There's an interesting article on the some of the worst predictions for 2006 at http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/dec2006/db20061229_154029.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_businessweek+exclusives
One of them I relish most was the one from Karl Rove for the 2006 election:
"I'm looking at all of these [polls]…and adding them up. I add up to a Republican Senate and a Republican House. You may end up with a different math, but you are entitled to your math, and I'm entitled to THE math."
Well, we don't need to say much to that. As to Rove, it's about time he goes back to his elementary school math.
The other one was from one of the YouTube cofounder, Chen:
"There's just not that many videos I want to watch."
when he commented in March 2005 about his worry of the YouTube popularity. You may say all that you can, and certainly having 100 million views of clips on the website, shows some strength of some interesting videos.
Which reminds me of a video I saw on YouTube one time: I watched a video from a related link from another site on storm chasers, and that linked video on YouTube was pretty cool (about a bunch of guys chasing a tornedo and was hit by big hail storm). Then, I searched around to see other "interesting" storm chasing or weather related videos. One of them struck me in particular: The title was extreme weather. All the comments were like "wow, the worst storm i've ever seen", yada yada. So, I viewed it....and wasted 0:45 minutes of my time looking at some rainfall (mild one) in someone's backyard...through some glass door and flyscreen. I went like, it must be a joke. I'm sure it's a joke. But there you have it, 100 million views and how many useless ones that are big turnoffs? From then on (and I didn't start out on it anyways), I don't really view much on YouTube. I would venture, that 90% of it are losers stuffs like the extreme-weather clip I watched.
So, you may say all you can, that YouTube is cool and all, it has yet to get me excited about it. As to MySpace, forget it.
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Saturday, December 30, 2006
2006: And for the rest of the world...
To take stock of 2006, we'll look at what's around us...
It's not as sanguine to see how the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gap of wealth between rich and poor is widening in not only US, but around the world. There's still much suffering among the poor in all parts of the world. I miss out alot of what falls in between, but it doesn't look that pretty either.
Someday, I'll ditch what I'm doing for-profit, to cross over to the not-for-profit world. And one of these days, I'll ditch meat and go vegetarian. I don't want any more killings. But a medium-rare juicy steak is still too irresistible.
I'm still hopeful. I'm always hopeful, that tomorrow will be better. I hope you are too, my friend.
It's not as sanguine to see how the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gap of wealth between rich and poor is widening in not only US, but around the world. There's still much suffering among the poor in all parts of the world. I miss out alot of what falls in between, but it doesn't look that pretty either.
Someday, I'll ditch what I'm doing for-profit, to cross over to the not-for-profit world. And one of these days, I'll ditch meat and go vegetarian. I don't want any more killings. But a medium-rare juicy steak is still too irresistible.
I'm still hopeful. I'm always hopeful, that tomorrow will be better. I hope you are too, my friend.
2006: Taking stock...
It's about time to take stock of 2006. It's a good year, all in all. My husband found his calling (after ditching basic research in science). Kids are doing well in schools and growing healthy and nice. I've had ideas in my head as well, although nothing concrete has been done this year.
And parents are doing well in health, after a few episodes. And I've got a new nephew baby whom I look forward to seeing, and my sis and bro-in-law look to have made some breaks in their business venture. And my big sis has found her bearings with this guy. And my brother has found his way back into the workforce after (a somewhat coerced) early retirement. And my youngest sis is doing well with her family.
2006 has been a good year, and I look forward to 2007. :)
PS: Would someone put on some music to celebrate the countdown? :>
And parents are doing well in health, after a few episodes. And I've got a new nephew baby whom I look forward to seeing, and my sis and bro-in-law look to have made some breaks in their business venture. And my big sis has found her bearings with this guy. And my brother has found his way back into the workforce after (a somewhat coerced) early retirement. And my youngest sis is doing well with her family.
2006 has been a good year, and I look forward to 2007. :)
PS: Would someone put on some music to celebrate the countdown? :>
Friday, December 29, 2006
Such a heart-warming movie...
Have you seen that movie While You Were Sleeping? (The rather old one by Sandra Bullock and Bill Pullman.) Yes, yes, yes, the plots are predictable, and all. But it's so heart-warming. I really love it. :)
It even started me on this DVD spending spree, and I just got Open Range as well. Not that I'm a great fan of westerns or Kevin Kostner, but the movie is very well made. And I've got a whole bunch of DVD's for the kids. For now, it's Pixar's mostly, cuz their movies are so well made, and the stories are great, with no adults jokes like Dreamworks' that kids might not understand. And yes, Aristocats too, and probably Fantasia. But I'm not sure if I want to start my daughter on the path of "princess only" movies like Cinderalla. Oh, and Wallace and Gromit as well. Kids love them.
It even started me on this DVD spending spree, and I just got Open Range as well. Not that I'm a great fan of westerns or Kevin Kostner, but the movie is very well made. And I've got a whole bunch of DVD's for the kids. For now, it's Pixar's mostly, cuz their movies are so well made, and the stories are great, with no adults jokes like Dreamworks' that kids might not understand. And yes, Aristocats too, and probably Fantasia. But I'm not sure if I want to start my daughter on the path of "princess only" movies like Cinderalla. Oh, and Wallace and Gromit as well. Kids love them.
Thursday, December 28, 2006
On standard testing students in US...
There's an interesting article in New York times -- http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/27/education/27education.html?pagewanted=all -- on how some counties in NY have been dealing with standard tests and the issue of immigrant children.
There should be some upfront disclosure of my view in standard tests. I grew up with standard tests, in a country where everything is very homogeneous, and as a kid, I dealt with it pretty well, all in all.
Now that I have kids of my own who're starting out their schooling, I've come to see and be more concerned with the education system in US. There're a few things that struck me --
(1) Why does it take so long for a regulation like No Child Left Behind Act to be enacted?!? Why is it so wrong to test your kids in order to see how they're doing, and whether they need help or not?
(2) Having said that, this Act is exactly like all of those regulations and things that the Bush administration pushed forward -- well-intentioned, but amazingly naive, and very poorly executed.
(3) Why do I say that? Well, for one, if you say what you mean, you do what you say. I'm 100% behind testing the kids, but you (Bush) do not going about saying it, without backing it up with resources (funding is a thorny issue).
(4) In the execution of this Act, there is only stick and no carrot (which is a more powerful motivation tool). Schools are penalized, with the immediate side-effects of kids falling through the cracks (either get kicked out, or schools avoiding the tests for potentially marginal students, as the above article shows).
(5) Sometimes, in dealing with human and social issues, it's not as easy as doing a performance review of employees, and fire them when you want to get rid of them. In a society, you do not want to give up on anyone. I don't see that happening with this "compassionate conservative" administration. That's what's happening, in effect, with this Act. And there's no Plan B, which is exactly like how this administration deals with everything else, like the war in Iraq.
(6) Schools must be smoking if they claim that they can't standard-test immigrant children with 5 years. Five years is a long time. If the family is new immigrant, and no one speaks English, then yes, testing the children within 1 year is unrealistic. Kids need time to learn. But 2 years of rigorous learning should bring the kids up to speed.
(7) There is something else though: While we should never give up on any kids (or adults), we should accept the fact that some kids just don't like schools, or they're good at something else. These kids could be bright and all, but they quite likely won't do well in standard tests. It seems to be very politically incorrect to accept this fact, to acknowledge that some kids just won't do well in schools. Problem is, there are very few alternatives for these kids. If only there are more advocates on other vocational avenues that these kids could choose from. Just look at the shortages of all the craftsmen, like electricians, and even watchmakers. But this country seems to see that all kids should do straight-A's, given time. I respectfully disagree.
We, as parents, would also hope and wish that our kids will be the ones who do well in schools. But there's little hope that innovative approach will come out of the federal government. Let's hope that bodies like the Gates Foundation, with their clout and enthusiasm, would come up with alternatives; and other institutions will step up to the plate, and offer other choices for kids.
There should be some upfront disclosure of my view in standard tests. I grew up with standard tests, in a country where everything is very homogeneous, and as a kid, I dealt with it pretty well, all in all.
Now that I have kids of my own who're starting out their schooling, I've come to see and be more concerned with the education system in US. There're a few things that struck me --
(1) Why does it take so long for a regulation like No Child Left Behind Act to be enacted?!? Why is it so wrong to test your kids in order to see how they're doing, and whether they need help or not?
(2) Having said that, this Act is exactly like all of those regulations and things that the Bush administration pushed forward -- well-intentioned, but amazingly naive, and very poorly executed.
(3) Why do I say that? Well, for one, if you say what you mean, you do what you say. I'm 100% behind testing the kids, but you (Bush) do not going about saying it, without backing it up with resources (funding is a thorny issue).
(4) In the execution of this Act, there is only stick and no carrot (which is a more powerful motivation tool). Schools are penalized, with the immediate side-effects of kids falling through the cracks (either get kicked out, or schools avoiding the tests for potentially marginal students, as the above article shows).
(5) Sometimes, in dealing with human and social issues, it's not as easy as doing a performance review of employees, and fire them when you want to get rid of them. In a society, you do not want to give up on anyone. I don't see that happening with this "compassionate conservative" administration. That's what's happening, in effect, with this Act. And there's no Plan B, which is exactly like how this administration deals with everything else, like the war in Iraq.
(6) Schools must be smoking if they claim that they can't standard-test immigrant children with 5 years. Five years is a long time. If the family is new immigrant, and no one speaks English, then yes, testing the children within 1 year is unrealistic. Kids need time to learn. But 2 years of rigorous learning should bring the kids up to speed.
(7) There is something else though: While we should never give up on any kids (or adults), we should accept the fact that some kids just don't like schools, or they're good at something else. These kids could be bright and all, but they quite likely won't do well in standard tests. It seems to be very politically incorrect to accept this fact, to acknowledge that some kids just won't do well in schools. Problem is, there are very few alternatives for these kids. If only there are more advocates on other vocational avenues that these kids could choose from. Just look at the shortages of all the craftsmen, like electricians, and even watchmakers. But this country seems to see that all kids should do straight-A's, given time. I respectfully disagree.
We, as parents, would also hope and wish that our kids will be the ones who do well in schools. But there's little hope that innovative approach will come out of the federal government. Let's hope that bodies like the Gates Foundation, with their clout and enthusiasm, would come up with alternatives; and other institutions will step up to the plate, and offer other choices for kids.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Between Christmas and New Year...
It's hard to focus on work when it's between Christmas and New Year, and when practically nobody's around working. :)
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
On what it means when little girls wanting to be princesses...
There's an interesting article in New York Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/24/magazine/24princess.t.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin of a (feminist) mother pondering over what it means when her little girl wants to be princess, and likes only pink, though at the back of her mind, she still hopes her daughter would one day find her Prince Charming who would love and respect her and share half of the daycare.
I have a little girl and a young boy. I can understand how she feels about all these girlie things that don't do much to potentially improve the self-esteem. Having said that, I disagree with what one mother in the article says “What am I supposed to say?” when her young girl shows her something that makes her look more like little prostitutes.
I would say, tell them. Tell the kids what is proper and what is not. We should not let the commercial firms dictate what is supposed to look right or not. If a dress is too skimpy, say it. Parents have to start the assertion when they're young; not when they're 10 or 12. That would be too late.
And I would also say, all these feminism and social movement focus on just the women. Have we thought of how young boys are brought up? Have we, as parents, told the boys too, of what is respectable and what is not (clothing or behavior, for example)?
Many a time, I've heard of women saying, they're given the chance to prove themselves along their career path and they shine, and 9 out of 10 of the bosses are men who understand this. Like one of the guys I work with, who has 2 girls: His tick on it is that, he treats those who work for him like he would like his daughters to be treated in the future, and that lets him to allow the female workers to flourish.
I'm not saying, we as women have to be given the chance by men. I did not grow up in America. I grew up in a country where women and men are treated like equals (one of the most capitalist places on world - go figure it out). :) In fact, the idea of feminism never crossed my mind when I was growing up. When I was a little girl, I liked princess stickers, but I didn't like pink. I did like play-acting cooking in the kitchen. My mother is a strong-willed woman. She never told me, I can be whatever I want to be. But everyone in the house, boys or girls, do the same chores. We're expected to deliver the same results (school or sports). And that implicitly told every one of my siblings (me included) that we go out and compete as equals. We do not fret over whether we're boys or girls.
Of course, back then, things were alot more innocent. Perhaps these days, we *do* have to tell our children explicitly what we expect them to do. And you know what, children will rise up to the expectations. They will. Not that we should force our wills on them on what they should do in their life, but if we don't have expectations, they will flounder.
Sometimes, I feel impatient about all the talk of feminism and its movement. We should go out, teach our girls *and* our boys. Perhaps then, our next generation will treat each other a little more equally.
I have a little girl and a young boy. I can understand how she feels about all these girlie things that don't do much to potentially improve the self-esteem. Having said that, I disagree with what one mother in the article says “What am I supposed to say?” when her young girl shows her something that makes her look more like little prostitutes.
I would say, tell them. Tell the kids what is proper and what is not. We should not let the commercial firms dictate what is supposed to look right or not. If a dress is too skimpy, say it. Parents have to start the assertion when they're young; not when they're 10 or 12. That would be too late.
And I would also say, all these feminism and social movement focus on just the women. Have we thought of how young boys are brought up? Have we, as parents, told the boys too, of what is respectable and what is not (clothing or behavior, for example)?
Many a time, I've heard of women saying, they're given the chance to prove themselves along their career path and they shine, and 9 out of 10 of the bosses are men who understand this. Like one of the guys I work with, who has 2 girls: His tick on it is that, he treats those who work for him like he would like his daughters to be treated in the future, and that lets him to allow the female workers to flourish.
I'm not saying, we as women have to be given the chance by men. I did not grow up in America. I grew up in a country where women and men are treated like equals (one of the most capitalist places on world - go figure it out). :) In fact, the idea of feminism never crossed my mind when I was growing up. When I was a little girl, I liked princess stickers, but I didn't like pink. I did like play-acting cooking in the kitchen. My mother is a strong-willed woman. She never told me, I can be whatever I want to be. But everyone in the house, boys or girls, do the same chores. We're expected to deliver the same results (school or sports). And that implicitly told every one of my siblings (me included) that we go out and compete as equals. We do not fret over whether we're boys or girls.
Of course, back then, things were alot more innocent. Perhaps these days, we *do* have to tell our children explicitly what we expect them to do. And you know what, children will rise up to the expectations. They will. Not that we should force our wills on them on what they should do in their life, but if we don't have expectations, they will flounder.
Sometimes, I feel impatient about all the talk of feminism and its movement. We should go out, teach our girls *and* our boys. Perhaps then, our next generation will treat each other a little more equally.
On a President who can't read...
I can't resist this, and I have to make another entry in the journal...
Perhaps it's equally surprising, and not surprising, that reports like http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/25/business/media/25paper.html told us that George W Bush doesn't read, and that there are now reports of Laura Bush saying, the couple has indeed had the daily habit for years, of reading papers during coffee in the morning. But there is no mention what (kind of) papers this man can read, or whether it's just Laura Bush reading and him drinking coffee only.
What kind of a world is this, that we have descended to, where 50% of the populace would elect an airhead to be president, knowing that this guy can't even read or speak properly; and that the same people are comfortable with him making war decisions (or declaring wars, to begin with) where these countries are on the map.
For a reformed Christian that Bush claims himself to be, I'm wondering if he uses audio book in place of reading Bible.
Perhaps it's equally surprising, and not surprising, that reports like http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/25/business/media/25paper.html told us that George W Bush doesn't read, and that there are now reports of Laura Bush saying, the couple has indeed had the daily habit for years, of reading papers during coffee in the morning. But there is no mention what (kind of) papers this man can read, or whether it's just Laura Bush reading and him drinking coffee only.
What kind of a world is this, that we have descended to, where 50% of the populace would elect an airhead to be president, knowing that this guy can't even read or speak properly; and that the same people are comfortable with him making war decisions (or declaring wars, to begin with) where these countries are on the map.
For a reformed Christian that Bush claims himself to be, I'm wondering if he uses audio book in place of reading Bible.
Monday, December 25, 2006
'Tis the season to be jolly...
'tis the season to be jolly, fa-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la...
Strictly looking at it as a holiday, I like Christmas more than New Year.
And today, in my spare time, I'll scout ebay for some DVD's that I never intend to own, like all the Pixar animated movies. (Pixar is a good story-teller. It's not unlike Aardman Production for giving us Wallace and Gromit, although Pixar is a little more "grown-up." Dreamwork doesn't come close.)
Strictly looking at it as a holiday, I like Christmas more than New Year.
And today, in my spare time, I'll scout ebay for some DVD's that I never intend to own, like all the Pixar animated movies. (Pixar is a good story-teller. It's not unlike Aardman Production for giving us Wallace and Gromit, although Pixar is a little more "grown-up." Dreamwork doesn't come close.)
Sunday, December 24, 2006
On the Pope's call to children welfare in Christmas Mass...
There are reports like http://www.playfuls.com/news_10_6308-ROUNDUP-Pope-Recalls-Childrens-Suffering-In-Christmas-Mass.htmlon the Pope's call to the world's attention on child abuse and suffering. Before I read into a little more details, I thought he had suddenly but finally got religion to face up to the issues of child sex abuse, smuggling, and the like.
Well, the Pope mentioned child soldiers, children who're unloved, those who suffer hunger and deprivation. There's no mention of the child sex abuse and smuggling. I suppose everyone has their priorities, but I just find it hard to believe that, given the breadth and depth of the sex scandals in the church, and the other reports around the world on the suffering of children, it didn't even worth a mention with a word or two. I guess I was hopeful, and equally naive. Why would the Pope (church) pull its pants down, and draw attention to its shortcomings.
I have no doubts that the Pope has genuine care for this subject (otherwise he wouldn't even need to talk about it in the Christmas Mass), but for him to attempt to touch on the subject, and still afraid to face up to the challenge he would have placed on his own rank-and-file (at least), that's pretty whimpy. I'm disappointed.
Well, the Pope mentioned child soldiers, children who're unloved, those who suffer hunger and deprivation. There's no mention of the child sex abuse and smuggling. I suppose everyone has their priorities, but I just find it hard to believe that, given the breadth and depth of the sex scandals in the church, and the other reports around the world on the suffering of children, it didn't even worth a mention with a word or two. I guess I was hopeful, and equally naive. Why would the Pope (church) pull its pants down, and draw attention to its shortcomings.
I have no doubts that the Pope has genuine care for this subject (otherwise he wouldn't even need to talk about it in the Christmas Mass), but for him to attempt to touch on the subject, and still afraid to face up to the challenge he would have placed on his own rank-and-file (at least), that's pretty whimpy. I'm disappointed.
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Christmas panic....
Does anyone know where to find a HotWheels comforter for kids? That's the only thing left on my list. :(((
Friday, December 22, 2006
3 days to Christmas, and counting...
I remember one time I was in Spain around Christmas time, and the whole atmosphere was magical. There're lots of people with their whole family on the street, going out to buy things for Christmas. I was walking toward a church, and there's this lane leading to the church with all sorts of things on sale. People were buying Christmas trees, decors, and all. It's just joyous and cheerful. Thing is, it gave me that warm feeling of families and togetherness. Somehow, I don't quite feel that way in America, for some reason. Not sure why.
Still, I like Christmas. And I like wrapping up a year, and looking forward to another bright year. Hope you're feeling that, and looking up too, my friend. :)
Still, I like Christmas. And I like wrapping up a year, and looking forward to another bright year. Hope you're feeling that, and looking up too, my friend. :)
Thursday, December 21, 2006
On Donald Trump's moral over Miss USA...
There's an ounce of truth in Rosie O'Donnell's tirade about Donald Trump's moral bearing on the 20-year-old Miss USA who misbehaves.
Who is he to lecture on her when his personal life is as messy (if not much worse) than hers. In a way, it's not unlike a parent lecturing his/her own kid on misbehavior when the parent himself doesn't behave. It's just laughable. I would not have listened, if I were the kid.
The only difference here, with this Miss USA, is that she wants to keep the tiara and he has the control over it. That's all there is, and not because he behaves any better than any teenager. Let's make no mistake about that.
And what is he going to sue O'Donnell on anyways, that she's telling the truth about him? Not that she doesn't have a loud mouth, but Trump needs some mouthwash as well. But I suppose they both serve their purpose - they're in the entertainment business, and really this is quite entertaining.
Who is he to lecture on her when his personal life is as messy (if not much worse) than hers. In a way, it's not unlike a parent lecturing his/her own kid on misbehavior when the parent himself doesn't behave. It's just laughable. I would not have listened, if I were the kid.
The only difference here, with this Miss USA, is that she wants to keep the tiara and he has the control over it. That's all there is, and not because he behaves any better than any teenager. Let's make no mistake about that.
And what is he going to sue O'Donnell on anyways, that she's telling the truth about him? Not that she doesn't have a loud mouth, but Trump needs some mouthwash as well. But I suppose they both serve their purpose - they're in the entertainment business, and really this is quite entertaining.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
What a beta site...
Maybe I shouldn't have picked a beta site to start blogger. Today is 20th. I posted, and the server stopped responding. Reasonable person would give it another go, and so I did. It ended up being posted twice, just to see it posted to, what, 19th of December!?! That's yesterday!!! Can't the server even keep datetime straight!?!
Maybe it's time to shop for a new blogging site...
Maybe it's time to shop for a new blogging site...
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
On Bush and the war in Iraq...
Karl Rove coaches Bush well, judging by the way Bush is now able to play with words, or at least understand the nuance of the words involved -- http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/20/bush.main/
As to the we're not winning, we're not losing statement, what the heck does it tell us anyways? That our commander-in-chief is telling us, we don't know what the heck is going on; and that he doesn't know/have the details, but go ask those in the Pentagon?!? It reminds me of Ken Lay of Enron, when he could shamelessly profess publicly that he didn't know (or didn't need to know) the details of operations since he 'entrusted' his people. Well, at least Ken Lay just squandered away billions of dollars. For Bush to have authorized a war he had no freaking idea in in the first place, he squandered away hundreds of billions, and thousands of lives (both Americans and Iraqis). The moral high ground of Americans, in the eyes of the world, is also squandered away, and could take years to rebuild. It's a shame in history. It's certainly a job well done.
Every time this subject is brought up, it makes my blood boil.
As to the we're not winning, we're not losing statement, what the heck does it tell us anyways? That our commander-in-chief is telling us, we don't know what the heck is going on; and that he doesn't know/have the details, but go ask those in the Pentagon?!? It reminds me of Ken Lay of Enron, when he could shamelessly profess publicly that he didn't know (or didn't need to know) the details of operations since he 'entrusted' his people. Well, at least Ken Lay just squandered away billions of dollars. For Bush to have authorized a war he had no freaking idea in in the first place, he squandered away hundreds of billions, and thousands of lives (both Americans and Iraqis). The moral high ground of Americans, in the eyes of the world, is also squandered away, and could take years to rebuild. It's a shame in history. It's certainly a job well done.
Every time this subject is brought up, it makes my blood boil.
On Bush and the war in Iraq...
Karl Rove coaches Bush well, judging by the way Bush is now able to play with words, or at least understand the nuance of the words involved -- http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/20/bush.main/
As to the 'we're not winning, we're not losing' statement, what the heck does it tell us anyways? That our commander-in-chief is telling us, we don't know what the heck is going on; and that he doesn't know/have the details, but go ask those in the Pentagon?!? It reminds me of Ken Lay of Enron, when he could shamelessly profess publicly that he didn't know (or didn't need to know) the details of operations since he 'entrusted' his people. Well, at least Ken Lay 'just' squandered away billions of dollars. For Bush to have authorized a war he had no freaking idea in in the first place, he squandered away hundreds of billions, and thousands of lives (both Americans and Iraqis). The moral high ground of Americans, in the eyes of the world, is also squandered away, and could take years to rebuild. It's a shame in history. It's certainly a job 'well done.'
Every time this subject is brought up, it makes my blood boil.
As to the 'we're not winning, we're not losing' statement, what the heck does it tell us anyways? That our commander-in-chief is telling us, we don't know what the heck is going on; and that he doesn't know/have the details, but go ask those in the Pentagon?!? It reminds me of Ken Lay of Enron, when he could shamelessly profess publicly that he didn't know (or didn't need to know) the details of operations since he 'entrusted' his people. Well, at least Ken Lay 'just' squandered away billions of dollars. For Bush to have authorized a war he had no freaking idea in in the first place, he squandered away hundreds of billions, and thousands of lives (both Americans and Iraqis). The moral high ground of Americans, in the eyes of the world, is also squandered away, and could take years to rebuild. It's a shame in history. It's certainly a job 'well done.'
Every time this subject is brought up, it makes my blood boil.
On online auctions in china...
There's news like http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/19/technology/19ebay.html?_r=1&oref=slogin that ebay is shutting its own auction site, and puts money instead on a local joint venture.
This leads me to wonder, how many Chinese actually buy (not just browse) from online auction in China, when it's cheaper to buy things from street hawkers?!? Unlike Western countries when consumers would be paying thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars buying the real thing, like electronics and jewelries and clothings, they could be had for less than a fraction of that buying counterfeits (sometimes made in the same factory that services the name brands). It's true that it's still not the like buying, say, a real Patek. But hey, buying from online auction doesn't give you that feeling anyways.
Well, more on that market dumping in China tomorrow. Time to get some work done now. :)
This leads me to wonder, how many Chinese actually buy (not just browse) from online auction in China, when it's cheaper to buy things from street hawkers?!? Unlike Western countries when consumers would be paying thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars buying the real thing, like electronics and jewelries and clothings, they could be had for less than a fraction of that buying counterfeits (sometimes made in the same factory that services the name brands). It's true that it's still not the like buying, say, a real Patek. But hey, buying from online auction doesn't give you that feeling anyways.
Well, more on that market dumping in China tomorrow. Time to get some work done now. :)
Monday, December 18, 2006
On the efficiency of British investigation...
There's breaking news this morning that the British police might have got the murderer who killed several prostitutes in Ipswich, and there's also findings of the poisoning of the ex-Russian spy in London.
Somehow I have this impression (and this might not be substantiated by empirical evidence and statistics) that when the British is on the job, they really would get it done quite efficiently and effectively. There is something about the British as a people that is quite resilient and remarkable (WWII comes to mind). Their seriousness reminds me of Israelis. The British as their own sense of humor which can be funny too. But I dislike the undercurrent of the "class" society in Britain.
Compared those to, say, the Jon Bennet investigation in US, and the latter is just laughable.
Somehow I have this impression (and this might not be substantiated by empirical evidence and statistics) that when the British is on the job, they really would get it done quite efficiently and effectively. There is something about the British as a people that is quite resilient and remarkable (WWII comes to mind). Their seriousness reminds me of Israelis. The British as their own sense of humor which can be funny too. But I dislike the undercurrent of the "class" society in Britain.
Compared those to, say, the Jon Bennet investigation in US, and the latter is just laughable.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
On women still a minority in the corner suite...
There's an interesting article at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/business/yourmoney/17csuite.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all interviewing a few prominent women who have been or are in the corner suite of Fortune 500 companies.
One of the more interesting points came from Maggie Wilderotter who's the CEO of Citizens Communications, in that she's fortunate to have her husband with flexible work schedule (being a vineyard owner) and who can tend to the family when she couldn't make the time. I strongly agree with this. I don't believe that those ambitious and highly capable women who attend their MBA's and advanced degrees, just to tell themselves they can't make it to the top and fall on the wayside. I do believe that it's a matter of work-life balance, and when one gets to the point of starting a family, and if the spouse is not going to make that sacrifice (of pulling back from a high powered life), the woman would do it. I attest to that with my own experience.
That decision is compounded by the culture of the company that the woman works. If the company values diversity, and is flexible and accommodating to employees' work-life balance, it would work out somehow. If the company does not allow for that, and if there's no fall-back option (with extended family or spousal support), then there's really little choice for the women.
I can understand why these successful women do not want to talk about their situation (of being a minority CEO). One does not want talk about subject like this, to dilute the merits and hardwork that they've put it, simply by having a label on their head, that they're women. I work in a male-dominated field (and in a lot of cases, I'm the only woman in a room). There are obvious disadvantages, like I don't golf with the guys. So, in a way, I have to work almost doubly hard in order to make my work shine and speak for me (not that I would shrink from speaking up or standing up for myself). Do I feel that I need to complain about it? Not really. A lot of times, male employees have the same work-life balance issue as well. Thus, ultimately for the benefit of the greater good of all employees, company cultures have to take this into account. In that sense, it's not a men vs. women issue anymore.
One of the more interesting points came from Maggie Wilderotter who's the CEO of Citizens Communications, in that she's fortunate to have her husband with flexible work schedule (being a vineyard owner) and who can tend to the family when she couldn't make the time. I strongly agree with this. I don't believe that those ambitious and highly capable women who attend their MBA's and advanced degrees, just to tell themselves they can't make it to the top and fall on the wayside. I do believe that it's a matter of work-life balance, and when one gets to the point of starting a family, and if the spouse is not going to make that sacrifice (of pulling back from a high powered life), the woman would do it. I attest to that with my own experience.
That decision is compounded by the culture of the company that the woman works. If the company values diversity, and is flexible and accommodating to employees' work-life balance, it would work out somehow. If the company does not allow for that, and if there's no fall-back option (with extended family or spousal support), then there's really little choice for the women.
I can understand why these successful women do not want to talk about their situation (of being a minority CEO). One does not want talk about subject like this, to dilute the merits and hardwork that they've put it, simply by having a label on their head, that they're women. I work in a male-dominated field (and in a lot of cases, I'm the only woman in a room). There are obvious disadvantages, like I don't golf with the guys. So, in a way, I have to work almost doubly hard in order to make my work shine and speak for me (not that I would shrink from speaking up or standing up for myself). Do I feel that I need to complain about it? Not really. A lot of times, male employees have the same work-life balance issue as well. Thus, ultimately for the benefit of the greater good of all employees, company cultures have to take this into account. In that sense, it's not a men vs. women issue anymore.
Saturday, December 16, 2006
al-Fayed: Mental case or grieving father?
There've been many reports of Mohamed al-Fayed, father of Dodi al-Fayed who's the supposedly lover of Diana and who's killed in the same car crash in August 1997. One sample is the column on Lord Stevens' findings and the al-Fayed response at http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2081659.ece
There's little doubt that he's both a grieving father and a mental case, having the illusion that to hope that "If Dodi and Diana had wed and if they had children, Britain would have had, in effect, an alternative royal family. The attractive, personable Fayeds. Or the charmless German Windsors?" Ah...that would have been a nice thought, wouldn't it, to have hoped that the long dead son could have become a pseudo royal in the class-conscious Britain. I guess he could never accept the notion that his son was but one of the many lovers that Diana wrapped around her fingers, who surely enjoyed the attention of men, and that his son was just a fool. Beneath that notion is also that Diana was the noble princess that would do no wrongs. If this father has grieved privately, maybe everyone around him would not have been forced to come out and say "this emperor has no clothes on."
In any case, I guess it's just too mean for anyone to come out and tell him straight in the face that he's a mental case. His money would have made people around him continue to play nice to him.
An old father living past his beloved son is sad. His finding will probably kill him when he's already in steady decline.
There's little doubt that he's both a grieving father and a mental case, having the illusion that to hope that "If Dodi and Diana had wed and if they had children, Britain would have had, in effect, an alternative royal family. The attractive, personable Fayeds. Or the charmless German Windsors?" Ah...that would have been a nice thought, wouldn't it, to have hoped that the long dead son could have become a pseudo royal in the class-conscious Britain. I guess he could never accept the notion that his son was but one of the many lovers that Diana wrapped around her fingers, who surely enjoyed the attention of men, and that his son was just a fool. Beneath that notion is also that Diana was the noble princess that would do no wrongs. If this father has grieved privately, maybe everyone around him would not have been forced to come out and say "this emperor has no clothes on."
In any case, I guess it's just too mean for anyone to come out and tell him straight in the face that he's a mental case. His money would have made people around him continue to play nice to him.
An old father living past his beloved son is sad. His finding will probably kill him when he's already in steady decline.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Not much innovation.
The IT field is quite apt to hype. There are all these visionaries, or revolutionary product/service, which sometimes make me laugh.
If you look at it, most everything that we do today (web related stuffs, for example), whether you write it in java or c++ or pick any other languages, the underlying principle is still tcp. Everything is just building on top of those basic building blocks. Yeah, you could have soap, running over http/https, over tcp. Or you could interface from one big system to another. And what do you use? You may say, j2ee, jms, but look beneath the hood, and what will you find? Tcp.
One would think, why the heck would it take so long for something like web services to come along to *enable* heterogenous to talk. Well, the revolution is not so much in the technology, but the fact that everyone (or the big boys) at least sees that there is money to be made by pushing for industry standards.
It's quite a sad state of affair, to see that there really hasn't been any truly revolutionary technology coming about in more than two decades. Everybody's just rehashing existing stuffs, putting old wine in new bottle (if you will), and makes money by drumming up the hype. It seems like great big breakthroughs come mostly from academia and military research, and since the world is getting...er...safer, with no main villain in sight (who knows where bin Laden anyways, and the Bush administration is just farting in the wind), there's not much coming out from here either.
The way that the world is going, I'm just not very hopeful for lots of "real" innovations and breakthroughs. I hope I'm wrong.
If you look at it, most everything that we do today (web related stuffs, for example), whether you write it in java or c++ or pick any other languages, the underlying principle is still tcp. Everything is just building on top of those basic building blocks. Yeah, you could have soap, running over http/https, over tcp. Or you could interface from one big system to another. And what do you use? You may say, j2ee, jms, but look beneath the hood, and what will you find? Tcp.
One would think, why the heck would it take so long for something like web services to come along to *enable* heterogenous to talk. Well, the revolution is not so much in the technology, but the fact that everyone (or the big boys) at least sees that there is money to be made by pushing for industry standards.
It's quite a sad state of affair, to see that there really hasn't been any truly revolutionary technology coming about in more than two decades. Everybody's just rehashing existing stuffs, putting old wine in new bottle (if you will), and makes money by drumming up the hype. It seems like great big breakthroughs come mostly from academia and military research, and since the world is getting...er...safer, with no main villain in sight (who knows where bin Laden anyways, and the Bush administration is just farting in the wind), there's not much coming out from here either.
The way that the world is going, I'm just not very hopeful for lots of "real" innovations and breakthroughs. I hope I'm wrong.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
On video on demand and DVD...
I used to like going into the corner DVD store to rent DVD's. It was good deal good, 5 DVD for 2-3 days, for $10. I like purusing the DVD's in my hand.
And then I moved, and there's no DVD store nearby. I switched to MovieLink, for downloads of movies, for essentially the same (and sometimes more expensive) price. Sometimes, old movies can be had for $1.99 which is not bad. I don't need to rush to the store to return the movies to avoid late fees. The catch(es) is, the movie quality is bad (even with 500Mb size), it can take couple of hours to download (even though I have DSL), and once you start the movie, you only have one day to watch it.
And then Netflix came along. The first thing that caught my eyes was that, the selection is large. I like old movies (like, really old movies) and new movies alike, and it has almost all that I can think of. Like MovieLink, I don't need to drive to return the DVD's. And I like the one-at-a-time plan, when the DVD comes in the mail every few days. The pace is just right for me. And if Netflix doesn't screw up (intentional or otherwise) with delays in the mail, it comes out to be cheaper than even the store and definitely MovieLink. It's no wonder why I read the report that its subscription base is expanding. It even starts my interest in blog too, to write reviews every so often, when I have a strong opinion on a particular movie (if it's particularly good or bad), and feel good to see that there're alot of people sharing my opinion in voting for my reviews.
What actually started me on this blog journal was that New York Times reporting on child abuse in Africa. Such injustice. I have to write something about it. No matter that no one read about it (yet). But if it hasn't been for Netflix, I wouldn't have felt comfortable writing the opinions, and realized that it would feel quite good knowing that I'm not alone in my opinions.
I hope Netflix will be around for a long time. It's my main source of entertainment these days. And it's so convenient and reasonably priced. If it hasn't allowed me to keep count, I would not know that I had watched close to 1000 movies since childhood. It amazes myself.
And then I moved, and there's no DVD store nearby. I switched to MovieLink, for downloads of movies, for essentially the same (and sometimes more expensive) price. Sometimes, old movies can be had for $1.99 which is not bad. I don't need to rush to the store to return the movies to avoid late fees. The catch(es) is, the movie quality is bad (even with 500Mb size), it can take couple of hours to download (even though I have DSL), and once you start the movie, you only have one day to watch it.
And then Netflix came along. The first thing that caught my eyes was that, the selection is large. I like old movies (like, really old movies) and new movies alike, and it has almost all that I can think of. Like MovieLink, I don't need to drive to return the DVD's. And I like the one-at-a-time plan, when the DVD comes in the mail every few days. The pace is just right for me. And if Netflix doesn't screw up (intentional or otherwise) with delays in the mail, it comes out to be cheaper than even the store and definitely MovieLink. It's no wonder why I read the report that its subscription base is expanding. It even starts my interest in blog too, to write reviews every so often, when I have a strong opinion on a particular movie (if it's particularly good or bad), and feel good to see that there're alot of people sharing my opinion in voting for my reviews.
What actually started me on this blog journal was that New York Times reporting on child abuse in Africa. Such injustice. I have to write something about it. No matter that no one read about it (yet). But if it hasn't been for Netflix, I wouldn't have felt comfortable writing the opinions, and realized that it would feel quite good knowing that I'm not alone in my opinions.
I hope Netflix will be around for a long time. It's my main source of entertainment these days. And it's so convenient and reasonably priced. If it hasn't allowed me to keep count, I would not know that I had watched close to 1000 movies since childhood. It amazes myself.
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
On conspiracy theory around Diana's death...
There is a pretty even-handed article written by Christopher Dickey at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16188931/site/newsweek/ on Princess Diana's death and the conspiracy theory.
I really don't quite get the fuss over what could have been an accident. I remember back then when it happened, and Diana was compared to Mother Teresa since they died in the same year. I couldn't even laugh. I thought, give me a break, Diana is like Mother Teresa? She doesn't even have a toe-stand on the humanity stage.
Still, people would always be fascinated by promising or famous individuals who die young, like James Dean and Marilyn Monroe. It's always more interesting to have some conspiracy behind it. Secret services of all governments keep files on all sorts of people, not to mention a controversial exiled Royal member. To justify that any government intentionally killed her, based primarily on the issue that they had a file on her, is naive at best.
There was this air-headed woman, who married rich, and inherited all these jewelry and title, on the condition of some prenup equivalent; and then turned around and said, screw that, I want a divorce, I want to keep all heirlooms, and I still want to be Queen, that won't get much sympathy from me. At least Charles can stay faithful to one not-so-pretty woman with love and affection, Diana was all over the place and wanted attention of all men and the world. Yes, I've seen alot of women like that, and believe me, they might be pretty to look at, but they're bitch.
So, no, I won't go to a concert to commemorate a bitch. Come to think of it, why am I still using the title Princess?!?
I really don't quite get the fuss over what could have been an accident. I remember back then when it happened, and Diana was compared to Mother Teresa since they died in the same year. I couldn't even laugh. I thought, give me a break, Diana is like Mother Teresa? She doesn't even have a toe-stand on the humanity stage.
Still, people would always be fascinated by promising or famous individuals who die young, like James Dean and Marilyn Monroe. It's always more interesting to have some conspiracy behind it. Secret services of all governments keep files on all sorts of people, not to mention a controversial exiled Royal member. To justify that any government intentionally killed her, based primarily on the issue that they had a file on her, is naive at best.
There was this air-headed woman, who married rich, and inherited all these jewelry and title, on the condition of some prenup equivalent; and then turned around and said, screw that, I want a divorce, I want to keep all heirlooms, and I still want to be Queen, that won't get much sympathy from me. At least Charles can stay faithful to one not-so-pretty woman with love and affection, Diana was all over the place and wanted attention of all men and the world. Yes, I've seen alot of women like that, and believe me, they might be pretty to look at, but they're bitch.
So, no, I won't go to a concert to commemorate a bitch. Come to think of it, why am I still using the title Princess?!?
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
On the human need to expose themselves...
Some 12 years ago, when there was this guy I knew (some middle aged guy) in Australia once proudly pronounced, that he had his own website up. Back then, I thought, who would care to read someone else's personal details on the web. I wouldn't even allow my picture on the web. I had reckoned, maybe he's going through his middle life crisis.
That was 1994. Maybe I would never understand this herd mentality to feel the need to expose oneself. Well, of course, this is big now, circa 2006, when everyone wants to expose themselves, judging by the popularity of YouTube and MySpace.
I would never have considered writing blogs in the past. But I tap the keyboard faster than I write. And I don't need to keep a physical journal (save all the papers and trees and ink and pens), and someone would spare me the disk space. I say to myself, that's really quite nice. And if I really have something I want to say, that someone should hear about, it could do that too. Of course, maybe this journal would not be discovered in 50 years. That's ok with me. There really is nothing much important in this journal anyways. If there is anyone who cares to share their thoughts or argue a few points, that's even better. (I like good, healthy debates.) From these perspectives, blog is a good thing.
Perhaps my grandchildren will come to read the few trivial thoughts that their granny had decades ago, and give them a glimpse of how the world is like in 2006, that would serve a good enough purpose for blogs for me.
That was 1994. Maybe I would never understand this herd mentality to feel the need to expose oneself. Well, of course, this is big now, circa 2006, when everyone wants to expose themselves, judging by the popularity of YouTube and MySpace.
I would never have considered writing blogs in the past. But I tap the keyboard faster than I write. And I don't need to keep a physical journal (save all the papers and trees and ink and pens), and someone would spare me the disk space. I say to myself, that's really quite nice. And if I really have something I want to say, that someone should hear about, it could do that too. Of course, maybe this journal would not be discovered in 50 years. That's ok with me. There really is nothing much important in this journal anyways. If there is anyone who cares to share their thoughts or argue a few points, that's even better. (I like good, healthy debates.) From these perspectives, blog is a good thing.
Perhaps my grandchildren will come to read the few trivial thoughts that their granny had decades ago, and give them a glimpse of how the world is like in 2006, that would serve a good enough purpose for blogs for me.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Nostalgia towards irc...
Do you miss irc? Do you know what it is, by the way? I miss it in its early days, when everyone's just college kids, me included.
I remember one dude Kim (can't even remember his nick), who's been on for 10 years or so even way back when, when I started. It's way over due. Don't get me wrong. He's cool. But for him to spend some 4-6 hours irc'ing everyday for 10+ years, I would think there must be other activities that can employ his energy a little more productively.
I never went back to irc, though sometimes I missed the fun in those days. There comes a time when irc, like college days, should come to pass, and we move on, to our adulthood. It's almost like a rite of passage. I must be getting old. I feel nostalgia. :)
I remember one dude Kim (can't even remember his nick), who's been on for 10 years or so even way back when, when I started. It's way over due. Don't get me wrong. He's cool. But for him to spend some 4-6 hours irc'ing everyday for 10+ years, I would think there must be other activities that can employ his energy a little more productively.
I never went back to irc, though sometimes I missed the fun in those days. There comes a time when irc, like college days, should come to pass, and we move on, to our adulthood. It's almost like a rite of passage. I must be getting old. I feel nostalgia. :)
Sunday, December 10, 2006
On the Star War Kid video...
Have you seen the Star War Kid video on YouTube? You probably have, if you have stayed on the web longer than 10 minutes. :) I don't know about you, but I find him genuinely funny and quite adorable. And then I read those comments from various people, saying he's a loser etc etc, I simply don't understand it. Here it is, a kid who has the imagination and wit to play out his fantasy to be a jedi knight, and did some exercise along the way, I reckon it's a very good thing. I do believe that, 90% or more of those who said he's a loser would not have guts or wit as his.
Sadly, there's report that the Kid is now in hiding, and hates the world for "exposing" his fantasy.
I hope he would come out of it, and appreciate it that it's not a bad thing at all, that the world sees him as he is.
Sadly, there's report that the Kid is now in hiding, and hates the world for "exposing" his fantasy.
I hope he would come out of it, and appreciate it that it's not a bad thing at all, that the world sees him as he is.
All work. No play.
On a day when you work 13 hours a day, you don't think and you don't play. That's my day today. At least I was finally able to squeeze in a DVD in the end. But I've got to increase my sleep ration from 4 hours to a bit more. Not good for health. :)
Saturday, December 9, 2006
On Mark Foley, GOP et al...
Reading through reports like http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/08/foley.ethics/ and others on the post-election finding on Mark Foley's conduct and who in the GOP top knew what when and whether/what actions they did/did not take, one can't help but be reminded of the church scandals in US in recent years.
Looking beyond Mark Foley (a nothing but shameless, hypocritical freak who preys on the young), and we can see some pattern that can be generalized. When we put someone in a power position with no checks-or-balance (and no enforcement of the rules/law, if any), and we're bound to have problems. Problems could be corruption, or it could be exploitation, or much worse.
Who in the public in the right mind would have any doubts that the GOP leaders did not know about Foley's conduct, and they simply looked the other way since Foley is a six-term congressman, and they just wanted to keep him in that GOP seat. They would rather see him consume the sacrificial lambs (much like the church looking the other way to avoid scandals or lawsuits, rather than watching out for the kids). Bush's administration might have made my blood boiled, but the GOP leaders are worse, much worse.
At least there's a silver lining to the Foley scandal, which is to tip the scale in the election. But if we don't see the structure changed, anyone (and any party) in that position is 99.99% likely to do the same thing again in the same way. And there's been no change in Capitol Hill (even though it changes hands). American public is just so complacent. With that attribute, there is no motivation and no need at all of _any_ party to make real change. That's sad.
Looking beyond Mark Foley (a nothing but shameless, hypocritical freak who preys on the young), and we can see some pattern that can be generalized. When we put someone in a power position with no checks-or-balance (and no enforcement of the rules/law, if any), and we're bound to have problems. Problems could be corruption, or it could be exploitation, or much worse.
Who in the public in the right mind would have any doubts that the GOP leaders did not know about Foley's conduct, and they simply looked the other way since Foley is a six-term congressman, and they just wanted to keep him in that GOP seat. They would rather see him consume the sacrificial lambs (much like the church looking the other way to avoid scandals or lawsuits, rather than watching out for the kids). Bush's administration might have made my blood boiled, but the GOP leaders are worse, much worse.
At least there's a silver lining to the Foley scandal, which is to tip the scale in the election. But if we don't see the structure changed, anyone (and any party) in that position is 99.99% likely to do the same thing again in the same way. And there's been no change in Capitol Hill (even though it changes hands). American public is just so complacent. With that attribute, there is no motivation and no need at all of _any_ party to make real change. That's sad.
Thursday, December 7, 2006
I feel good today.
Sometimes it doesn't take much to feel good. :)
I'd had my bathroom renovation. It's in pristine condition now, but I've been dragging my feet in cleaning up the rest of the place. Finally, after some 3 weeks, I managed to clean out...about half of my place, and discovered clothings and other stuffs that would never get the chance to see the light of day again. I also managed to hand-shred 3 huge bags of documents (including bills) going back to 10 years.
Mind, that's actually quite good progress since I have maybe an hour or less everyday, and a total of maybe 2-3 hours a weekend, in between my work/family, to do the cleaning. I've been bugged to just go buy a home-sized paper shredder which would probably save me a few hours of the shredding, but I don't want to buy something which I'll use once every 5 years, and which consume electricity no less. Not good.
Now, I feel quite "accomplished." Not only is half of the place cleaned out, but the stuffs that I don't need anymore can now go to Salvation Army, rather than to the dumpsters instead of the landfill. I really like recycling (I picked up empty bottles home from the street at times to recycle). That's one big reason why I like eBay too. In fact, I was about to throw out an old book on the art of mixing drinks, and thought maybe I should check eBay first. Lo and behold, it turns out people bid on it like crazy. Granted, mine is not as tip-top shape as the one in the auction, I'm going to put it back under the weight of my other books. Who knows, it'll be auctionable state when I look over it again in another 10 years. (Well, it'll stay with me for another decade, no doubt.)
So, the morale of the day is, eating is not the only to make you feel good. Do some house cleaning (and stealth exercise while moving the boxes), and you'll feel even better. Try it. It works. :)
I'd had my bathroom renovation. It's in pristine condition now, but I've been dragging my feet in cleaning up the rest of the place. Finally, after some 3 weeks, I managed to clean out...about half of my place, and discovered clothings and other stuffs that would never get the chance to see the light of day again. I also managed to hand-shred 3 huge bags of documents (including bills) going back to 10 years.
Mind, that's actually quite good progress since I have maybe an hour or less everyday, and a total of maybe 2-3 hours a weekend, in between my work/family, to do the cleaning. I've been bugged to just go buy a home-sized paper shredder which would probably save me a few hours of the shredding, but I don't want to buy something which I'll use once every 5 years, and which consume electricity no less. Not good.
Now, I feel quite "accomplished." Not only is half of the place cleaned out, but the stuffs that I don't need anymore can now go to Salvation Army, rather than to the dumpsters instead of the landfill. I really like recycling (I picked up empty bottles home from the street at times to recycle). That's one big reason why I like eBay too. In fact, I was about to throw out an old book on the art of mixing drinks, and thought maybe I should check eBay first. Lo and behold, it turns out people bid on it like crazy. Granted, mine is not as tip-top shape as the one in the auction, I'm going to put it back under the weight of my other books. Who knows, it'll be auctionable state when I look over it again in another 10 years. (Well, it'll stay with me for another decade, no doubt.)
So, the morale of the day is, eating is not the only to make you feel good. Do some house cleaning (and stealth exercise while moving the boxes), and you'll feel even better. Try it. It works. :)
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Family anomalies, exposed.
It's weird, reading news on molester blaming his wife's bingo habit for his deviation -- http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/04/bingo.molester.ap/index.html -- or that a mother's calling the police to catch his son to opening Christmas presents a little too early in order give him a lesson -- http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/05/christmaspresent.arrest.ap/index.html
On the mother-calling-police story:
Now, the odd thing about the mother-calling-police story is two-fold. If the mother really believes that her son has ADHD, then calling the police is not going to help her son, and he's not likely to "learn the lesson". If according to the mother, the ADHD medication has no effect on her son, has she considered that perhaps her son isn't ADHD at all?
Now, they are important, because if he's not ADHD, then maybe, just maybe, that he's just a misbehaved boy, and perhaps the police call might have served some purpose. But if he's not ADHD, then the mother shouldn't have fed him ADHD at all.
But since she fed her the ADHD medications and mentioned it to the police too, she must have thought that he's ADHD. In that case, having the police thrown him to jail is *not* going to solve any problem.
These two underlying threads in the story were just so at odds, that I can only conclude that this mother is just clueless. All the same, the society got pulled, and taxpayers' money was spent to deal with silly deeds like this.
On the molester-blaming-acts-on-wifes-bingo-habit:
Did he even have the slightest belief that anyone would buy his line, that his molesting children since his wife was always away at the bingo parlor and that he was "angry". He's not just sick to the bone, but he's delusional. There can be no excuse whatsoever, for child molestation acts.
Observations:
One is, Americans are so used to blaming something/someone else for their problems. (Maybe not just Americans, but they do it in a high profile way.)
Second is, there is always a medical term/condition for any behavior that we don't want/need.
I would not make it a conclusive observation for this lazy mother in calling the police, to generalize on the populace. She is perhaps an odd one in the far end of the standard deviation curve on the left. :)
On the mother-calling-police story:
Now, the odd thing about the mother-calling-police story is two-fold. If the mother really believes that her son has ADHD, then calling the police is not going to help her son, and he's not likely to "learn the lesson". If according to the mother, the ADHD medication has no effect on her son, has she considered that perhaps her son isn't ADHD at all?
Now, they are important, because if he's not ADHD, then maybe, just maybe, that he's just a misbehaved boy, and perhaps the police call might have served some purpose. But if he's not ADHD, then the mother shouldn't have fed him ADHD at all.
But since she fed her the ADHD medications and mentioned it to the police too, she must have thought that he's ADHD. In that case, having the police thrown him to jail is *not* going to solve any problem.
These two underlying threads in the story were just so at odds, that I can only conclude that this mother is just clueless. All the same, the society got pulled, and taxpayers' money was spent to deal with silly deeds like this.
On the molester-blaming-acts-on-wifes-bingo-habit:
Did he even have the slightest belief that anyone would buy his line, that his molesting children since his wife was always away at the bingo parlor and that he was "angry". He's not just sick to the bone, but he's delusional. There can be no excuse whatsoever, for child molestation acts.
Observations:
One is, Americans are so used to blaming something/someone else for their problems. (Maybe not just Americans, but they do it in a high profile way.)
Second is, there is always a medical term/condition for any behavior that we don't want/need.
I would not make it a conclusive observation for this lazy mother in calling the police, to generalize on the populace. She is perhaps an odd one in the far end of the standard deviation curve on the left. :)
Tuesday, December 5, 2006
What if my company acts like Wal-Mart...
Have you read that report on Wal-Mart? Like this one at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/business/04walmart.html?_r=1&oref=slogin about how Wal-Mart thinks it's newsworthy to tell the world that it's "rewarding" its loyal employees' 15 years of service with a T-shirt? What would _YOU_ do if your company treats you like that?
It amazes me that the best that Wal-Mart's HR can come up with for employee rewards is this, and equally amazing to see that their PR folks thinks this is such a big deal that they need to make a news release on it. Even more so is that, its senior management lacks the commonsense to think that this is going to be bad PR. I wonder how many rank-and-file employees (not management) actually stay there for 15 long years. Can anyone tell me?
Well, but let's try not to be cynical about this Behemoth. For a company that promises nothing more than pitches pennies for its customers, we shouldn't be expecting too much from them, should we.
It amazes me that the best that Wal-Mart's HR can come up with for employee rewards is this, and equally amazing to see that their PR folks thinks this is such a big deal that they need to make a news release on it. Even more so is that, its senior management lacks the commonsense to think that this is going to be bad PR. I wonder how many rank-and-file employees (not management) actually stay there for 15 long years. Can anyone tell me?
Well, but let's try not to be cynical about this Behemoth. For a company that promises nothing more than pitches pennies for its customers, we shouldn't be expecting too much from them, should we.
Monday, December 4, 2006
Finally, democracy won the day...
Can't we just say, it's long overdue for John Bolton, the UN ambassador that Bush finagled in, was finally gone? See http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=79010ccb-59eb-490c-9610-8c54979d4a44&k=32252
The way that Bush conducts this Administration, in the my-way-or-the-highway and I-can-do-whatever-I-like style, it's just so despicable. Sometimes I just can't believe it that we're looking at an elected leader in a Western democratic country. No doubt Bush will have more fun running country like Singapore or even China (or pick any Africa country), when he can do or say whatever he wants (and he doesn't even need to pretend he knows how to speak proper English).
Score one for the democracy. :)
The way that Bush conducts this Administration, in the my-way-or-the-highway and I-can-do-whatever-I-like style, it's just so despicable. Sometimes I just can't believe it that we're looking at an elected leader in a Western democratic country. No doubt Bush will have more fun running country like Singapore or even China (or pick any Africa country), when he can do or say whatever he wants (and he doesn't even need to pretend he knows how to speak proper English).
Score one for the democracy. :)
Sunday, December 3, 2006
On which country is superior and which one(s) is not...
Along the line of the blog debates at Sydney Morning Herald posted yesterday, on whether US is superior than the rest of the world, I sometimes find myself looking at the situation and debates like an outsider looking in, and find most of the arguments so narrow-minded and the views so limiting.
This brought me back memory of a radio talk show On Point on WBUR at Boston (NPR) very recently, hosted by Tom Ashbrook. The guest was Milton Friedman (the newly minted Nobel winner who also just recently died, as we all know), to present the view that Americans should be grateful that they're in America, since the economy is in great shape, yada yada. It's funny how 99% of the call-ins from audience pounded him on where the heck the great economy is that he's talking about (since most of them have experienced unemployment and layoffs or know of someone who experienced that), and that no, Americans *do* long to be in old Europe, even though economists like Friedman would not have endorsed it.
In a way, economists are like war generals. They have to look at things on a very macro sense. For one thing, I would not have expected Friedman to study every individual who suffers from unemployment or layoffs, particularly in the face of global competition. (Much like war generals discussing deaths and maims as merely collateral damage, to make it impersonal.) But to hear it in person from Friedman, of how after he's presented with overwhelming evidence that people do *NOT* enjoy being in America (what with the insecurity in jobs and health care and growing wealth disparity), and how he would give the "yeah, but..." like statements to these people, and tell them in their face that what they're seeing is wrong (cuz that's not what the economists are seeing), it's just so surreal. Maybe it's another political incorrect statement to make, but I find it (and him) very clueless in a way. To quote the Freakonomics perspective, economists like him are just not looking at the right kind of data to draw conclusions.
I couldn't help myself, and I called in to voice my view while Robert Reich (the former Labor Secretary under Clinton) was still on the line. I told them one thing that I see: I grew up in Hong Kong, and there is no other place in the world who can claim to be more capitalist than this tiny place (so, quit the BS that America is capitalist and old Europe is not, since this is all relativity). I saw in first hand, how during the British rule (regardless of the seemingly undemocratic rule back then), the British colonial government did a very good job at taking care of the basic services (infrastructures like airport and cargo terminal, public housing, public education, basic universal health care), and let the private market handle the rest. What I see in US is that, the federal government fails miserably in almost all fronts. Public housing is a shame; funding to education and health care are cut, in the name of either state government issue or private market efficiency. It's just obvious that the federal government drops the ball (for the Bush administration, this is all deliberate anyways), and push the responsibilities to the states and individuals, which are overwhelming. And for those basic services that are not supposed to be very profitable, obviously no private market is stepping in unless they can demand a king's ransom. Reich jumped in, and agreed that that's spot on. For Friedman, he gave me the usual yeah-but response. All in all, I'm just very disappointed in him. (I don't care if he has a Nobel or not, the disappointment is all the same.)
This brings us back to the Sydney Morning Herald debate, which I mentioned that it's just a matter of relativity, of whether Australians (or the rest of the world) envy Americans, or vice versa. As much as alot of Americans don't want to hear it, US is still a place people want to come, but they don't envy US at all. They (legal and illegals alike) just want to come, make enough bucks, and go home. If they have envied US so much, they would have stayed rather than wanting to leave, mostly. And most Americans long for the laid back lifestyle of old Europe and even Australia. There is just alot of sour-grapes when people (on either side) talk about the other country, and how their own country should be considered more superior.
It's really quite amazing to observe, really.
This brought me back memory of a radio talk show On Point on WBUR at Boston (NPR) very recently, hosted by Tom Ashbrook. The guest was Milton Friedman (the newly minted Nobel winner who also just recently died, as we all know), to present the view that Americans should be grateful that they're in America, since the economy is in great shape, yada yada. It's funny how 99% of the call-ins from audience pounded him on where the heck the great economy is that he's talking about (since most of them have experienced unemployment and layoffs or know of someone who experienced that), and that no, Americans *do* long to be in old Europe, even though economists like Friedman would not have endorsed it.
In a way, economists are like war generals. They have to look at things on a very macro sense. For one thing, I would not have expected Friedman to study every individual who suffers from unemployment or layoffs, particularly in the face of global competition. (Much like war generals discussing deaths and maims as merely collateral damage, to make it impersonal.) But to hear it in person from Friedman, of how after he's presented with overwhelming evidence that people do *NOT* enjoy being in America (what with the insecurity in jobs and health care and growing wealth disparity), and how he would give the "yeah, but..." like statements to these people, and tell them in their face that what they're seeing is wrong (cuz that's not what the economists are seeing), it's just so surreal. Maybe it's another political incorrect statement to make, but I find it (and him) very clueless in a way. To quote the Freakonomics perspective, economists like him are just not looking at the right kind of data to draw conclusions.
I couldn't help myself, and I called in to voice my view while Robert Reich (the former Labor Secretary under Clinton) was still on the line. I told them one thing that I see: I grew up in Hong Kong, and there is no other place in the world who can claim to be more capitalist than this tiny place (so, quit the BS that America is capitalist and old Europe is not, since this is all relativity). I saw in first hand, how during the British rule (regardless of the seemingly undemocratic rule back then), the British colonial government did a very good job at taking care of the basic services (infrastructures like airport and cargo terminal, public housing, public education, basic universal health care), and let the private market handle the rest. What I see in US is that, the federal government fails miserably in almost all fronts. Public housing is a shame; funding to education and health care are cut, in the name of either state government issue or private market efficiency. It's just obvious that the federal government drops the ball (for the Bush administration, this is all deliberate anyways), and push the responsibilities to the states and individuals, which are overwhelming. And for those basic services that are not supposed to be very profitable, obviously no private market is stepping in unless they can demand a king's ransom. Reich jumped in, and agreed that that's spot on. For Friedman, he gave me the usual yeah-but response. All in all, I'm just very disappointed in him. (I don't care if he has a Nobel or not, the disappointment is all the same.)
This brings us back to the Sydney Morning Herald debate, which I mentioned that it's just a matter of relativity, of whether Australians (or the rest of the world) envy Americans, or vice versa. As much as alot of Americans don't want to hear it, US is still a place people want to come, but they don't envy US at all. They (legal and illegals alike) just want to come, make enough bucks, and go home. If they have envied US so much, they would have stayed rather than wanting to leave, mostly. And most Americans long for the laid back lifestyle of old Europe and even Australia. There is just alot of sour-grapes when people (on either side) talk about the other country, and how their own country should be considered more superior.
It's really quite amazing to observe, really.
Saturday, December 2, 2006
To the debate in Australia on whether US media can be said of as bold and honest...
I've been following the news article and the subsequent blog debate at Sydney Morning Herald at http://blogs.smh.com.au/newsblog/archives/mark_coultan/008502.html The article originally was about the choice of words now by some US media to classify Iraq's situation as civil war.
Interestingly, the one main argument in the blogs is not about the highlight of the reporting, but on whether US media can be linked to words like integrity and boldness. I made a couple of postings as "australian in new york". Rather than rephrasing whatever I had said, here's the posting that I would hope anyone cares to read will take it seriously:
Interestingly, the one main argument in the blogs is not about the highlight of the reporting, but on whether US media can be linked to words like integrity and boldness. I made a couple of postings as "australian in new york". Rather than rephrasing whatever I had said, here's the posting that I would hope anyone cares to read will take it seriously:
dudes, lets all not argue about whether australia (or the rest of the world) envy US, or vice versa. if we all take a wider view of things, and we're all citizens of the world, we might just be able to start thinking along a similar line. each country has their strengths and weaknesses.
for example, i got 4 weeks of vacation in australia back then, and i got 4 weeks of vacation in US now as well. the only difference is, in australia, it's almost a birth-right to have 4 weeks, whereas in US, u have to earn it (or rather, get to a certain seniority). and if we compare ourselves to europe, phew - there's no comparison. does comparing countries based on one single (or a selected few) factor realistically reflect whether one country is superior than the others? absolutely not.
and i can safely say, there're australians (or europeans) who want to come to US to work, and yet there're equally as many americans who long for the more laid-back life style that allows one the luxury to enjoy life. afterall, there's no point work till u drop when u don't even have time to enjoy the fruits of ur work. the by-product is the increasing consumerism in US since shopping provides an obvious emotional relief.
but back to one of the original issues in this blog debates, of whether US media can be associated with words like accuracy, integrity and boldness, i do believe that during its glory days, it has. just look at washington post and the watergate. the only other news organization that i might have thought of capable of achieving that is probably BBC. these days, though, i do believe that the pressure to media to conform has become so immense, thanks to the almost macarthy-era-like labeling by the bush administration on any and all the dissenting voices (media included). and by jove, they've been so effective in silencing the opposing voices.
the onslaught of internet also means that there's an ever shrinking budget to provide quality news, since like i said before, most audience are just interested in those 5-minute headlines.
so, my second suggested action (and challenge to all that might care to listen/read) is, since u all are so familiar with the people's power of the internet, put forward ur views and concerns to the news organization (be it, NBC or ABC or CBS, u name it), let them know what u think. let them know that u believe what they present is inaccurate or too whimpy. and let them know that u'r all too ready to vote with ur feet (and run) if they don't improve. i would strongly argue that that would be one effective and constructive means to get things improved, rather than just bitching and moaning here in the blogs world.
that, and to vote to let the government know. to everyone, these are what we can do, TODAY. otherwise, folks like karl rove and john howard would be laughing their heads off, and continue what they've been doing, since us, the public can't even present a dominant voice for them to take us seriously.
Such injustice...
Today, I read an article in nytimes.com about the child sex abuse to girls, in particular, at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/01/world/africa/01madagascar.html?ei=5087%0A&em=&en=4afeb28fb61c9802&ex=1165208400&pagewanted=all For the first time in my life, I felt like throwing up after reading it. Maybe I'm naive to say this, but how could humans possibly do this to kids?!?! Even animals don't, so these people are less than that.
A while back, I read another article in a series of reporting on human smuggling (mostly importing from around the world into America). I felt so sick on learning how even infants as young as 3 months are sold for sex, and to serve as sex slaves. This opens my eyes to how naive and sheltered I've been in my life. I remember one time when I was growing up (in Asia), I saw this news reporting of how a father who had his infant baby sleeping next to him on a make-shift bed during hot summer months, and someone took the baby while the father was sleeping soundly. I'd been wondering back then why people would take the baby. The worst I could think of was, maybe they would sell the baby. But the baby was later found, and I was told he was abused. I didn't even know what abuse means. I thought someone took the baby and beat him up or something. I kept asking myself, why would anyone do that.
Well, that innocent me is long gone, and now I understand how sinister human nature can be. It might well be politically incorrect to say this, but seriously, these evils (they're less than humans) should be castrated. Honestly. Take that urge out of them, and maybe that would alleviate the situation. Fast. Of course you might say that this idea of mine is naive too. But perhaps a better alternative is to take the China approach: catch them, and shoot them. Frankly, I have no mercy for these unforgiveable sins.
A while back, I read another article in a series of reporting on human smuggling (mostly importing from around the world into America). I felt so sick on learning how even infants as young as 3 months are sold for sex, and to serve as sex slaves. This opens my eyes to how naive and sheltered I've been in my life. I remember one time when I was growing up (in Asia), I saw this news reporting of how a father who had his infant baby sleeping next to him on a make-shift bed during hot summer months, and someone took the baby while the father was sleeping soundly. I'd been wondering back then why people would take the baby. The worst I could think of was, maybe they would sell the baby. But the baby was later found, and I was told he was abused. I didn't even know what abuse means. I thought someone took the baby and beat him up or something. I kept asking myself, why would anyone do that.
Well, that innocent me is long gone, and now I understand how sinister human nature can be. It might well be politically incorrect to say this, but seriously, these evils (they're less than humans) should be castrated. Honestly. Take that urge out of them, and maybe that would alleviate the situation. Fast. Of course you might say that this idea of mine is naive too. But perhaps a better alternative is to take the China approach: catch them, and shoot them. Frankly, I have no mercy for these unforgiveable sins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)