So weighing the pros and cons, I have to decide that spending my money on food is more worthwhile than on music. But with p2p sharing software, we now have free goods. So in essence, there is no longer opportunity cost on music, which gives me the incentive to download as much as I want, cos I'll never tire of the amount I have.
So here's the question: Should I spend my money on the more important things and deprive myself of music? Or should I just spend my money on the important things and get free exposure to music?
In my perspective, I benefit. But how about the artists and all?
Well, some people claim that piracy is a 'marketing virus'. In other words, artists 'accidentally' release their music on public servers, and let people listen to them, which then encourages people to buy their music. So in fact, the good artists may see a boost in sales due to advertising of their music. But what's all this fuss about artists losing money? Well, I'm not too sure whether they profit or lose out overall but I think the artists losing money are the ones who just cant make the grade.
Piracy in fact possible reduces the distortions of what economists call 'asymmetric information'. In other words, because there's a lack of information, people are unsure of what to buy, as they are unsure of the value of certain goods. So people really lose out if they waste their money on lousy music. But with the advent of piracy, we can now listen to songs. And differentiate the good albums from the bad ones.
Whether we love the artists a lot to support them by buying their albums however was the core of the discussion.
Essentially, it is ethically and legally wrong. Period. Full stop. Finito.
But why cant the music industry like spare us asians the stupidity of the exchange rate and charge us music at the same price, but just change the little currency sign?
Well, this is due to possible price leaks. Take drugs. Pharmaceutical companies spend millions researching and developing drugs because there's a lucrative and wealthy market to tap into, such as in the US. But they wouldnt mind lowering the prices for let's say a poor taxi driver in India. Cos they could still stand to make a profit. However, what happens when someone goes to India, buys a whole load of cheap medicine, and smuggles it back into the US, then selling it at a slightly lower price which allows them to profit but loses the pharmaceutical companies a lot of money? Well. These are the culprits who are responsible for expensive drugs - cos they force 'pharms' to charge high standard rates.
Anyways, relating this back to intellectual property such as music, people could just buy cheap music here and bring it back to the US. So we should really point at these culprits who ruin a perfectly good idea. Of course, the music industry could in fact be greedy moguls who want to suck us dry.
So what's the solution to this ethical dilemma? Note that this dilemma only applies to those who feel guilt aboult illegal downloading of music and would want to buy the originals: We want to buy original music, but it's just out of our price range for several different reasons, and we download music to allow us to enjoy the music as well as to help us differentiate between good and bad albums and artists, and therefore make more beneficial choices should we come into some cash and decide to purchase an original CD; however, in the first place it is legally wrong for us to violate copyright laws through our file sharing, and brings us back to square one where we want to buy the originals but cant 'afford' it, and are at an ethical conundrum as to whether to violate the law or not.
Whoa long conclusion there. But there's the dilemma. Help me solve it.
1) The clarification of Windows Live Messenger, or equivalent, status-es (not sure what the plural of status is)
2) The basic principles of multi-tasking
3) The tenets of piracy
Lol. Sounds so bombastic. But here are three issues I remember from a long day today.
Wait. Didn't I have my SATs today? But who wants to know that? I'm sure you all rather hear about more useful stuff...
So let me start with the first. Upon flipping to Windows Live Messenger now, I see 5 modes. Well in reality 4, but I'll explain the last one. The first 4 are 'Online', 'Busy', 'Away', the bemusing 'Out to Lunch' at 12.40am and the fifth one is 'Appear offline', which you can't see but its existence is acknowledged. It's kind of like the flaw when people argue about whether God really exists. They claim that you cant prove what you cannot see. Well you can prove that appear offline is being used eventhough you cant see it.
Anyways, here's what they really mean in my dictionary of messenger slang.
'Online' - Hi. I'm supposedly on right now and you can just message me. But if I dont reply, that means I'm not really on, just that I left my messenger on and in fact I'm really away, so ignore the 'online' status.
BOTTOMLINE: Dubious status. More information needed.
'Busy' - Hi. I'm busy right now. So I shouldnt actually be saying hi because i dont have the time to talk. Anyhow, dont expect a reply. If you do get one, that means I'm currently on selective chat mode, in which I pick the convos i want to reply to or initiate the convos I'm interested in. But at the very least, I have informed you of the fact that I'm busy - or I'll be if i start talking to you, which is why you're not going to get that urgent reply you need.
BOTTOMLINE: I use this all the time. And it works. And the nudges dont vibrate your desktop or make loud noises.
DISCLAIMER : I understand that this status is shown by default when certain programs are running.
'Away' - This is an interesting one. It's probably quite similar to online. Possible differences could include use of a screensaver. Enlighten me if there are further activities that might automatically trigger the away mode. But here's what it says most of the time.
Hi, I'm away as you can see. So obviously dont expect any replies, unless I'm telepathic. Which I possibly am because there's a slight chance that I'll be away and reply to you. In other words, like Mr. Busy, I am possibly on 'selective chat mode'. But instead of being too busy to talk to you, I'm just too distant. As in you're standing together with me, but we might as well be standing on opposite sides of the universe.
BOTTOMLINE: The 'aways' are usually away. However, there are stray occasions where the away people are online. And the online people are usually away. So maybe a change of status is needed?
DISCLAIMER: Again, absence from the computer enables this mode by default. Also, some people leave their computers on all day and cant be fussed to change their mode.
'Out to Lunch' - I love this one. It's got to be the funniest one ever.
Hi. I'm out to lunch as you can see. I'm really jetlagged, which is why I'm eating lunch at 1am in the morning, or 7pm at night. Although I'm actually going to have breakfast/dinner now, I'm just going to put 'out to lunch'.
BOTTOMLINE: Should refrain from using this and petition messenger to put in 'eating' instead.
DISCLAIMER: Well, I do understand that some people like to dwell over lunch...
So after all that rambling, what was the point of all that ranting? Well there's really no point to having status-es. Because regardless of whether you are busy, away, online, or out to lunch, you're really something else. I like to call it 'confused'. Or there's always the alternative - 'appear offline'. This has got to be the best thing ever. Hate all those messenger convos that pop up? Just too popular? Well, with 'appear offline', you can now surf the web in peace without ever getting disturbed by those dumb friends of yours who have too much time to ping you.
Pointless rambling no.1 completed. hehe. Sorry if I wasted your precious time. But on to lucky number two.
Multi-tasking. Apparently a female-only ability. But i seem to possess it. This however does not equate with me being female. It's just that i have a different brain structure. (Although I did take this brain gender test on BBC once and it told me that i had a partial female brain)
Anyways here's how multi tasking works. At the most primitive level, in the virtual brain, we have sections A and B. Multi tasking works like hyper threading on a computer. You simply run two programs simultaneously in sections A and B. However, this poses a very interesting dilemma. What happens if something is occupying sector A, but sector B is free. What happens here, at least to me, is what I describe as a 'random walk'. Basically B decides to roam around, and if it so happens to intrude on A, then too bad A. Of course, you dont want B to shatter A's concentration. Therefore, you must engage B in something else. This is of course why I often doodle, or do something funny with my hands.
When it comes to further math though, A and B are both needed to tackle the problem at hand. Ahh....the limitations of processing power.
Third issue. Piracy.
Is piracy ever justified? They should ask this on the SAT paper, although the essay question was still pretty good. I cannot reveal it however, as I'm not meant to, or I might get disqualified.
Let me lay out a very basic right vs wrong case. Piracy is against the law, period. There's no right.
OK. So it's just a wrong case. Same with lies. Lies are definitely wrong. But then there's always that irksome word - 'justified'. Dont people in my history class just hate these phrases? How justified? How far? To what extent? Anyways I digress as usual.
Personally I like to take a long term view of piracy. In this case, I am specifically referring to the download of intellectual property, e.g. songs and videos. If it's good, and when I'm working with money to spend, I will indeed buy originals. But in my current status, I am unable to afford it.
Well actually I can, but this brings us to the economic concept of 'opportunity cost' - or the next best alternative forgone. By buying music, I am no longer able to buy other stuff, like food. So weighing the pros and cons, I have to decide that spending my money on food is more worthwhile than on music. But with p2p sharing software, we now have free goods. So in essence, there is no longer opportunity cost on music, which gives me the incentive to download as much as I want, cos I'll never tire of the amount I have.
So here's the question: Should I spend my money on the more important things and deprive myself of music? Or should I just spend my money on the important things and get free exposure to music?
In my perspective, I benefit. But how about the artists and all?
Well, some people claim that piracy is a 'marketing virus'. In other words, artists 'accidentally' release their music on public servers, and let people listen to them, which then encourages people to buy their music. So in fact, the good artists may see a boost in sales due to advertising of their music. But what's all this fuss about artists losing money? Well, I'm not too sure whether they profit or lose out overall but I think the artists losing money are the ones who just cant make the grade.
Piracy in fact possible reduces the distortions of what economists call 'asymmetric information'. In other words, because there's a lack of information, people are unsure of what to buy, as they are unsure of the value of certain goods. So people really lose out if they waste their money on lousy music. But with the advent of piracy, we can now listen to songs. And differentiate the good albums from the bad ones.
Whether we love the artists a lot to support them by buying their albums however was the core of the discussion.
Essentially, it is ethically and legally wrong. Period. Full stop. Finito.
But why cant the music industry like spare us asians the stupidity of the exchange rate and charge us music at the same price, but just change the little currency sign?
Well, this is due to possible price leaks. Take drugs. Pharmaceutical companies spend millions researching and developing drugs because there's a lucrative and wealthy market to tap into, such as in the US. But they wouldnt mind lowering the prices for let's say a poor taxi driver in India. Cos they could still stand to make a profit. However, what happens when someone goes to India, buys a whole load of cheap medicine, and smuggles it back into the US, then selling it at a slightly lower price which allows them to profit but loses the pharmaceutical companies a lot of money? Well. These are the culprits who are responsible for expensive drugs - cos they force 'pharms' to charge high standard rates.
Anyways, relating this back to intellectual property such as music, people could just buy cheap music here and bring it back to the US. So we should really point at these culprits who ruin a perfectly good idea. Of course, the music industry could in fact be greedy moguls who want to suck us dry.
So what's the solution to this ethical dilemma? Note that this dilemma only applies to those who feel guilt aboult illegal downloading of music and would want to buy the originals: We want to buy original music, but it's just out of our price range for several different reasons, and we download music to allow us to enjoy the music as well as to help us differentiate between good and bad albums and artists, and therefore make more beneficial choices should we come into some cash and decide to purchase an original CD; however, in the first place it is legally wrong for us to violate copyright laws through our file sharing, and brings us back to square one where we want to buy the originals but cant 'afford' it, and are at an ethical conundrum as to whether to violate the law or not.
Whoa long conclusion there. But there's the dilemma. Help me solve it.
Friday, October 13, 2006
Untitled
Yes. This post is untitled.
Why?
Because today flew by really fast and I havent had time to dwell on things. SATs are tomorrow and the funny thing is I've only started looking at practice tests this week, namely Tuesday.
I guess you could call that last minute.
I'm aiming for a perfect score of 2400 - lol wont be easy if the paper comes out horrible.
Ever had a day where you couldnt find time to dwell on the day's experiences? Caught up in the routine of our daily schedules, buffered on all sides by oppressing, albeit sometimes unnecessary, pressures? This isn't what humans are meant to be like.
The rat race is getting crazier and crazier every day. And sometimes we just can't stop, or we'll be left behind.
But stop we must. Cos sometimes it's preferable to be left behind, then to tire yourself staying in front.
Recuperate. Refresh yourself. Seek rejuvenation in God.
Then run.
But don't run towards the worldly standards of success - money, achievements, e.t.c
Look to eternity. Fight the good fight. Finish the race. Keep the faith. Cos the crown of righteousness awaits.
Why?
Because today flew by really fast and I havent had time to dwell on things. SATs are tomorrow and the funny thing is I've only started looking at practice tests this week, namely Tuesday.
I guess you could call that last minute.
I'm aiming for a perfect score of 2400 - lol wont be easy if the paper comes out horrible.
Ever had a day where you couldnt find time to dwell on the day's experiences? Caught up in the routine of our daily schedules, buffered on all sides by oppressing, albeit sometimes unnecessary, pressures? This isn't what humans are meant to be like.
The rat race is getting crazier and crazier every day. And sometimes we just can't stop, or we'll be left behind.
But stop we must. Cos sometimes it's preferable to be left behind, then to tire yourself staying in front.
Recuperate. Refresh yourself. Seek rejuvenation in God.
Then run.
But don't run towards the worldly standards of success - money, achievements, e.t.c
Look to eternity. Fight the good fight. Finish the race. Keep the faith. Cos the crown of righteousness awaits.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Annoying habits..
Taking a break from SAT revision..
Want to know what I find an annoying habit?
That guys dont wash their hands before leaving the bathroom.
But then should I be surprised? I remember reading about a survey somewhere (can't quite recall at the moment where it was) that a higher percentage of guys fail to wash their hands compared to women.
You men, you are a disgrace.
But here are some tips for those of you who get irked by non-hand washers.
And you might laugh, but handwashing after using the bathroom is one of the most fundamental hygiene practices. Apparently a lot of food poisoning cases, and stuff like herpes is caused by coming in contact with other people's leftover hand 'prints' or your own germs.
So I thought about the issue and wondered, what practical steps have mankind taken to resolve this hygiene issue when indoctrination fails?
But honestly, why dont people just wash their hands in the first place? It only takes 10 - 15 seconds.
Bleargh.
Want to know what I find an annoying habit?
That guys dont wash their hands before leaving the bathroom.
But then should I be surprised? I remember reading about a survey somewhere (can't quite recall at the moment where it was) that a higher percentage of guys fail to wash their hands compared to women.
You men, you are a disgrace.
But here are some tips for those of you who get irked by non-hand washers.
- Go to the nearest cubicle and pull our some toilet paper, touching the door knob with the toilet paper instead of your bare unprotected and clean hands.
- Wait. Wait. Wait. When someone opens the door, rush out.
- This is best done with a friend. Use the bathroom and pretend to dally, but as soon as he ignorantly touches the contaminated door knob, get out of there.
- Touch the door itself. Sometimes the door is never fully closed and therefore you can grab hold of the wooden door itself. I recommend grabbing the bit BELOW the knob. Why? Cos wood apparently harbours bacteria longer than the metal knob. And you're not the only one to grab the door itself. Only that most people tend to reach for a comfortable height. However, this is still not a recommended method and I highly suggest you find the nearest sink upon exiting.
And you might laugh, but handwashing after using the bathroom is one of the most fundamental hygiene practices. Apparently a lot of food poisoning cases, and stuff like herpes is caused by coming in contact with other people's leftover hand 'prints' or your own germs.
So I thought about the issue and wondered, what practical steps have mankind taken to resolve this hygiene issue when indoctrination fails?
- The door-less toilet. Yep. You see it nearly all the time in shopping malls. I am highly supportive of this idea.
- The toilet with the always-open door. Same concept except that the door-less toilet was probably an evolution of this concept.
- Getting rid of urinals and all and only having cubicles in the place. Then before users are allowed to leave the cubicle, they have to wash their hands in this inbuilt sink in the door and get their hands certified as clean by a scanner before the door unlocks itself. If not, stay locked inside your germ infested cubicle for trying to contaminate the world with your germs.
- A doorknob that yells "GO WASH YOUR HANDS" when someone who hasnt done so touches it.
- In built sterilisers in door knobs. That would be an awesome...ly expensive option.
But honestly, why dont people just wash their hands in the first place? It only takes 10 - 15 seconds.
Bleargh.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
A life or death question?
After the initial 'euphoria' of my blog release, after the apparently cycnical second post, and the randomness of the third post, here's something of consequence to think about. And consider carefully what you're about to read.
Suppose one day you were walking down the street and someone came up to you one day and asked, "What is my purpose in life?"
How would you answer that?
Well firstly you might think that he's suicidal. I would. At the very least, he's confused, and can find no direction, lost in the bustle of life, aimlessly wandering.
If you told him he had no purpose in life, he'll probably just step in front of a bus right in front of your eyes. Bad idea.
If you told him that his purpose was to enjoy himself, he might reply he tried but found no eternal happiness - when the cash ran dry, his happiness evaporated.
If you told him that he was here to make a difference in the world, he would probably reply with the fact that he can't even make a difference in his life, let alone in the world.
If you told him we're merely a product of the stuff, of this so called evolution, and that we find our own purpose in life, he might just spent the next few months doing some desperate soul searching, before throwing himself off his balcony, because he found none. Another bad idea.
Sounds like a worst-case scenario. But it's not totally unrealistic. How often are we so caught up in routine, in our short term delirium, in our pursuit of the neverending goal of success, that we lose sight of the bigger picture? Of the fact that there is a bigger picture? That there exists an ultimate purpose behind all the short term goals of success and wealth, of pleasure and power, that this world blares at you? That your life is not defined by others but by the One who created you and gave you a role to fulfill on this earth before returning to Him?
Step back and take some time to discover the truth. The truth behind your life. Because the truth will set you free. And then you will no longer be captive to the chains of this world.
A lot of people ask me why I'm always grinning or happy all the time. Well, here's my answer:
I have found THE truth, the one and only truth. My chains are gone. I am free.
Would you like to be as well?
Suppose one day you were walking down the street and someone came up to you one day and asked, "What is my purpose in life?"
How would you answer that?
Well firstly you might think that he's suicidal. I would. At the very least, he's confused, and can find no direction, lost in the bustle of life, aimlessly wandering.
If you told him he had no purpose in life, he'll probably just step in front of a bus right in front of your eyes. Bad idea.
If you told him that his purpose was to enjoy himself, he might reply he tried but found no eternal happiness - when the cash ran dry, his happiness evaporated.
If you told him that he was here to make a difference in the world, he would probably reply with the fact that he can't even make a difference in his life, let alone in the world.
If you told him we're merely a product of the stuff, of this so called evolution, and that we find our own purpose in life, he might just spent the next few months doing some desperate soul searching, before throwing himself off his balcony, because he found none. Another bad idea.
Sounds like a worst-case scenario. But it's not totally unrealistic. How often are we so caught up in routine, in our short term delirium, in our pursuit of the neverending goal of success, that we lose sight of the bigger picture? Of the fact that there is a bigger picture? That there exists an ultimate purpose behind all the short term goals of success and wealth, of pleasure and power, that this world blares at you? That your life is not defined by others but by the One who created you and gave you a role to fulfill on this earth before returning to Him?
Step back and take some time to discover the truth. The truth behind your life. Because the truth will set you free. And then you will no longer be captive to the chains of this world.
A lot of people ask me why I'm always grinning or happy all the time. Well, here's my answer:
I have found THE truth, the one and only truth. My chains are gone. I am free.
Would you like to be as well?
Random Thought #1
Google bought YouTube this week for around $1.6 billion. But that's not what's on my mind.
We all know that Google is such a well know search engine, that the phrase 'to google' has become almost synonymous with web searching. In fact, this blog is powered by google search as well.
So i wonder, how many people google names? Like names of friends, or specifically their own names?
Apparently there are two teachers from my school who do it. But i wonder how common this phenomenon is?
I would set up an experiment by posting the names of everyone i knew here and observe whether their name googling directed them here, except that it's not wise to name names in blogs. So I guess my would-be-brilliant plan is foiled.
But has anyone reading this googled their name at least once?
We all know that Google is such a well know search engine, that the phrase 'to google' has become almost synonymous with web searching. In fact, this blog is powered by google search as well.
So i wonder, how many people google names? Like names of friends, or specifically their own names?
Apparently there are two teachers from my school who do it. But i wonder how common this phenomenon is?
I would set up an experiment by posting the names of everyone i knew here and observe whether their name googling directed them here, except that it's not wise to name names in blogs. So I guess my would-be-brilliant plan is foiled.
But has anyone reading this googled their name at least once?
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Of blogs and hogs
Lol. Yes people I have a blog.
Anyways was going to post this yesterday but nature, as in bedtime, called:
What is up with these trends? We have the handphone trend, the music player trend, the myspace/friendster/hi5/ringo/whateverthoseotherspacesare trends and the blog trend. Just to clarify here, I'm not against ALL of the above, but I do believe each entails a certain necessity. Like the other day, I saw a 6 year old kid with a handphone that probably costed the parents RM1500 and an iPod Video (don't even bother to tell me how much this one costs). I'm surprised our so call epidemic of snatch thefts havent worked their way to these little kids, who are easier pickings then big fat women who will flatten you.
Incidentally, I like to call this my column, not my blog. Hm. This probably means I should change the name of myblog COLUMN. But I digress.
Ah yes. Trends. Someone mentioned (won't name names) to me today how I got a blog because everyone has one. Well here's my reply: Do you have an iPod (or insert equivalent) because everyone has one or because you need one? Let's look at this myspace/friendster thing - someone tell me what is the point of having something like that. "To keep in touch with my friends". Hmm. That's a strange one - why not just email the person? Or call him? I wonder - how much advertising revenue do these companies get from the amount of irrational traffic on these 'connecting' sites? Last i remembered, Rupert Murdoch's news corporation bought myspace for $580 million.
Give me a minute. I think I'm going to start up a new community now and put video sharing functions on it. Should be able to get a fair price of $2billion on it by next August.
Anyways, speaking about 'irrational traffic', Malaysians are probably the worst drivers on the road. Prepare for my one and only traffic gripe - I promise not to repeat this gripe ever despite my frustrations at the stupidity of drivers and their road hogginess.
Was on my way home from school today and we got caught in this huge traffic jam. So thinking it was caused by today being a Selangor public holiday, we queued up for quite a few minutes. Only to realise that everyone was slowing down to see a car accident. I can imagine what the first few minutes of the crash must have been for the victims. Their car is smashed and they need some help and sure enough a lot of attention comes. Pairs of eyes drive by, fingers pointing and gesturing wildly in their cars. Makes you wonder who the first person to stop will be. I wonder, if the Malaysian police propped up partitions around the scene, whether people will still stop to try to see through the opaque partition to the what-must-be-an-accident-scene behind.
Still, this wasnt the worst incident ever. Me and my brother got stuck in a traffic jam for nearly an hour once. Just to find out that it was due to a bus breakdown. Of course, you would think that being a bus breakdown, that would have limited the number of lanes on the road. Except that the bus which had broken down had stopped in the emergency lane (incidentally, this lane which should be left free for emergencies, hence the name 'emergency lane', are just used by Malaysian drivers during traffic jams at rush hour, probably because they're in an 'emergency' to get home). Thus meaning that all the lanes on the road were free! Sheer idiocy. Makes my blood boil. This dearth of road proficiency and courtesy is probably down to all that "duit kopi" being passed around at the JPJ:
"Hi. I'm really lousy at driving but I need my license so that I can help clog up our already very busy roads with my idiotic road hogging driving skills" *passes money to invigilator*
"OK. Berhenti di sini. Saya akan memandu untuk awak." (Ok. Stop here. I'll drive for you)
*Both get out of car and swap places. The invigilator then drives the student back to the center, after which they swap places and the student finishes with her parking (although i question whether they even learn how to park, looking at how horrendous people are when it comes to parking judgment)*
"Sangat baik. Saya beri kamu markah penuh. Ambil lesen kamu minggu hadapan" (Very good. I'll give you full marks. Come collect your license next week)
Here's how that scene will look like in twenty years.
"Hi. I'm really lousy at driving but I need my license so that I can help clog up our already very busy roads with my idiotic road hogging driving skills" *passes money to invigilator*
"OK. Berhenti di sini. Saya akan memandu untuk awak." (Ok. Stop here. I'll drive for you)
*Both get out of car and swap places. The invigilator then proceeds to drive the student back to the center but steers the car into the drain. Cos he bribed the invigilator 20 years ago for his license*
How do we solve the Malaysian driving conundrum? Beats me. Maybe I should just buy a tow truck and tow all these people's cars to a scrap metal yard.
Anyways was going to post this yesterday but nature, as in bedtime, called:
What is up with these trends? We have the handphone trend, the music player trend, the myspace/friendster/hi5/ringo/whateverthoseotherspacesare trends and the blog trend. Just to clarify here, I'm not against ALL of the above, but I do believe each entails a certain necessity. Like the other day, I saw a 6 year old kid with a handphone that probably costed the parents RM1500 and an iPod Video (don't even bother to tell me how much this one costs). I'm surprised our so call epidemic of snatch thefts havent worked their way to these little kids, who are easier pickings then big fat women who will flatten you.
Incidentally, I like to call this my column, not my blog. Hm. This probably means I should change the name of my
Ah yes. Trends. Someone mentioned (won't name names) to me today how I got a blog because everyone has one. Well here's my reply: Do you have an iPod (or insert equivalent) because everyone has one or because you need one? Let's look at this myspace/friendster thing - someone tell me what is the point of having something like that. "To keep in touch with my friends". Hmm. That's a strange one - why not just email the person? Or call him? I wonder - how much advertising revenue do these companies get from the amount of irrational traffic on these 'connecting' sites? Last i remembered, Rupert Murdoch's news corporation bought myspace for $580 million.
Give me a minute. I think I'm going to start up a new community now and put video sharing functions on it. Should be able to get a fair price of $2billion on it by next August.
Anyways, speaking about 'irrational traffic', Malaysians are probably the worst drivers on the road. Prepare for my one and only traffic gripe - I promise not to repeat this gripe ever despite my frustrations at the stupidity of drivers and their road hogginess.
Was on my way home from school today and we got caught in this huge traffic jam. So thinking it was caused by today being a Selangor public holiday, we queued up for quite a few minutes. Only to realise that everyone was slowing down to see a car accident. I can imagine what the first few minutes of the crash must have been for the victims. Their car is smashed and they need some help and sure enough a lot of attention comes. Pairs of eyes drive by, fingers pointing and gesturing wildly in their cars. Makes you wonder who the first person to stop will be. I wonder, if the Malaysian police propped up partitions around the scene, whether people will still stop to try to see through the opaque partition to the what-must-be-an-accident-scene behind.
Still, this wasnt the worst incident ever. Me and my brother got stuck in a traffic jam for nearly an hour once. Just to find out that it was due to a bus breakdown. Of course, you would think that being a bus breakdown, that would have limited the number of lanes on the road. Except that the bus which had broken down had stopped in the emergency lane (incidentally, this lane which should be left free for emergencies, hence the name 'emergency lane', are just used by Malaysian drivers during traffic jams at rush hour, probably because they're in an 'emergency' to get home). Thus meaning that all the lanes on the road were free! Sheer idiocy. Makes my blood boil. This dearth of road proficiency and courtesy is probably down to all that "duit kopi" being passed around at the JPJ:
"Hi. I'm really lousy at driving but I need my license so that I can help clog up our already very busy roads with my idiotic road hogging driving skills" *passes money to invigilator*
"OK. Berhenti di sini. Saya akan memandu untuk awak." (Ok. Stop here. I'll drive for you)
*Both get out of car and swap places. The invigilator then drives the student back to the center, after which they swap places and the student finishes with her parking (although i question whether they even learn how to park, looking at how horrendous people are when it comes to parking judgment)*
"Sangat baik. Saya beri kamu markah penuh. Ambil lesen kamu minggu hadapan" (Very good. I'll give you full marks. Come collect your license next week)
Here's how that scene will look like in twenty years.
"Hi. I'm really lousy at driving but I need my license so that I can help clog up our already very busy roads with my idiotic road hogging driving skills" *passes money to invigilator*
"OK. Berhenti di sini. Saya akan memandu untuk awak." (Ok. Stop here. I'll drive for you)
*Both get out of car and swap places. The invigilator then proceeds to drive the student back to the center but steers the car into the drain. Cos he bribed the invigilator 20 years ago for his license*
How do we solve the Malaysian driving conundrum? Beats me. Maybe I should just buy a tow truck and tow all these people's cars to a scrap metal yard.
Monday, October 09, 2006
The Great Blogging Experiment
Blogs seem to be the craze nowadays. Which is why I've decided to spend the past minute creating this blog. And therefore this blog is aptly named "The Great Blogging Experiment" - I'm going to see what makes a blog great.
So I was considering the following:
1) Do people really like to read about what you did throughout the day - as routine as it was?
2) Do people enjoy reading insightful experiences?
3) How much does humour influence the 'enjoy-ability' of the post?
4) How deep should your thoughts run - before people get bored of reading?
5) Do people enjoy looking at pictures? (I'm not a camera kind of person btw)
6) How personal (in a positive way) can a blog get?
7) If you could measure your blog on a scale, what would be on both ends - besides good and bad?
Of course this list of questions could possibly go on if I had more time.
But, enough said. Let the random-ness begin....
Tomorrow that is - I need to go sleep now :p
*afternote: I think it's quite perverse how I have to wake up at 6 and reach school around 7.40 for registration when my first class is at 11.
So I was considering the following:
1) Do people really like to read about what you did throughout the day - as routine as it was?
2) Do people enjoy reading insightful experiences?
3) How much does humour influence the 'enjoy-ability' of the post?
4) How deep should your thoughts run - before people get bored of reading?
5) Do people enjoy looking at pictures? (I'm not a camera kind of person btw)
6) How personal (in a positive way) can a blog get?
7) If you could measure your blog on a scale, what would be on both ends - besides good and bad?
Of course this list of questions could possibly go on if I had more time.
But, enough said. Let the random-ness begin....
Tomorrow that is - I need to go sleep now :p
*afternote: I think it's quite perverse how I have to wake up at 6 and reach school around 7.40 for registration when my first class is at 11.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)