'Cause you said, said he was the one
Baby yes you said, said you were in love












Back to basics: Step 1
Arthur
JJC
Outgrowing 17
Dreamer
Poet
Lover
Atheist
Left-Handed Saggitarian

My passions: Step 2
Food
Company
Writing
Movies
Music
Debates


What i am: Step 3
Strengths:
Confident
Sensitive
Eloquent


Weaknesses:
Paranoid
Unorganized
Careless

Dreams of a globetrotter wannabe: Step 4
Paris
Shanghai
London
Gold Coast
Japan(Tokyo)
Rome
Taiwan
Hong Kong
New York
San Francisco
South Korea

Wishlist
My own domain
Scholarship
To publish a book

Want to know more about me?

Read my blog and you would start discovering fragments of me

P.S. All the works here posted belong to me unless stated otherwise. If you want to post them elsewhere, please seek prior permission from me before doing so. Thanks.

Layout: vehemency
Icon: reruntherace

June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 November 2008 December 2008

Why Chinese shouldn't have Christian names
Thursday, December 4, 2008, 12:16 PM

A funny email I got from my sis about why Chinese shouldn't have Christian names. You would need to understand a little bit of chinese dialects and chinese to be able to get the jokes though. Disclaimer: Purely for laughs and nothing else.

Here goes:

Anne Chang => Dirty (Mandarin)
Anne Chin => Keep Quiet (Mandarin)
Faye Chen => Dusty (Mandarin)
Carl Cheng => Buttock (Hokkien)
Monica Cheng => Touching your buttocks (Hokkien)
Lucy Leow => You are dead (Hokkien)
Jane Tan => Frying eggs (Mandarin)
Suzie Leow => Lose till death (Hokkien)
Henry Mah => Hate your mum (Mandarin)
Corrine Tai => Poor fellow (Hokkien)
Paul Chan => Bankrupt (Mandarin)
Nelson Tan => Bird laying eggs (Mandarin)
Leslie Tong => Rubbish Bin (Mandarin)
Carmen Teng => Leg hair long (Hokkien)
Connie Mah => Call your mother (Cantonese)
Danny See => Squeeze you to death (Hokkien)
Rosie Teng => Screws and nails (Hokkien)
Pete Tsai => Nose droppings (Hokkien)
Macy Koh => Never die before (Cantonese)

Labels: , ,




My terrible experience on the bus
Saturday, November 22, 2008, 4:41 PM

Are there moments where you feel like cursing and swearing at commuters in the early morning or evening when you are commuting? Here's my own experience(not too long ago).

I was on the bus some time back. Guess what? I witnessed one of the most atrocious and ridiculous behaviour of commuters in Singapore - refusing to move in when there's plenty of space.

Here's the picture. See the stark contrast?


If you still can't see it, try looking at this. It should help.


If the difference dosen't appear significant at all, try imagining yourself at that seat and you would probably get what I mean. It's not a very good photo because of the seat that I was at(not that I could help it...)

Really, what's their problem? Being a commuter myself, I went through several of the reasons in my head.

1. The person that refuses to move in is alighting soon. To save himself from the inconvenience of having to move all the way to the door again, he stays rooted to his position and refuses to move in.

2.He dosen't really care as long as he is comfortable with his position.

Don't we all hate people like that? Both of these reasons don't seem significant enough to justify such irresponsible behaviour.

I know that some bus captains do raise their voices and get the commuters to move in. Very nice of them I must say. But, some bus drivers(note the use of the different nouns used to describe them) really don't care. What? They are afraid of getting bashed up by someone who needs an emotional outlet? Or they couldn't care less?

It used to be the case for commuters who get away scot-free not tapping their Ez-link card. Now, when you board the bus, you will notice a pair of eyes scrutinising every single one of the commuters, making sure everybody taps their cards. Why? It's probably because the bus companies impose some kind of a regulation on bus drivers to do that or else they would probably have to bear a penalty of some sort(I think). Even if it's not the case, I'm sure the bus companies did something to get the bus drivers to check that people pay their fare.

It's high time the bus companies do something about that. Sure, the problem may lie with the commuters which most certainly needs to be told to move in. Maybe something can be done about the commuters. Even so, just because the fault lies with the commuters, the bus companies should seriously do something about it. That's why we have laws for criminals, right? Going by the same logic, something should be done about this problem that has been persisting for really long.

Anyway, such irresponsible behaviour causing inconvenience to people is one of the reasons that compell people to turn to private transport(at least that's why I intend to drive in the near future... after i get my license that is. =P). If the government wants to help reduce traffic on the road, perhaps it's time to look at something else other than ERP and COE.

Some commuters seriously need to be taught a lesson!

Labels: , , , , ,




An error in 2008 'A' Level Chemistry Paper 1?
Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 8:33 AM

Like many of the other thousand 'A' Level candidates taking H2 Chemistry, I was stumped by one of the organic chemistry questions for H2 Chemistry Paper 1. Well, for those of you who don't know what I am talking about, it's question 20 for paper 1. The question was basically "Which two-srtage process will not give a good yield of 1,2-dibromocyclohexane?" The reaction is basically a two-step process.

What's wrong with the question? Nothing very wrong except that there were some weird reagents in the question. The first step's reagents were "normal" reagents but not the second. There were two options with these "weird" reagents. One of them being Br2,hv and the other being red P, Br2.

Some kind soul told me that red P is red Phosphorus which is a catalyst for bromination. I'm still not quite sure what hv is yet. I searched the net and came across it a couple of times but it didn't shed any light on what hv is. Anyone knows what's that? Anyway, now we all know that it's not some kind of printing error or error on Cambridge's side(as I thought it might have been during the 1 hour paper). It's kind of weird though that it was never taught(to me at least and some friends from other jcs) and I never came across it.

Labels: ,




Is meritocracy a form of elitism?
Friday, November 14, 2008, 8:06 PM

Meritocracy. It seems like an ideal way to reward people for their efforts and appears to have been successful over the past 40 odd years. Is that system really FAIR? It seems to have a slant towards elitism. Why?


I got my inspiration for this piece from Full Metal Alchemist(that's an anime) and it's main theme which centrals around the idea of equivalent trade. Pardon me if it's not that well written. I need to oil my brain.

Meritocracy. I'm sure many of us are familiar with the concept of meritocracy. Reward those that do the best, yea? Is that really fair? If you look at it from a certain way(like I did after I got "enlightened"), it's just another form of elitism. Just that it's a more subtle form.(i think, at least. open for debate i guess) Why? Let's simplify it. Put it in the context of a school. Someone of higher intellect can easily accomplish a task much faster and probably much more better and much more efficient than someone who is of lower intellect who would, arguably, have to put in more effort. The same goes for work. Someone who is more talented in singing would not have to put in as much effort as someone who lacks the talent in singing to achieve the same results. Sure, they get rewarded with the same carrots for their brilliant achievements. The flaw with this entire concept of meritocracy is that it looks at only the end. The END and perhaps, nothing else.

Whether meritocracy is really seen as fair really depends on how you look at it. What is fairness? To be rewarded in the same manner for similar achievements? OR should someone who works harder(despite having the same result or something that is less impressive) be rewarded more? The former, of course, encourages efficiency. But there are always those that can never achieve the same result regardless of the effort they put in. That's talent. And it's a word that people always look out for. In actual fact, the less-abled or the less talented aren't very much better off as compared to if they were under some form of system which subscribes to elitism. Shouldn't someone who puts in more effort,but achieves the same result, be rewarded more? That's if you look at rewarding for effort. Well, which system works better? I don't know. But objectively, it appears the more efficient of the two, that which rewards results, seem to be better. But still, it's not completely unrelated from it's slant towards elitism. We may not have an egalitarian society but perhaps one day, there might be a better value to guide the way some of us work, apart from meritocracy that is.




8:04 PM

I'm terribly sorry for the long hiatus without any notice. I've been on hiatus for this blog for like a couple of months. I have been really busy with school and all. But, to my relief, exams are drawing to an end. =P.




What $90 can get you at the arcade
Saturday, September 6, 2008, 9:33 PM

Ever wondered why anybody would spend so much at an arcade? My mum and my elder sis did just that. $90 at a stupid machine... Want to know what we got in return? Read on...

Well, it happened at Jurong Point. That's near Jurong West for anyone who dosen't know where it is... It happened at Zone-X which was newly revamped. Apparently, there's a relatively new machine, at least I think it is, where you basically use the machine to scoop candies from an area and deposit it at another area. At the area where you deposit the candies, there's two boards there. One of the boards is stationary while the other(above the stationary board) basically just slids forward and backward, pushing whatever candy it can into the collection area(whatever goes in here belongs to you. Can't think of a better word than a collection bin off-hand >.<) That's how the game works, more or less.

There's this additional segment where there is this LED display that has about 12 bars showing where you are now. The display is divided into 3 segments and there are 4 bars which are labelled C,B,A and JP respectively in the order from the bottom of the bar to the top. If you hit C,B or A, something special will happen to the boards to help push more candies into the collection bin(Hitting C,B and A does different things). JP stands for Jackpot and if you hit, you get the big prize i.e. the soft toy. So how dos the bar go up? I think a certain number of credits or successfully pushing a number of candies into the collection bin will trigger this wheel which starts spinning and will land on either a 1,2 or 3 which determines how much the bar will increase by. Sth like tt. I know it's confusing.

A picture of the LED thingy..


So my sis and mum were at like somewhere near B when they wanted to stop. Guess what? They then decided to continue playing again because it's such a waste to spend $50 and only get candies and they continued playing till they got the jackpot of course. All in all, they spent $90 on that stupid game. -.-"

Let me show you some pictures. =P.





Labels:




20 Amazing and err.. ??? Pictures that you probably never saw in your entire life
Friday, September 5, 2008, 11:34 PM







































Labels: ,