Democracy Epidemic, A Sour Sweet

In the last century, red terror swept across the globe as if a tsunami - appalling and damaging but fortunately short-lived. Thanks to Marshall plan which has proved effective in containing the spread of communism and consequently contributed to eventual collapse of the bloc.

While the world is assured with liberty and security, little do they realise that democracy can be an epidemic which has gained ground in Asia, undermining stability and wealth of the region. To make the matter worse, increasing number of "elites" are so fixated to the idea of democracy that it has become a fetish.

The epidemic first manifested itself in communist China on 4th of June, 1989. Peking university students, together with some workers, occupied the parliament square, (or Tiananmen Square) to demand democracy. Chinese government, which was yet ready to reform, finally decided to clear the place using military force, after few months of running protest that had ruined the country’s economy. Mind you, I am not justifying Chinese Government's resolution in the uprising; I believe that the government had no better choice in the wake of pressure from students and press not noted for the consequence of abrupt political reform.

Tiananmen incident has died down in China but similar uprising has come to wake in Southeast Asia especially after 1997 Asian Economic Crisis. First to feel the impact was Indonesian president, Suharto who was forced to step down in favour of democracy. The event was generally applauded by the world since Suharto administration was a totalitarian government. However, events that happened in Indonesia subsequently are devastating. Racial riot in Java and Aceh killed hundreds of Chinese and destroyed millions dollars of properties. More than 100 women were allegedly raped. Rich Chinese fled out of the country along with their wealth, further undermining Indonesian economic. In other islands of Indonesia, violence also occurred between transmigrants and indigenous groups. In years before Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono took the office, Indonesia was little different from being anarchic.

The enpidemic also took root in Thailand. Thaksin faced the steepest slope in his political life when multitudes went to street to demand Thaksin to step down as prime minister. Opportunistic opposition parties later organised the crowd systemetically and suceeded to force the premier to quit. Press dominated by liberals had also played a significant role in this event. However, political turmoil was not simply ended. Instead, it becomes even more complicated after the snap poll was annulled by High Court, which left the country in uncertainty. Critics say that humming Thailand economic remains intact despite anti-Thaksin protest which has adversely affected Bangkok, Thailand's capital, for more than 4 months. In fact... To be continued

Population - A Resource of A Burden?

Developed countries tend to have population decline. Certain countries are even experiencing zero, if not negative population growth. Japan, for example, is facing the problem of greying population with deaths exceeding births by 31,034. In the United States, declining and ageing population also spells trouble for the workforce.

Cost of raising children in developed countries is high, especially in Japan and the U.K. where living cost is much higher than any other country. This daunts many couples thinking of bearing a child. On the other hand, developing countries have the fastest population growth, particularly in the poorest regions. Poor agricultural-based economy requires labour work. Hence, families tend to have more children to rely on to do chores and for security when parents reach old age. They also lack access to family planning, tending to have many children as an insurance against high-mortality rates.

In contrast, economies in developed countries are driven by service industries, which demand skilled workers, rather than huge unskilled labour pool. Children are, thus, deemed as liabilities by many parents who are responsible for children's basic necessity, education, etc. Furthermore, as women are liberated and educated, their involvement in workforce also means a shift to later marriage. This is also a factor contributing to low fertility rate.

It has been said that taken as a whole, the problem with world population, usually manifested in the shortage of resources is not due to population growth as such but to the inequitable distribution of wealth and resources. Some economists have bought into the thesis, owning to the fact that developed nations consume 80% of the world natural resources annually. In addition to their poor resource management, the poorer nations are in the lower end when it comes to allocation of resources. This aggravates the problem that the Rich gets richer while the Poor gets poorer.

What did Zhao 11 say about voting?

Zhao 11 aka Shiu Hei recently gained the limelight on National Geographic magazine front-page, but that does not distract him from being "always neutral". In effect, one of his latest commentaries -"General Elections: Who to Vote For?"- has effectively demonstrated his "neutrality" in the sense that his stand remains inconspicuous in his essay.

However, individuals are not allowed to exercise neutrality when it comes to election. Every citizen has to make a decision by voting for one of the candidates, or giving up his ballot.

There is a breach of author's neutrality nevertheless. He says "Although they may not have results as glamorous as the PAP, they have put in effort to prove themselves nonetheless." This is rather a slanted account which is in favour of the opposition parties. Even though that is true, opposition parties are still far from being comparable with ruling PAP. This, apart from PAP's past achievements, as the author suggests, is partly because they are fettered by "opposition party" mentality, which means these opposition parties do not prove to be alternatives to PAP. Rather, the very basis of their existence is to oppose, or euphemistically, to check the government.

Furthermore, he poses a question to Singaporeans- "Will the PAP continue to do well even when they have introduced young and fresh faces as candidates?" The phase in the context, "Will [they] continue to do well" implies his doubt towards the ability of the young generation of PAP.

In short, the commentary is quite comprehensive and it has shown that the author is following the development of the events of General Election closely. This suffices to be impressive, especially when the author is a foreigner who is not obligated to vote.

Driving Globalisation on the slow lane

Globalisation has started to lose its momentum as European Union and the U.S. are putting on the brakes to retard its driving force. Failed attempt of China National Offshore Oil Corp in acquisition of US based company, Unocal, uproar over Dubai-based organisation running US port, and troublesome planned merger of German energy giant E.ON and Spain’s Endesa, shows that even the world most globalised nations are fettered by economic nationalism.

Segregated world has no long term winner. The Europeans have reaped considerable benefits from single European market, which was implemented in 1993, while foreign investment in world market has contributed spectacular amount to its GDP. However, recent wave of protest appealing greater protection from the government in the face of global competition has, by and large, impeded progress of further economic integration. Perhaps, “Asia will be the biggest loser, finding its route into league of multinationals dull of obstacles”, but Europeans and Americans will end up the permanent losers.

Asia is the most populated continent which is rich in human resources, as well as natural resources. The prospect of future economic power of Asia is unconceivable, especially as the world see China and India emerging as the world’s fastest growing economy. Should EU and the US close its market, they isolate themselves from the world’s biggest market.

Science and Technology vs Professional Ethics

The path that scientists and doctors tread is not an easy one. They have to overcome difficulties and uncertainties in their careers. Firstly, a scientist has to follow the hint of natural phenomenon and discover a scientific theory from it while a doctor has to deal with bacteria, viruses and cells, killing them or manipulating them. Yet, apart from lack of capital and experimental materials, their voracious passion to discover and to explore is under the constraint of ethics.

What would you have done if you were in the shoes of a doctor who is asked to help a 65 year old woman or to help a comatose/severely deformed person die? This situation will undoubtedly place most people on the horns of dilemma. I probably will defy the decision for a simple reason: Let her or his life decided by fate. The approach is out of fatalism, rather than pragmatism. However, in the face of controversy of ethics, it seems more pragmatic to "give the patients' fate to the God".

Then what would you have done if you had worked with a scientist who breached professional ethics? As for this question, my response will depend on to what scale his action has broken professional ethics. Cloning has long deemed as an unethical activity by many ethical groups. But the argument succumbs to the prospect that human embryos are curative for terminal illness such as cancer.

In view of the repercussions of scientific research, scientists are expected to bear with some social responsibilities. For example, research done by a bio-chemical scientist should be transparent. Should an incident like leaking of poisonous chemical occurs, people are able to respond quickly.

New technology enables us to improve on nature. Scientists should be encouraged to go in pursuit of their goals while keeping to ethical and social responsibilities. This can be done with transparency in scientific research. As mentioned above, transparency allows public to monitor how far has the scientist gone in his field and give necessary curb before things get awry.

Do you find it difficult to look for academic information on Google?

Citation Analysis, one type of bibliometric, is not a new concept. But, with the advancement of powerful computing industry, it has become a useful tool for web users. Thanks to Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the founders of Google, who developed PageRank based on the principal of Citation Analysis.

PageRank(PR) algorithm (computing method or a command to computer ) assigns every single webpage a point. The point is earned if the webpage is linked to by other webpages with high PR. Google later will place the webpage with the highest PR on top of its search list. Thus, internet surfers will be able to access to your website easily should it be linked by many other popular websites.

In order to gain popularity, the most practical way is to pay famous websites like Yahoo, Google, and Lycos for an advertisement link. That is why you are most likely to be diverted to wood-processing companies' website when you enter "blurdwood" in the hopes of getting to know what it is, due to the fact that no non-profit academic webmaster is going to spend huge sum of money to advertise his websites.

Therefore, most students are only able to access to information from some internet library financed by big companies like Wikipedia. Yet, many useful learning materials on the internet are not discovered unless students know how to manipulate search options or they bother to take time to find the information they want from 1000 pages long search result list.

Apart from blaming Google and students, perhaps teachers should educate their students about the searching skill when assigning them with some tasks to do research. Otherwise, once promising internet learning will , instead, become a stumbling block to learning process due to the misleading information, rather than an aid for self directed learning.

Reference: ST article titled "Brain drained by Google?"

Why born? Why live? And why die?

Kaithirasen, columnist from NST, commented on joy that a baby brings along upon her arrival on New Sunday Times of 26 Mar 2006. Perhaps, I should call this is a tacit agreement, for today is my 19th birthday. The commentary has somehow makes me visualise myself being born and wailing but doctor, nurses and, especially, my parents were smiling. Since that moment, I have also become hope of my parents and even the human beings.

Zillions people come to the world as I did and they are also the hopes of human beings. Before the age of 5, they learn. Somes are fast while somes are slow. Later in their from 5 to 20, fortunate ones get the chance to discover more in the world. However, many are not so fortunate. They have to find different ways to survive in very harsh and unpredictable condition. These people, despite hardship and sufferring they are encountering, do not give up to continue the line of human beings. What makes them persevere? Is it survival instinct? Or is it the prospect of happiness in future?

I do not know the answer but I know that I am the fortunate one. So are the people around me. They have learnt a lot although the amount of knowledge they acquired is insignificant in the universe. The capable fews from this group of people later use their discoveries to invent, design and create to benefit others in their communities but the unfortunate ones are still left behind.

Therefore, fews form the benefited communities feel obligated to help. Whether the aid is in the form of food, money or in more constructive form of education and technology, little can be done to improve on the "unfortunate" condition that lies onto them. It is because they did not teach them how to create as the capable fews did. Instead, they give them whatever has been created, which is useless to alleviate their suffering permanently. Nevertheless, they are not to be blamed because know-how to create is not a textbook knowlegde that can be passed down. Thus, the fortunates one remain unfortunate.

Whether being fortunate or not, no one can avoid to face the menace of death. And after they pass away, it leaves nothing but memory and, perhaps, their creation.

So what for living if one has to die eventually?
I have been searching for the answer but to no avail.

Bodhisattva, teacher of buddhism, had concentrated his energy to look for the answer 2000 years ago. He said life is impermanent as it is in the cycle of being born, old, sick and die, which is a form of suffering. The world we are living now is for us to acquire prajna (Wisdom to realise the emptiness of the materialistic world), hence to be able to cross to paramitra (to cross beyond all suffering and difficulity).

This is quite true because most our suffering is caused by sights, sounds, smells, tastes, body and mind. Should we overcome limitation of our body, we will have no suffering. Notwithstandingly, I have a doubt - if human beings are born to realise the emptiness of the world, why give place us in the cycle? In the cycle, we suffer and forget about the lesson learnt from the suffering after we die. Thus, we are born and make the same mistakes again. Why?

I am in a state of confusion. I want my family to live in happiness but money is the only possible mean to achieve happiness for people around me in this society. Such illusion is possessed by most of the people around me. This is because money can buy you health, buy you time, and most importantly, help you to pursue your interest and your happiness.

Thus, it is difficult for me exclude financial factors when I plan for my future if I want to be happy most of the time. I do not hope that people will cry when I am dead and smiling, but everyone on the earth can be happy in their short span of life.

Open source - a new strategy in software war

Programmers in the past used to share software routinely. Computer makers later equipped their products with these software, and customers customise the software with additional codes. Then came Bill Gates who set up Microsoft, a company which made standardised software, and made it much more affordable than investing money and time to develop additional codes individually. It marked the time when hardware become a commodity while software is the core product for many computer users. This was also the time when software war began.

However, software world becomes increasingly complicated then it was a decade ago. Nowaday, piracy is the biggest threat to software makers but a good news to end users. Software companies have invested billions of dollars to curb piracy by introducing more sophiscated protection in their products. Yet, it is unable to defy hackers who destroy the walls of protection that the companies have thrown most of their money in.

Why does such a big company like Microsoft with billions of capital and thousands of human power fail to crackdown on piracy?

Hackers work collaboratively across the borders of nations. The deep well of knowledge allow them to come up with a solution effectively. Whereas, Microsoft develops its software in a close manner, isolating itself from many elites over the world. The productivity hence is undermined. To classify, Microsoft adopt a proprietary way in promoting its products, while hackers do the work in open-source way.

In fact, open source becomes the main driving force in software world in 21st century. Three quarter of companies' servers are installed with Linux operating system.
Many big companies like Acer and IBM have switched their focus on Linux for its reliability and, most importantly, much lower cost. 90% of current 3-G mobile devices are also using modified version of Linux operating system.

IBM regards open source as an answer to how companies can stimulate growth and economic development while also cutting cost. By donating source codes to open community, IBM left the job to improve on the programmes to voluntary programmers over the world. As a result, the company not only cut cost in software research, but also able to possess different ideas from elites of the community. These ideas allow IBM to improve on their service in developing a reliable computer system. It can not be denied that Linux has far less bugs than that Microsoft Windows has.

Hence, open source has become a new strategy in software competition in providing reliable and
low cost computer system.