Saturday, 31 July 2010
First week back
Wish I could say it's not boring, but then again, plenty of interesting stuff happened. Transport system meltdown, for example. The beginning of the second term, another example. Finding out the real reason why mum wants me back in Malaysia, yet another example. However classes are a bit tedious at times.. unless it's just my imagination at work here. So I'll give this first week a 7.5 out of 10 and see how the rest of the semester looks like later on.
Monday, 26 July 2010
Sore
A good game of paintball does that to you.
PS: Rambo is still the way to go. Half the people don't know how to counter that effectively :D
PS: Rambo is still the way to go. Half the people don't know how to counter that effectively :D
Thursday, 22 July 2010
Semester 2 inbound
C&S day later today. Whee. New T-shirt too :)
On one hand I'm excited about the prospect of getting to learn new stuff.. on the other hand I wonder if I'll have to deal with Chinese lecturers and their accents again. Not that I despise their accent, more like their accent impediments speed learning.
On one hand I'm excited about the prospect of getting to learn new stuff.. on the other hand I wonder if I'll have to deal with Chinese lecturers and their accents again. Not that I despise their accent, more like their accent impediments speed learning.
Monday, 12 July 2010
Website construction
With so many DIY tutorials on the net, this is looking up for me. And it's fun too :)
Friday, 2 July 2010
Winter break
It's cold. Very.
I'm getting bored of reading politics, both about here and home in Malaysia. One thing is certain though, corruption is universal.
Will update when I find something worth blogging about.
I'm getting bored of reading politics, both about here and home in Malaysia. One thing is certain though, corruption is universal.
Will update when I find something worth blogging about.
Saturday, 19 June 2010
Wednesday, 9 June 2010
Saturday, 5 June 2010
Justice
So I was on the train coming back, and there's this bunch of Indians on the train. There's this guy in a fluoro jacket next to them, and he soon starts arguing with the Indians for some reason. One Asian guy sitting in front of me starts recording the scene, and a dad with his daughters gets slightly worried about Fluoro-Jacket's tone and language. I can tell that Fluoro-Jacket isn't happy right.. and when the father speaks up, Fluoro-Jacket sees the Asian guy recording him, and storms right over.
I sense something about to boil over.. and I feel obliged to step in to help. The dad shields his daughters from anything Fluoro-Jacket does, while I hold back the Asian guy. Interestingly enough the train hasn't started moving. I later realise someone pressed the emergency intercom to call the driver.
Fluoro-Jacket is still trying to land some hits on the Asian guy I'm restraining. The situation looks bad, but the surrounding passengers already know that they can do something. More of the guys move forward to confront Fluoro-Jacket, telling him to get off the train. Surprisingly, he complies quickly enough, although he curses on the way out the doors, and the train continues on its journey.
No lasting harm was done, although the girls are slightly shaken. The Asian guy checks himself through his window reflection, finding that his hair is the only thing out of shape. One of the other guys heads over to the Indians, probably checking that they're fine, and probably apologising for the incident.
Staring out the window, I reflect on the incident. Immigration has changed countries a lot, and it looks like Australia isn't left out on that front. I may preach tolerance, but then again I guess the immigrants should learn some of that too.
I sense something about to boil over.. and I feel obliged to step in to help. The dad shields his daughters from anything Fluoro-Jacket does, while I hold back the Asian guy. Interestingly enough the train hasn't started moving. I later realise someone pressed the emergency intercom to call the driver.
Fluoro-Jacket is still trying to land some hits on the Asian guy I'm restraining. The situation looks bad, but the surrounding passengers already know that they can do something. More of the guys move forward to confront Fluoro-Jacket, telling him to get off the train. Surprisingly, he complies quickly enough, although he curses on the way out the doors, and the train continues on its journey.
No lasting harm was done, although the girls are slightly shaken. The Asian guy checks himself through his window reflection, finding that his hair is the only thing out of shape. One of the other guys heads over to the Indians, probably checking that they're fine, and probably apologising for the incident.
Staring out the window, I reflect on the incident. Immigration has changed countries a lot, and it looks like Australia isn't left out on that front. I may preach tolerance, but then again I guess the immigrants should learn some of that too.
Too many monkeys, too few peanuts
>>Link<<
Reading both the Barefoot Investor's blog and the Star in the morning puts a new spin on some things, for example the title of this post. I'll assume you know what I'm talking about after reading the news article from the Star.
So it seems that the PSD has run into the same problem again - too little money and too many "bright" students demanding scholarships.
If we look at the way the education system has been revamped, nothing has really changed. Introducing the A+ system hasn't really helped filtering and classification. Not until the Ministry decides to reveal the actual marking and grading system. How is the public to know whether the grades published in newspapers are the grades before or after statistical adjustment? It is purported that grades are sometimes artificially inflated by the marking system. If so, the introduction of the A+ system is pointless. Hence the "bright" students might not be that bright after all.
So... do we demand a review of the transparency of the marking system? I'd say aye. It's high time we realised how markers are [if they are] skewing the statistical distribution of our students' marks. That right-skewed curve might be a sign of something else in the future..
Note: Statistical adjustment refers to cases such as the grading method used in the SAM finals results, where the final grades are a reflection of the statistical distribution of grades in the total student population in the SAM programme.
Reading both the Barefoot Investor's blog and the Star in the morning puts a new spin on some things, for example the title of this post. I'll assume you know what I'm talking about after reading the news article from the Star.
So it seems that the PSD has run into the same problem again - too little money and too many "bright" students demanding scholarships.
If we look at the way the education system has been revamped, nothing has really changed. Introducing the A+ system hasn't really helped filtering and classification. Not until the Ministry decides to reveal the actual marking and grading system. How is the public to know whether the grades published in newspapers are the grades before or after statistical adjustment? It is purported that grades are sometimes artificially inflated by the marking system. If so, the introduction of the A+ system is pointless. Hence the "bright" students might not be that bright after all.
So... do we demand a review of the transparency of the marking system? I'd say aye. It's high time we realised how markers are [if they are] skewing the statistical distribution of our students' marks. That right-skewed curve might be a sign of something else in the future..
Note: Statistical adjustment refers to cases such as the grading method used in the SAM finals results, where the final grades are a reflection of the statistical distribution of grades in the total student population in the SAM programme.
Wednesday, 2 June 2010
Saturday, 29 May 2010
Graphic
Walking past Borders in Chadstone today, I saw Twilight: The Graphic Novel displayed on their advertisement boards.
The sheer amount of fail is indescribable. It feels as though these people are milking a dry cow.
The sheer amount of fail is indescribable. It feels as though these people are milking a dry cow.
Thursday, 27 May 2010
Shattered 2
Thank you for your application... I am sorry to advise you that your application has been unsuccessful...
As you are aware, ... is extremely competitive and it is unfortunate that we are unable to place all applicants... If you are still eligible you may wish to consider applying ... in another round.
Please note that due to the volume of applications received, we are unable to provide individual feedback to unsuccessful applicants.
Sigh. Hope I don't waste this winter.
Saturday, 22 May 2010
Shattered
No tickets for the footy, apparently groups can't get that many tickets cos of the deadlines and stuff. Damn.
Monday, 17 May 2010
Saturday, 15 May 2010
Breather
Assessments seem to come around in bursts. At least that gives me some time to recover. And then it'll be off again for me, doing stuff that I partially enjoy [and that everyone else seems to loathe].
And that's life for me.
And that's life for me.
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
The Forgotten - part 10 (Reawakening)
Shivering
under the cold glare of night
he winces
a pain burning within
the pain of longing
the pain of rejection
the pain of hunger
the pain of indignity
the pain of insignificance
Walking along in the cold
he carries on
an outcast
in a world of joy
under the cold glare of night
he winces
a pain burning within
the pain of longing
the pain of rejection
the pain of hunger
the pain of indignity
the pain of insignificance
Walking along in the cold
he carries on
an outcast
in a world of joy
Sunday, 9 May 2010
Sunday, 2 May 2010
Busy
2 lab reports, 1 newsletter, 1 online test. Work as usual for a typical undergrad I'd say.
So if I don't seem busy enough I might have ticked off some of those stuff from my to-do list already :)
So if I don't seem busy enough I might have ticked off some of those stuff from my to-do list already :)
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
It's a rush going to your head
I just came back from an awesome weekend, involving soccer, paintball and badminton. So.. who says students can't keep fit?
Now talking about paintball. One thing really riles me - the lack of the element of retribution. No, I'm not talking about revenge. Revenge is something totally different from retribution. Retribution is based on the golden rule of "don't do unto others what you don't want done unto yourself". Which means that if somebody shoots you within 8 metres even after you yell at him/her to surrender, you are very much welcome to spray the idiot full of paint, also within 8 metres. Then you get to walk away.
Retribution would make paintball so much more rewarding in terms of player satisfaction. As I bore witness at Oakleigh last Sunday, quite a number of players had sustained flesh wounds from close-range shots, even though the marshals had already cautioned us not to fire our markers when within 8 metres of an opponent. A number of them were disgruntled that the other players did not bother to obey the 8 metre rule. If the concept of retribution were to be implemented, I suppose that players would think twice before opening fire within the 8 metre zone, mainly because they would then know the pain of receiving close-range shots. This would thus reduce the number of injuries due to close-range shooting, I suppose.
Damn. I have ideas. Whether they work very well is another matter in practice.
Now back to work.
Now talking about paintball. One thing really riles me - the lack of the element of retribution. No, I'm not talking about revenge. Revenge is something totally different from retribution. Retribution is based on the golden rule of "don't do unto others what you don't want done unto yourself". Which means that if somebody shoots you within 8 metres even after you yell at him/her to surrender, you are very much welcome to spray the idiot full of paint, also within 8 metres. Then you get to walk away.
Retribution would make paintball so much more rewarding in terms of player satisfaction. As I bore witness at Oakleigh last Sunday, quite a number of players had sustained flesh wounds from close-range shots, even though the marshals had already cautioned us not to fire our markers when within 8 metres of an opponent. A number of them were disgruntled that the other players did not bother to obey the 8 metre rule. If the concept of retribution were to be implemented, I suppose that players would think twice before opening fire within the 8 metre zone, mainly because they would then know the pain of receiving close-range shots. This would thus reduce the number of injuries due to close-range shooting, I suppose.
Damn. I have ideas. Whether they work very well is another matter in practice.
Now back to work.
Sunday, 25 April 2010
Rigged
How else would you describe a debate that has a sudden increase in the number of people supporting the Malaysian government's ideas? This shows that even in Australia, the long scary arm of Malaysia still lurks behind shadows.
The MASCA Annual Debate had a good motive behind it. Unfortunately when discussing motions involving government policies, a debate is not the best solution. People have varying views on the topic at hand; some fully support the policy, others fully oppose the policy, and there are many who fall somewhere in between the two extremes. A debate, being fully black and white in having "For" and "Against" teams, does not work well to support the full spectrum of views. Hence, I say that a good idea was tripped up by its execution.
I have other reasons to view the debate as flawed. Bad imagery on the program booklet and advertisements - are we really all monkeys living in trees? Not the best imagery I'd say. Furthermore, regarding the program booklet handed out, there is nothing inside regarding any of the 6 speakers or the moderator. No credentials, no photos, no details about what makes them suitable candidates for the debate. And why aren't there any engineers on either of the debating teams? Something to think about there, since some people say that "Engineers make the world go round, politicians come and stuff things up".
As for the handling of the debate itself, the moderator was not subtle when it came to reminding debaters about their time limits. Visual cues should have been given, or a less intrusive ringing bell would have worked.
On the debate itself, the participants had weak points overall. A single government policy does not always directly cause something, especially since you need to trace all the policies to get to the root cause of something. How do you know that the NEP directly assisted the progress of Malaysia?
Also, when it came to defining progress, I feel that the speakers could have used the following analogy: Progress is an upward-sloping line. It's not a flat line.
Thus, if you're anywhere below that line, then there is not enough progress. Really, we should be looking at natural progress as well as assisted progress. None of the speakers took into account natural progress, which would have been more meaningful.
Overall, I feel that the opposition speakers of the day are still making excuses for the Malaysian government, such as "We are still a young nation" [Young? Pfft.], "We don't want to be lapdogs of the USA" [Um. How do you progress if you don't want learn from the best?] and "If you aim for the stars and you miss, at least you still land on the moon" [Very comforting, I know, but useless when you look at the "cold hard facts", as their own speakers put it].
NB: The topic of the debate was "Malaysia has failed to progress since the inception of the NEP". Opposition speakers on the topic think that we have progressed, government speakers think that we have failed to progress.
The MASCA Annual Debate had a good motive behind it. Unfortunately when discussing motions involving government policies, a debate is not the best solution. People have varying views on the topic at hand; some fully support the policy, others fully oppose the policy, and there are many who fall somewhere in between the two extremes. A debate, being fully black and white in having "For" and "Against" teams, does not work well to support the full spectrum of views. Hence, I say that a good idea was tripped up by its execution.
I have other reasons to view the debate as flawed. Bad imagery on the program booklet and advertisements - are we really all monkeys living in trees? Not the best imagery I'd say. Furthermore, regarding the program booklet handed out, there is nothing inside regarding any of the 6 speakers or the moderator. No credentials, no photos, no details about what makes them suitable candidates for the debate. And why aren't there any engineers on either of the debating teams? Something to think about there, since some people say that "Engineers make the world go round, politicians come and stuff things up".
As for the handling of the debate itself, the moderator was not subtle when it came to reminding debaters about their time limits. Visual cues should have been given, or a less intrusive ringing bell would have worked.
On the debate itself, the participants had weak points overall. A single government policy does not always directly cause something, especially since you need to trace all the policies to get to the root cause of something. How do you know that the NEP directly assisted the progress of Malaysia?
Also, when it came to defining progress, I feel that the speakers could have used the following analogy: Progress is an upward-sloping line. It's not a flat line.
Thus, if you're anywhere below that line, then there is not enough progress. Really, we should be looking at natural progress as well as assisted progress. None of the speakers took into account natural progress, which would have been more meaningful.
Overall, I feel that the opposition speakers of the day are still making excuses for the Malaysian government, such as "We are still a young nation" [Young? Pfft.], "We don't want to be lapdogs of the USA" [Um. How do you progress if you don't want learn from the best?] and "If you aim for the stars and you miss, at least you still land on the moon" [Very comforting, I know, but useless when you look at the "cold hard facts", as their own speakers put it].
NB: The topic of the debate was "Malaysia has failed to progress since the inception of the NEP". Opposition speakers on the topic think that we have progressed, government speakers think that we have failed to progress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)