Thursday, December 23, 2010

On the 20 things that go obsolete in the past decade...

Since it's the end of a decade, it's high time to look back on things, particularly those that might invoke nostalgia since they could be gone for good. I read an article earlier today which suggests 20 things that have become obsolete in this past decade. I thought it's pretty good reminder of what would be gone from the landscape. For my own benefits, here it is:
  1. VCR and VHS tapes
  2. Travel agents
  3. The separation of work life and personal life
  4. Forgetting (since the web records everything and forgets nothing)
  5. Bookstores
  6. Watches
  7. Phone sex via 1-900 numbers
  8. Maps
  9. Calling
  10. Classifieds in newspapers
  11. Dial-up connections
  12. Encyclopedias
  13. CD's
  14. Landline phones
  15. Films and film cameras
  16. Yellow pages and address books
  17. Catalogs
  18. Fax machines
  19. Wires
  20. Handwritten letters
Not that I agree with this list completely (for example, the "forgetting" part is arguable, as popular sites like GeoCities came and went, after Yahoo shutters it, so too are the lives and times recorded there), but it enumerates quite a number of things that have been in long, slow decline for quite some time now, including bookstores, encyclopedias, maps, and fax machines. Their functions will still be in high demands (eg. encyclopedias, newspaper classifieds, maps), it's just that it'll reincarnate in some other form (hello, wikipedia, craigslist, GPS and google maps). Do I really think they would do an equally good job? No. What we trade for some (eg. speed to search; available for search anywhere anytime, as long as you have a web connection), we lose on the others (eg. how body of knowledge is organized can be completely lost on the younger generation; the patience in doing basic research against the instant gratification of plagiarism). As imaging copies become legally accepted, fax machines will not be needed anymore (although in some countries like China, there's still a loooong way to go on this, but perhaps we can export all our fax machines to China!?! Just a thought...)

Perhaps alongside the disappearing of handwritten letters, one thing that is harder to pinpoint and quantify, is the disappearing language and communication skills of the younger generations. The instant gratifications of instant messaging and texting that encapsulates everything in 160 characters mean that the younger generations are increasingly incapable to express lengthier thoughts or even write proper sentence or essays. (Or, do they have the patience to write at all, given that even emails are too slow and cumbersome for them?)

Other skills like map-reading the use of a compass could also become a dying art, now that everyone relies so much on their GPS device to tell them where to go, reducing humans to a dummy.

Other things that should have made the list but are left out include:
  • Newspapers in print (and how journalism on hard news might survive?)
  • TV (Now that I watch everything on my computer, anytime anywhere, I don't need it anymore)
  • Ethernet cables and connections (As wi-fi security gets beefed up, does anyone really need or want their ethernet connections?)
  • Brick-and-mortar stores (Not that this will disappear altogether. Afterall, you can eat the binary 0's and 1's, and the web can't deliver real stuffs like food, but stuffs like clothing and increasingly, luxury goods like jewelry, can be ordered online and delivered to your doorstep. It'll put the standalone brick-and-mortar stores in constant peril.)
If we look at it, all the physical stuffs (like books, and everything in prints) are fast disappearing. Everything goes online. Afterall, I'm even writing my own journal online, so there goes. :) When I look back on my life and ask myself the question of whether my life has changed for the better (or worse) thanks to technology, I have to say, the positives outweigh the negatives. I'm sad to see things like bookstores and alot of brick-and-mortar stores closing (maybe due to the poor economy, but the proliferation of everything online has alot more to do with it); on the other hand, it's a good thing that alot of wastage can be avoided. Things like, stacks of big yellow pages books that come every year that rarely do anyone use them anyone uses them anymore, should have been gone for good a long time ago.

I can only hope, that in the next decade when the younger generations come of age, they would find some appreciation of things of old, so that technology could help preserve these arts, albeit in completely different formats.

And, we should bring back morse codes.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

On the "Waity Katy" syndrome...

I read an article the other day on Sydney Morning Herald on the Waity Katy syndrome, and can't help smiling. Australians are obsessed about everything royal. Diana was a national obsession back then. Now they have their own fix, with the fairy tale Aussie commoner girl who is now princess of Denmark. Yes, she is quite stylish and all, but one must admit that there looks to be a tad bit lack of glamor in her otherwise classy style. (I know, I know, it must be a blasphemy to slight the Danish princess from Downunder; no matter.) But with the latest British royal news of engagement by Prince William and Kate Middleton, it's become fever pitch and the Brits are back in vogue again.

Whatever the republic agenda pushed by the then Prime Minister, Paul Keating, Australia would always want to hold onto the English coattail. Sad, but true. If the Queen is smart, she would pass directly the throne to the more photogenic Will and Middleton, bypassing Charles and Bowles altogether. Not that it's fair to Charles. Afterall, even though I don't give a damn about the royals, I do think he does an ok job. Reality is, royal families survive and thrive on hopes and dreams (more fairy tales). That's something that Will can deliver, and Charles is sorely lacking. One can say, it's totally unfair to Charles, but nothing in life does anyways.

...Ah, I'm digressing again. Where was I?...

Ah yes, the "Waity Katy" syndrome. It's about the eight long years that Kate Middleton has been waiting, and waiting, and waiting for Will to pop that question. Will he? Won't he? He loves me. He loves me not. You have to give it to Kate. When it comes to patience, nothing compares to the hopes and dreams of a girl to be a real princess. How cool is that...in name. Every girl has to curtsy to you, Your Highness this, Your Highness that. And, don't forget the castle and jewelry. One might say, Diana was that naive when she stepped in that shoe. Afterall, she was, what, 19 when all these started, and one year later, it's become her ticket to heaven and hell. Oh, but Katy is quite a different matter. She starts waiting from 20, and finally after 8 long years, she's finally getting the engagement, at 28. I don't mean to sound mean or cynical, but I'm not sure if love alone would survive that. I'm sorry to say, but I honestly don't believe it.

At least for Katy, she's betting that she's getting more out of the marriage, than if she doesn't. For the rest of the commoner girls, when their guys keep them hanging and guessing, should the girl wait, or just bail?

Personally, I think it comes down to what the girl wants most. Some girls don't want wedding, marriage, kids, attachment, commitment. That's all well and good. For these minority, I presume, it's no problem at all. In fact, she might even freak out if the guy pops the question.

And then, there are the rest of the majority who really wants to get marriage, the white-dress wedding, the big stone on the ring finger, have family and kids, and a backyard, and to take up husband's last name, what should they do? If I were a girl in this category, and if the guy hasn't proposed yet, chances are, he's not going to do it. Afterall, c'mon, if the girl has wanted all these formality, the guy could not have been so clueless that he doesn't know that's what she wants, after all the months and years together. But if her wants do not align with his, all the waiting is just one big losing proposition. The girl would be much better off bailing out from the relationship. Remember that movie Made of Honor? The movie is a nice eye-candy, but it's fairy tale. If you want Hollywood escape to some la-la land where rich, gorgeous guys are going to fall head over heels over you, and pop the question after 10 years, fine. In reality? It's not gonna happen.

Truth be told, I feel bad for Middleton, having every step of hers to be compared with Diana's. I don't know about you, but if I am to constantly be compared to my mother-in-law, from looks, to style, to works and achievement (if you can call it that), and perhaps, most sadly of all, fate and future, I would be extremely annoyed, to put it very mildly. Afterall, it does not matter how madly in love they seem to be now, or how gorgeous the wedding might look, everyone is expecting the same fate - a boring, unhappy marriage slowly and gradually descend to divorce - down the road. While I don't want to wish ill on anyone, royal or otherwise. The limelight can make such commoner's problems look even harsher.

On the illusion of universal health care, ObamaCare, and constitution...

Since the brouhaha of ObamaCare, the latest uproar is on the constitutionality of its health insurance mandate after the federal court in Virginia ruled that the mandate is unconstitutional for forcing citizens to buy health insurance coverage.

Ok, so there are two parts of the question. What the ObamaCare is trying to achieve, and how. The "what" part seems pretty obvious. The goal is to providing universal health care. Isn't that obvious, one would say. But you can't be too sure if you ask Obama what it truly means for universal health care.

Before answering that "what" question, one should perhaps look at what universal health care coverage means in other advanced countries, like Europe or Australia. Those countries, while spending less per person in medical care, truly covers everyone in country. And the government pays for it, by taxes, naturally.

Which, to the eyes of American, is a big no-no, to impose high taxes on everyone, but at the same time, truly covers everyone. To the conservative GOP, that would be close to blasphemy, a socialist welfare state. The idea of cradle-to-grave is a non-starter. That's exactly what federal programs like social security and medicare are like, but you will not hear any GOP pushing the scrapping of those programs. These days, that kind of entitlement mentality, that once it's there, it becomes one's birth right and cannot be taken away, is too dear to their heart to part with. So, never mind the fiscal conservatism.

As to the "how" part of the question, the Dem and Obama try to claim the mantle of providing universal health care in name, by expanding health care to more of the tens of millions of folks who don't have any coverage right now. That's the essence of the health insurance mandate in the ObamaCare. Since GOP would never agrees to the execution of universal health care the way that Europe and Australia does, namely, to have the central government pay for everyone's coverage by imposing high taxes, ObamaCare now mandates everyone to buy coverage themselves! VoilĂ , problem solved! Suddenly there'll be a thriving health insurance business. Everyone is paying for each other's health care needs. And the federal government doesn't need to do a thing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for universal health care. Afterall, I find it most ridiculous for people to consider whether to accept a job not just based on whether the job itself, but if the employer provides health care. I would never dream of having to do that, not when I was in Australia or England, not even in Hong Kong, the most capitalist place in the world. Worse thing with this mandate is that, everyone is now being held hostage and beholden on the insurance industry to decide how much premium we have to pay. But the worst thing that Obama has done in this whole ObamaCare fiasco is that, he let the lobbyists and GOP delete the public health care option, which is arguably the thing that would more truly bring America closer to universal health care, as everyone in the world knows it.

But I have to say, you have to give it to the Americans, to have such faith in the legal system and the constitution, that everything and anything can be - and it seems like, it should be - settled in courts.

So it is then that the case is almost destined to go to Supreme Court, and more drama ensues. What will happen to the wobbly two-legged stool in the ObamaCare setup, when the federal government can't force the healthy ones to buy insurance coverage, so that the insurance industry will hopefully make enough money to care for the sick and the poor? That's anyone's guess, but my bet is, it's not going to hold up under scrutiny.

Everyone touts the avant garde law in Massachusetts in which ObamaCare is based on. But if you ask anyone in Massachusetts, you should not be surprised to find not much praise to that law, with the largest voice going to increasingly loud complaint of how much health care costs of private insurance is growing, year-on-year. Checks on premium growth are almost non-existent. If you ask me, I'd say, that idea is a disgrace. But Ted Kennedy would not be around to fix the mess he pushed on us.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

2010: Taking stock, and looking ahead...

It's another interesting year. I always like to read my journal, from my year-end review the year before, and see how much has panned out according to plan, and how much is fluke.

It turns out things are going much as expected, both on the economy, personal lives, and things in general.

Hmm, what has happened this past year of 2010...

On the economy front, the US unemployment rate, though down from the scary 10% in 2009, is still stuck at a high 9.8%. There's much talk of the drag for the permanent long-term unemployed - yes, that's bleak prospect that was once only a fixture in the wealth states in Europe, but looks to be here to stay in US now. That's all the more reason why one should not swagger and boost about how there's new normal, and no one wants the Old Europe.

There's also much talk - ATNA, as in, all talk, no action - in Europe, about what to do with the deteriorating sovereign debts, spreading from Greece, to Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and now worryingly, to Belgium, now even France is in the talks of potential sovereign debt downgrades. I feel bad for them, but then, how would they govern a unified Euro, when they have one hand tied to their back? So, on the one hand, you have Germany who is an incredible disciplined people and who has no problem roaring back from recession. On the other hand, you have the rest of Europe who lives fast and loose on easy credit. There's all carrot, but the ultimate (and only) stick in the game, of allowing sovereign debt default, is guaranteed not to be happening. Then, you'll ask, what is there to stop these loosy-goosy countries from doing that again? Afterall, someone else is guaranteed to bail them out. Honestly, this unified Euro is a losing proposition from the start. But there's no plan for Europe to roll back to the pre-Euro world. There is no Plan B. Such a terrible bind.

For those who still have a job, 2010 doesn't feel so bad. The economy is slowly coming back. People are buying luxury goods again and their prices are roaring back, so you know they're having money to spare/spend again. If...and only if...China doesn't fall flat on its face in 2011, it should still be able to claim the world mantle for another year to be the last man standing in saving the hides of the rest of the developed world. Indeed, if you have a chance to go to China or Hong Kong, you can feel the giddiness in the air. And why not. Luxury shops like Louis Vuitton are crowded with almost 100% mainland Chinese tourists who roll their hand-carry suitcase to buy luxury and beauty care products, then resell in China. If you peek into these shops, you would never ever have imagined that China still has a large rural population that lives on less than a few thousand dollars a year. Hot money from mainland China dramatically pushes up prices all luxury properties in Hong Kong. In China, speculation in property, and increasingly in stock market, has become a popular spectator sport/pass-time for common folks. While all the talks in China are about chastening the West (most notably, US, of course) for fast and loose credits, China is literally doing the exact same thing, with huge stimulus to its local economy. China is in a different bind than Europe, but in a not dissimilar way. For all the noble intention of the central government to control inflation and speculation, and to tamper with social unrest, its main weapon is to prop up the economy. Chinese, much like Singaporeans, are like ants. As long as the society is peaceful and harmonious, they live in peace, with the hopes to prosper in life. The Chinese government cannot and will not allow the economy to go down, or property prices to decline, or stock markets to nose-dive. Much like Europe, there is no Plan B.

I feel sad every time I see an empty storefront when we go out. I've been seeing an increasing number of "For Lease" signs in our neighborhood, and we're supposed to be holding up quite well since the Great Recession took hold in 2008. Unfortunately, deep down, I know they are not going to come back. I'm particularly fond of book stores. But after Barnes & Noble, then Borders, closing the store near us, everyone knows they'll never come back again. You can say, I'm torn between their store closing, and what it means to the environment and green movement. Afterall, while I still treasure having a physical book in my hand - and the smell and feel that come with a book, even my own reading habits have been changing. I don't cherish the prospect of publishers and book stores having to produce stacks of books, then sell them, in order to make enough money to survive. Perhaps, the solution comes with e-readers like Kindle, Nook, and iPad. I have particularly strong feelings about this, because this past week, I've been doing house-cleaning, and there are tons of books (eg. children's books from my kids) that I have to either donate or sell. I never doubt the great impact of a physical children's book for my kids, but I don't like having to chop down all the trees to make these books that are destined to recycle bin. My own private solution to all these? I've stopped buying books for the kids. We spend hours at public library anyways, so I've resorted to making donations to public libraries, and let them buy the books instead, so that they can be shared among general public. It's a win-win.

As I was telling my kids, one such category that is particularly ripe for e-reader is the school textbooks. They are way over-priced. Every year, publishers or authors make slight modifications, put out an updated version, and all students have to throw out the older version to get new ones. It's all so ridiculous and incredibly wasteful. If they have it on e-reader, I would jump onto the bandwagon without second thoughts.

Speaking of textbooks, I'm quite happy that I'm almost done with my masters degree. (One last class to go, and I'm over it.) I don't know if I might do the unthinkable again, and take up a second job in the finance field, on top of my regular job in software, with the side venture in e-commerce, plus a bit of stock trading. I'm glad that my husband and kids are very supportive of that idea. But I'll just have to wait and see what happens in 2011.

Perhaps the not-so-good news this year has been my parents' health, which has been declining. They're in their 80's now afterall, so it's not a surprising development. I can only pray to God that, when my parents' time comes, it'll be peaceful and painless.

Kids are growing up fast too. The other day, I turn around at home, and there I see my son playing ball at home, and my daughter reading a book on the sofa. They look so big to me. They are among the many things that I'm so thankful for in life.

2011 should be looking up still. I just hope that China doesn't suffer hard landing in its economy, and at least there'll still be one leg standing in the three-legged stool of world economy. But I can only hope.