Amendable Homework!

Homework, or assesments, or positive practice to enhance mastery of subjects, or any euphemisn that means homework/schoolwork. Homework, does not behave like light,which performs rectilinear propagation, which thus contributes to the reversibilty of light. However, while homework does practice a fasimile of rectilinear propagation, this is however, a one-way road. No principle of Reversibility is practised. Once handed in/up, you cannot, possibly revoke, or get back your homework, to refine, revamp, redo, it. Once handed up. Its a done deal.

that. is tradition.

Now, with the evolution of technology, changing of homework has been made possible.
One such exemplar would be our recent blog projects. Since its now on the internet, our homework is no longer in the teacher's hands, now, we are also in control of our homework.
is this detrimental? is this good? Opposites.........

If we "handed in" on monday. Technically, this means that we have already handed in our homework, and am no longer in any power to alter our homework. Howver, with this blog concept, alteration of homework has been made possible. Now, it rests on our moral integrity, should we or should we not edit a piece of homework, which, technically has been handed in?

this is one problem of the sprawling internet technology, what should we do?

** i have been humbled. No more Pinnacle.....

OMG. Immediate Feelings after perusing a blog

After perusing a certain blog, for sensitivities, no name-calling will be entertained. He is entitled to his view, and i to mine. I was like, aghast, at that commentary of an article. Maybe i got the whole objective of writing a blog thingy wrong. But was it appropriate to launch into a lambast of bicycles? after a reading a heart-wrenching story on a poor boy being knocked down?
i certainly felt not. I just read the article, about how bad his condition was and all, then suddenly, e commentaries talks about how bicylces are evil n all... I must be blind man. Cuz i dun see e connection at all.

i feeling very very luan4. Never, venting is good...............


hope i wun die becuz of this vehement stuff. if u wan it to be abolished. post on tagboard. i will do it ASAP.....

Blog Article 2: I'm Loving it <3 skewed article.. sorry.

The Article

When gambling, dream big but keep your bets small ...

Tabitha Wang Friday March 2, 2007
news@newstoday.com.sg

I HAVE a secret that I'm hiding from my husband. Every once in a while, I go into my neighbourhood Singapore Pools outlet and buy a $3 lottery or put $2 on 4D or Toto.

If my husband discovers it, he won't divorce me but I know he'll nag me to death. He doesn't have any moral issues with my gambling but thinks it's a waste of money.

"Do you know you stand more chance of being hit by a car than striking the lottery?" is his constant reminder.

Which is true — but it still doesn't stop me from doing it, just for fun. The way I see it, I'm staking $2 on a dream. For a week or so, my spare moments are spent daydreaming about what I would do if I won that $2 million.

So far, I've debated the merits of buying a Provencal farmhouse versus a cottage in Dorset, of setting up a restaurant business versus going to study overseas, and of saving for retirement versus blowing it all on a trip of a lifetime. Seeing as the most I've ever won is $400, the dreams have come to nothing — but I've spent many happy hours exploring the various possibilities in my mind.

Singaporeans wager over $6 billion annually on anything from 4D to horse racing and spend another $2 billion in overseas casinos. I'm nowhere in that league. The most I've ever spent a year is $20 — and that was just because it was World Cup season.

I buy 4D only on special occasions, such as when I got my new car, moved into my first flat or got married. There isn't a set of numbers I have to "follow" every week. And when the integrated resorts open, you can bet that I won't be queueing up to go in — the $100 entrance fee for Singaporeans is more money than I'd ever want to bet.

Part of the reason is that I have pathetic luck with such things. I wagered $2 on my licence plate number for three weeks after I bought a new car, with no results. On the fourth week, when I decided I'd had enough, the number came out. First prize.

Even the one time I won it came at a price. I'd struck $400 buying 4D on my 18-year-old car's licence plate number. The day I went to collect the winnings, the car broke down and had to be towed to a workshop. The bill for repairs: $400. I kid you not.

So, why do I continue to sneak to a Singapore Pools outlet when my husband's at work? Because I don't want to give up on the tiny possibility that maybe this time it will be me posing with that $2-million cheque.

The BBC once interviewed psychologist Mark Griffiths on why people play the lottery and he said that when they buy a ticket, they don't think about the actual chances of winning, they focus on the money they could win. It's human to overestimate the chance of something good happening and underestimate the chance of something bad occurring.

Said Mr Griffiths: "If people were told that they have a 1-in-14 million chance of getting cancer in the next week, they'll say: 'Oh well, it is obviously not going to happen to me.' But because there is a 1-in-14 million chance of winning the lottery, they think: 'It's got to be someone, why can't it be me?'"

That's why I am planning to stake my $2 this month on today's Toto Hongbao Draw. Someone's got to win that $10 million, so why can't it be me?

Besides, I already have some numbers to play with. My drug-addict-turned- nutcase neighbour has been scribbling random digits on betting slips and throwing them through my grilles. At first, I was annoyed at having to throw those slips away but now, I've got an idea on how to put them to good use. I'm going to take them down to the Pools outlet and use those numbers for the Draw.

Since I'm feeling generous, I'll share them with you: 6 9 14 17 25 36. There's still time to place a last-minute bet, since ticket sales close at 9pm today.

Be warned: Before you put your second mortgage on those numbers, ask yourself if you really want to bet your house on tips from a guy who wears a towel for a hat ...

Tabitha Wang lives in a three-room rented flat that comes with its own block loony. If she wins, she'll move to a Sentosa Cove bungalow or maybe a Blair Plain shophouse or ...

Retrieved From http://www.todayonline.com/articles/174840.asp

The Response

Foreword: This is a seriously very good article. Both in its content and the way it deftly fleshes out the main thrust, humorous and engaging too. Maybe my funny bone is too easily tickled. the way through me is through my funny bone!

Commentary 2: Societal Issue: Lucky Gambling. Toto Grand Draw.

The message of the article comes across loud and clear. It is about the hope that we all harbour inside us. Tabitha is a very astute writer, she prepared this on the day of the Toto Grand Draw. It just nice coincides with the period, and its meaning is accentuated.

Let us examine the structure of her article. A mere 800 words, but so full of meaning. It totally demeans this very 500-word commentary I’m about to complete. First, she starts off with some suspense, a “secret”, to bring on the story of gambling and hoping to strike it rich. Then, she goes on to describe the happiness that dreams of procuring a windfall brings, almost in a wistful tone, very personal too, her article is, peppered with lots of personal anecdotes/narratives. Then, she goes on to describe her “pathetic luck”. This is a foreshadow of her main point later on. Reiterating an oft-asked question of why humanity continues to go and gamble on luck, she skillfully manifests the main point of her article, that of humans over depending on their supposed luck. She goes on to quote a psychologist, on why people would want to bet, even though the chances are close to nil. It thoroughly reflected this “hope for the best” mentality within us humans. She then closes by displacing a sentence from the psychologist onto her own context, drawing laughter. She skillfully ends by more humorous paragraphs.

Though her whole point, is fleshed out only in paragraphs 10-13. The way in which she adroitly shows us this is awesome. I not only took home laughter, but some additional insight into this human condition. Note the massively positively-charged words I have used “awesome” and all. This shows that I have been thoroughly brainwashed and just cannot tear my pitiful self away from this marvelous article. It’s like what Jay Chou is to his shrilly fans, to me. So, I sincerely apologise.

Digging deeper, we see that she’s not just talking about luck, but Hope. This hope, hoping for the best, yet also hoping for the least of the worst, is omnipresent in our nature. Though we know it, we know in our rational brains the probability of it happening is nil, our heart, still fervently hopes for a miracle. Though I know I’m going to fail my mathematics test, I still harbour a hope, that by some grace of God, I will pass. If it’s good, it’s going to be super-duper good, if it’s going to be bad, it’s going to be a manageable, not end-of-the-world bad. This is what Hope induces in us. In a sense, we may seem deluded, but it is precisely this hope, which lets ,people crushed under a collapsed building, know that they will survive, the hope that though only 3 people survived a catastrophe, it is surely My relative that survives. The hope, that burns strong in us, humans. All hail Pandora for leaving us this little critter, Hope.

Blog Article 1

Needed: Hard look at taxi efficiency

Waiting time display doesn't work

Letter from
Paul Chan Poh Hoi

The recent survey conducted by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) reflects a perennial problem — the waiting time to get a taxi.

The measures implemented do not help to make things better. Displaying waiting time is a regressive move which merely tells commuters how much time they would waste — simply by waiting.

We need to find out why getting a cab here is not as easy as, say, in Hong Kong.

Perhaps the authorities can try to solve this perennial problem by taking a hard look at the efficiency of the taxi services here.

Based on figures released in December last year, Hong Kong has a population of 7.2 million and receives 25.25 million tourists yearly. By contrast, Singapore has a population of 4.5 million and receives 9.7 million visitors.

Hong Kong has 18,031 cabs which carry 1.088 million passengers daily, while Singapore has far more cabs (23,382) for far less passengers (991,000), according to statistics released in 2005/06.

This translates to 61 passengers per cab in Hong Kong while Singapore's score is 42 passengers per cab.

This makes Singapore's taxi service far less efficient than that of Hong Kong, which has 23 per cent less cabs.

If our cabs can carry 61 passengers a day, we would be hitting averages of 1.43 million daily, an increase of 425,000.

When that is achieved, commuters would be able to hitch a cab within a minutes anywhere, just like in Hong Kong.

What we should re-examine is the productivity rate of our taxis, compared to that of Hong Kong.

If through sheer hard work, the productivity of our large fleet of cabs can be raised to increase efficiency without having to raise charges, our taxi woes will be eradicated.

The authorities have to find ways to keep cabs moving with passengers. The LTA can exempt taxis from having to pay Electronic Road Pricing or raise the road tax for taxis, for example, or cab operators can raise the flag-down fare if necessary. Commuters can certainly do without the hassle of having to call for a cab.

A revolutionary and bold approach by our authorities to solve our taxi woes is imperative, especially with the rise in tourist figures expected after the completion of the Integrated Resorts.

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/174845.asp

Reponse

Commentary on a Commentary 1: Societal Issue

Based on the Paul’s Wheel of Reasoning.

We can clearly see that the main purpose of the author, is, by drawing a comparison with cabs in Hong Kong, to admonish and bemoan the fact that, our taxi industry is just not up to scratch. It just has to improve. This is explicit in the title “ Needed: Hard look at taxi efficiency.” Note his usage of words, “Needed”, a “command” instead of words like “wanted”, a wish.

The author is obviously disappointed at the state of taxi efficiency in Singapore, as he kept harking back to Hong Kong’s example. He is probably at a loss, for why, with a bigger fleet, Singapore Taxi Services still lag behind Hong Kong. He says “ We need to find out why getting a cab here is not as easy as, say, in Hong Kong.” He uses “ as, say, in Hong Kong” This sounds very casual and not a deliberate allusion at first, because he does not say “ as, in Hong Kong”. He obviously wants to bring up Hong Kong, but, because he is sensitive enough, he uses the particular phrasing “ as, say, in Hong Kong”, to alleviate the shamefulness, for want of a better word.

He uses a whole host of very compelling evidence, both recent and veritable. He uses accurate statistics as released. “Based on figures”, “according to statistics released”. He also places the information in stark contrast, further heightening the sense of disappointment towards the Singapore situation.

He hits out at the move to display taxi waiting times, “ is a regressive move”, at the start of the article, extenuating it to bemoan the situation now. He also provides some forms of solution. It increases the veracity of his argument, as he won’t be just another Singaporean whiner, but actually gives some alternatives. However, it is to be noted that his solutions are quite marginal, and he does not expound more on them, devoting only the penultimate paragraph to the solutions. He seems to be fine with letting the establishment do the brain-racking, while he just points out the problem, then stop, not doing anything else.

After much admiration for the way he has constructed his article, it’s now time for criticisms. He only compares Singapore with Hong Kong, but not with other countries who may not equal Singapore. This is a tad unfair, as it totally discredits the efforts of the authorities so far. He could have applauded their effort and not be overly harsh and critical, these things take time, after all. Maybe he was already too fed-up and the latest move( displaying waiting times) was the proverbial last straw.

Being a disorganized person, I have just abandoned the Wheel in the middle of the article. I also know that my “analysis” may not be all encapsulating enough, and maybe not even incisive. My previous unpleasant encounters with waiting for taxis may have unwittingly infiltrated into this article and have caused some distortion.

I do hope that I have been objective enough…