Friday, May 2, 2008

Edison Chan saved Barisan Nasional for further embarrasment

Well, many would've thought "This is absurd!" Yeah yeah yeah ... the Malaysian Elections is now over, and everywhere in the nation the rakyat is celebrating over the 8th March elections (except those Barisan Nasional cronies)

For the first time in history, 5 states from Peninsula fell into the opposition's hands (if not for BN's absurdly-unfair-self humiliating-segregation of the Sabah and Sarawak zones, deliberately split to add more MPs into the parliament. (3000 people with one MP? compared to Seputeh zone in Selangor with almost 50,000 with one MP - JOKE)

Well, the battle has been fought, and 3 out of 4 market centers in Malaysia is now under the opposition's hands (Penang, Ipoh, KL).

The onslaught of the so called March 8th Tsunami actually started from all the negative stuffs BN brought us Malaysians, that not only infuriates the rakyat, but further embaressing us.

Let's do a count, before the 8th of March election, here goes the list of jokes coming from BN (off the hand, memory based)

1. Altantuya's murder - By special task force well of course under Defense Minister, Deputy Prime Minister - Najib Razak
2. Zakariah - The mansion, the illegal Satay buildup
3. The demolishing of Hindu temples
4. The 2007 Audit report that reveals tons of fraud cases from BN
5. The corrupted police force, the only thing done by our police force is to produce badges that says "Saya Anti Rasuah" and their little zerglings continue their wrong doings
6. The sleeping Pak Lah
7. The waving of the Kris by our Education Minister (Oh ya, he had a HUMMER, what a positive media coverage as the Minister of Education)
8. The Lingam mamak case "It looks and sounds like me, but i cannot hundred percent confirm it's me"
9. The RM 6 million cow slaughter house that slaughters 6 cows a year
10. The RM 10 million BANGA-lows for ministers
11. The leaking roof of Parliament building and the follow up response from Abang Samy - "I'm beli sure the biuding wil las handad pipty yiers apter da roop was pixed" (Abang, there are thousands of buildings that will last 5000 years or more without fix, talk with your brain k?)
12. The outright denial of our Foreign Minister in the BBC's Hardtalk show "As far as I know, there are more chinese and indian students in our local university compared to malays, and as far as I know, there are more chinese and indians getting government contracts compared to malays"
13. And of course, the AP issue that has long pass overdue for settlement
14. Our old horse Mahathir's 'teachings' on the zerglings he spawned.
15. The long overdue Anwar case
16. The Hindraf issue, with YouTube videos showing peaceful protestors were smoked, and then their leaders were detained under ISA for having links with the Sri Lankan terrorists

Ok .... many k? back to where it started, ALL THESE NEGATIVE NEWS, was suddenly wiped off by? Yes, Gillian's cat, Edison's male chicken, Bobo's flute skills, and Cecilia's hairy cat.

And the whole nation forgotten bout all these issues, news are flooded with these seductive news of these A-List actors/singers from HK in a string of home made pornos.

Hey Barisan, thank Edison, if not you might loose another state or two.


Sunday, December 16, 2007

You do? You don't. Period.

I have a problem with everyone I met, and I mean every single person, even my mother, my brothers and my family, friends. No, they ALL have a problem.

It all started with a simple statement. "I like cars." As cliche as "I like girls" from a guys mouth, it's a classic statement where the interpretation of it and my disagreement for the interpretation signifies me as the one being 'WRONG'; as I oppose everyone's perception of it, or of my perceived 'hobby'.

It all goes terribly wrong when they started to 'want' to engage in a conversation with me about cars; they'd go "Why didn't you train up being a mechanic?"

No I don't like oil stains, screwdrivers and spanners.

In fact, most mechanics treat cars the same way as a plumber treat your shithole, the one where you shit into and not from thou. To them it's just a job, not a hobby.

Hence when I answered 'No I don't like fixing cars' without further efforts into explaining, they'd go "Why didn't you learn designing cars?"

No I don't like and don't know how to design a car, same as most of the designers who designed very successful models like the Toyota Unser; all they ever need was a ruler and a pencil with no sharpener, as they'd easily finish that piece of 'exquisite', 'successful' model within 5 minutes.

The conversation then goes abit tricky for them and they would start suggesting me to be a racer, or a drifter, or Alonso. Then there goes my patience for the whole world's stupidity and naiveness.

The worst, worst of all, in fact Oxford needs a new term for this degree of worst-ness, which I'll dubb WORSTESTEREST to add on the exclamation, is that I am reagarded as one of the 3 billion people in this world that 'likes cars', given a ratio of 50:50 split between males and females.

Most "Car Enthusiasts" add spoilers on every single surface of their car deem possible, they have loud exhausts, leopard or tiger or whichever feline skins they could possibly get hold of, and loud bing banging sub woofers in their boots.

Their "dream car" is either a BMW 3 series in their 30s or a Ferrari in their 50s.

They have much more proof than me as to whether they are "good at" in their hobby, they could've owned an Evolution, or a Honda Civic Type-R, a Proton GTRRXXTTSST 3000, they could've raced frequently from Jalan Ampang, Petaling Street, Jalan Kuching; they might know how to drift with their Datsun 120Y, and they might know every single mechanical part in an engine bay.

Worst of all, they would have extremely bad fashion tastes, with half a bottle of Gatsby on their pubic hair given that they're all dickheads.

I"M ONE OF THEM, as perceived, and it's my fault that the world is wrong in their interpretation of my statement that "I liked cars".

I can name every single car on the road when I'm in my primary school years. I've played with toy cars since young, I know every single car manufacturer in this world, I know their history and how their design language has altered, and I can immediately tell, whether this car was produced with passion, or motif. I like cars, car industry in fact, as a whole. I'm intrigue by cars, the car industry if I'm allowed to explain.

Why didn't you all interpret someone who likes good food as someone who "failed" in achieveing their dreams of becoming a chef? Why you won't 'shed light' onto a person's life and tell them what's next to be done when they mentioned they like fashion? It's as if telling someone to write a book, or to go into publishing industry when they merely mumbled they're hobby is reading.

In short, I like cars, and you are all wrong.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Karl Marx is in us somewhere, deep inside, brain that is; whereas our heart lies Bill Gates.

Since young, we had seen countless images, imaginary arts of how our future city will look like, tall skyscrapers, relentlessly commuting peoples in pods, cars that fly, the world at peace, with everyone living in 'standard' 'quarters'; giving and taking for the good of the community.

Everyone had a role to play in this big stage, a stage where the human civilization has come of age, an age where there will be no poverty, no famine, no sickness, no harm, no threat. Everyone will abide and conform to the rules created by ourselves, to sustain the very existence of the human race, there will be no enemies, we are a family, the world has shrunk to the size of our knowledge, there will be no unexplored boundaries, there will be no evil regimes.

There will be no drugs, no prostitution, no cigarettes, no booze, no Aids, no STD; no parking violations, only rules and rules and rules to safeguard our interests as a whole.

These are all 'dreams' that we had, or are still having.

So what year are we in now? 2007. So are there flying cars ? Aluminum foil wrapped cities? People working in unity, playing own roles. Where are all these dreams?

Dreams? I'd say morality. We, are all born to this world and taught to 'think' or to 'hope' that way, we all are born and taught with a little Karl Marx in us, if you don't know who this guy is, he's the father of socialism, or communism to sound more familiar.

According to him, the people of the world should all be equal, every role in this world are played by people with equal importance, no single chain of this sustainable homosapien ecology should be neglected nor impaired with rights. Everyone would earn the same amount of money, everyone would work hard towards the common goal - The goal where human will forever dominate the world, live in peace and harmony.


Except that it's against our instincts, the instinct to 'SURVIVE'; the instinct to grab a larger loaf of bread than our neighbors, friends, family and siblings. Our offspring will forever be the utmost importance in ensuring the survival or of our genes, our thinking, our heritage and most surreal of all, our surname.

This sense of survival instinct is what that drives the evolution of our kind to dominate, amongst all species. We belonged to the family of mammals, the species where there's a Male and Female, with penis and vagina, that allows us to mate as much as we could, have offspring with as vast diversity a partner we could get hold of, to have the combined genes of people from different parts of the world, to be able to be subjected to different disease and have different kinds of immune system to ward off different kinds of sickness, to allow us to live in very vastly different terrains and geographical areas.

This is Capitalism. To capitalize on whatever that's surrounding us, and to make it benefit us at best it could.

Hence whilst ideologically we had a lil Karl Marx in us, instinctively we're Bill Gates.

Sunday, October 14, 2007

The Future of Tech Gadgets

Since the coming of age of wireless technologies such as Bluetooth and WiFi, we've experienced a huge surge in the demands for such devices whereby true 'mobility' was granted to these 'mobile' devices. Or was it?

Nonetheless the last entanglement tying these devices down into not being able to be truly 'mobile' is the power source.

4hrs of usage, 8hrs of recharge, these are terms we're so used to be reading thru the specification sheets of such devices, which tech gadget advocates truly take into consideration while making their purchases as this will determind how truly 'mobile' they can be.

Imagine IF electricity were to be able to funneled their way wirelessly powering up said devices, how nice would that be?

There are research being done in UK's MIT tech lab, which explores an age old physics phenomenon call 'Resonance', whereby instruments will 'react' to other instruments resonating at the same frequency, this can be noticed thru musical instruments whereby a certain note wa being played by a device at a certain frequency rate, the vibrations will be picked up and 'mimicked' by another instrument with the same resonating frequency. This phenomenon is currently being tested and is said that they have succeeded in channeling electricity within a distance of 3 to 5 meters.

It is astounding and utterly delighting to know that not far out in the future, we will be able to use gadgetries without the need to stay near a power source (assuming this technology has come of age and they are able to transmit energy up to a few hundred kilometers from a single power source - optimistically

By then, coupled with the ever increasing speed of wireless technology (Information transfer, not energy - thou it is some sort of energy being transferred) of WIMAX (Think 100MB per second with a range of 70 - 100 kilometers); our laptops can then be purchased without harddisks to store enormous data (all can be streamed across using WIMAX) and we will be truly wireless and mobile without the need to recharge our devices. By then our laptops will be a mere transmitter + screen + keyboard, and they'll perhaps just weigh in at 500gms.

By then, we will truly see another surge in the demand for devices such as laptops, mp3 players, and so on. By then, we will be truly mobile and wireless.

And of course, our last excuse of not being able to keep in touch with our bosses or clients ("I'm sorry my battery was flat.") will soon be made redundant.

Working 24hrs? Truly possible, desireable? Nope.

Nonetheless, I truly welcome this technology, and if the increase in power transmission be sufficient enough to run our cars - We can then truly have cars without combustion engines.

Saturday, June 30, 2007

The Pursuit of HappYness

Watched it? You must. You have to. You eventually would experience something like it. For if you don't, I have to say it's pretty much your loss, for people who are determine, it's either success or lesson learned.

There are alot of losers in the world, well then we must say they must be pretty 'lucky' to have all these FREE lessons.

Well ironically, the term 'losers' were not coined by themselves, it's by people who are successfull. Losers are losers when they don't realize themselves as one, or after they realized, they happen to accept this and hence acceptance spawns norm. Being a loser, is a norm for them; their brain hence was tweaked to think in this way :

" I'm unlucky, I'm a loser, I don't think I can make it, what if i can't make it?, what will my boss say to me the next morning?, will i get sacked? I might as well kill myself, no wait... that's painful, oh ya ... i could buy lottery, then if i win I'll quit my job.... yeah .... that's a good plan .... my job sucks... if i could just get myself a 4 digit and I'm out of here.... oh shit... here comes my boss .... he's gonna scold me again .... now where was i .... the documents.... .oh ... home? .... car ? ..... oh schmucks..... "

There goes. If you so happen frequent such thoughts..... quit it.

Remember this ironic thing : If you work hard, you'll get lucky.

There's this law amongst the seven laws that governs the universe: The Law of Attraction. The more focus your mind is on something, the more attraction you're pulled towards it, and hence it'll come to you.

When all the care you receive from your family and love ones, the care and guidance from colleagues and all the food you eat, the air you breath and the water you drank ;in short all this energy was transformed into a constant focus on the STUPID things in your mind. Do you think your concentration and focus of such immense energy towards it is enough to make you to react in everything in such a way that these STUPID/FAILURE/UNLUCKY/BAD/SUCKY DAY will come to you?

YES. I guarantee.

So, use all your might, your energy, your focus, your thoughts, your thinking, your mindset to focus on?

" I have to achieve it, I will slowly plan, gather information, look for that person.... hmm yes I guess this is the right way.... oh ya .... perhaps Michael can give me a hand in this.... yes yes.... wow this is hard.... oh wait.... i can do some small research..... hur? yes? oh no mom.... thanks... I'm doing some research.... k ... thanks! love ya! ..... hhmm .... i think i'll plan this way... when i reach this stage.... I'll go seek Michael.... yeah yeah .... i guess this is how i do it.... I have to succeed.... hmmm .... yupe."

DOES THAT SOUND BETTER? The food, the love, the air, the water, the care, the guidance - All these energy to be use in such a way?

Do it people, I've tasted the first such happYness recently, forgo all negative thoughts, surround yourself with faith and trust, do it. Remember, you'll get lucky if you work hard.

Monday, June 18, 2007

Do you believe Chen Sui Bian had a golden opportunity to be a hero?

First, one must understand China doesn't really care if Taiwan claims independance. The authorities might say stuffs like "No external forces shall divide the Chinese lands, never!"

Does Taiwan had anything to do with China now? Nothing.

So why China is so trembled, or show themselves as hostile if ever Taiwan were to gain independance?

Yes, United States of America.

USA had already a Korean Military base, a very strong Japan based military, another military base in Turkey and don't forget Philippines and Hawaii.

And now, since Taiwan had a pact with the USA, that if they were to be attacked, USA will indefinitely use their forces.

What if Taiwan were to gain independance? What impact would China get?


But, if China were to just let go of Taiwan, USA would immediately give military aid to Taiwan, establish bases to 'protect' them against the evil communists.

China hates USA's intervention and their expanding of their influences in this region. That's why they say they wouldn't allow Taiwan for independance.

Why? Just imagine if USA cuts off oil/steel supply to China. Enough?

Hmm this seems like a chicken and egg question right?

China poses a threat to Taiwan if USA were to be present, and the reason USA are present is because China poses a threat.

So how would all of these relate to my topic?

Which in your humble opinion makes a greater importance to China?

Economy OR Taiwan ?

China wouldn't loose a single strand of hair on Taiwan if they were to declare independance, the thing China doesn't want is that the USA were to have another strategic location to base their influence, which would be a significant threat to China.

So again, what does that have anything to do with my topic?

Now we look at the things that are going to happen in 2008.

Beijing Olympic
USA Elections
Taiwan Elections

This is a very critical for Taiwan, I might even say the timing is so perfect, that if Chen Sui Bian, that idiot were to be even slightly more tactful, he can play this into a historic scene, changing his current CSB=Idiot status to CSB = National Founder.


Before we go into that, think of this: What does Malaysia had to do with USA?

Nothing right? But do the USA hate us or cut off ties with us? Nope. Very normal relationship.

So, the only way for this historical moment to happen lies on Chen Sui Bian's palm. Catch the timing right, his portrait would be in history text books for ages.

Travel to China, meet president Hu Jing Tao and then in a joint statement:

Taiwan will declare the scrapping of the pact with USA (That Taiwan will be defended at any cost if attacked.) Which is a good thing for USA since they would love to have a better relationship with China.

Hur? Declaring something as such at your 'perceived' enemy's stronghold? YES.

Do you think President Hu Jin Tao would go " Wow great! USA no longer needs to defend Taiwan, now i can send my armies to Taiwan and grab this nation back with my loaded torpedoes!" ?

Nope, he rather had a very good and successfull Beijing Olympic 2008.

So after scrapping that pact, CSB would then announced in a joint statement in Beijing with Hu Jin Tao that Taiwan will now be in ties with Beijing, with annual RMB 200 billion investment in Harbin or Shanghai - As a sovereignity nation.


Claim independance from China by reassuring China that Taiwan will remain normal relationship with USA (just like Malaysia), with this reassurance, Taiwan would be in better terms with China, and trades with USA would be as per normal as well.

Oh wait, would this move piss off USA?

Nope. Their elections will be in year 2008. Do you think they're free for all this bullshit with Afghanistan, Iraq ?

So what do Chen Sui Bian do then?

Yes, give monetary support to Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama or any idiot from Republican for their election campaigns, and to have a healthy and normal relationship.

China happy, USA happy, Taiwan happy.

So CSB, instead of spending useless money on nations that are birdshit small with anonymous, hard to spell names, why not do something like this? The region will be peacefull, China can dismantle their rockets aiming at Chinese (There's no race called Taiwanese, seriously.); USA can leave China and Taiwan alone and the region will prosper.

Chen Sui Bian - Legend.

But i guess he ain't as smart ass as I do.

Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Vios or City anyone?

Many, i mean many bought Vios and City since year 2003.

And many, i mean many consider these 2 as 'GOOD' cars.

They're cheap, they claim. At RM80,000+

They're practical, good looking, good build quality. They claimed.

Many would also argue on the functionality, adequate space of these 2 cars.

If you're planning on getting one, or you actually envy others being able to afford one. READ THIS.

There are only two types of buyers who would self perceive as either one of these two groups:

1. I buy Vios or City not because I'm bias on others, but because the bang for buck they offered, and because of the interior, build quality, functionality, and they offer 2 airbags.

2. I love them, I don't care what you said, I love these cars.

3. (Third? I thought i only mention 2 groups? K, the third one is actually my opinion, which many would defend till death that they weren't in this group.) The third group is actually a group of buyers that could actually afford RM80k, and they're scouring the market for a choice. They wanted to buy a RM80k car, because they want people to know they could afford RM80k, and that they feel better when parked next to a car that costs RM50k. And they chose Vios and City, because it seems a 'safe' choice. Many were buying, hence i don't think i would get into much trouble getting one. Moreover, it's Toyota/Honda.

Group 1, let me present to you Perodua Myvi. Park one next to your Vios or City, put the brand aside. INSPECT. Build quality? SAME. Spaciousness? Myvi wins hands down. Airbags? Checked. Boot? Where's the boot? Myvi can load a washing machine or a 29 inch TV, which not much sedans could. So, if it were in terms of aesthetics, this small puny RM40k car is indeed the winner, in every sense (given the selling price). But would i buy one if i could afford a RM80k car? Nope, i won't, because I too would love people to see, that I, Bobby could afford an RM80k car. The self perceive social status gain that i would get when i spend that extra RM40k.

Group 2, you love Vios/City don't you? May i ask then, if Corolla Altis and Honda Civic were the exact same price as Vios/City. Which would you get? 100% of respondents interviewed by Mr Bobby reveals that this is a silly question, they will DEFINITELY get Altis or Civic.

Of course there will be people who'd argue that anyone would definitely get something that's more expensive. Or is it? Toyota Camry, that behemoth. Imagine you're the typical Vios/City buyer, a female, 25 year old or a college student. Would you like people seeing you driving a Camry? Gotcha, NO right? It's sooooooo UNCLE-ish, it's too huge, people would think you might be driving your dad's car.

So? by spending an extra RM40k to get something RM40k could get (Myvi); you not only did not get the perceive social status you ought to think you did, and you did not actually LOVE Vios or City;


So which car should you get?


It's a world car, one that was newly developed from a very well received concept car back in 2002; sold in Europe, Japan, Asia etc. Not some South East Asian marketing scam. Marketing scam? My Vios is a Marketing SCAM!!?

YES. Vios is actually the first generation of Toyota Yaris, launched way back in 1998, the chassis and platform was re-used for Vios, hence the small interior space, the solid rear axle which do nothing to help in the handling of the car. (Modern cars are all using independant linked suspension - Even Wira is using it)

Moreover, Suzuki Swift in UK was argued by many magazines including Top Gear to be a more worthwhile purchase than even the mighty Mini Cooper One.

Most of all, there's nothing right above it, on the edge of your affordability.

Saturday, April 14, 2007

The right to vote, is it right?

Kudos to Hong Kong, they've just elected Donald Tsang again for the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. Governing a state with a population of more than 6,9 million residents. Hong Kong, as one of the most advance, democratic society in the modern world, somehow practices a 'weird' approach when it comes for the election for the chief of state.

Out of the 6.9 million residents, only 694 of which are the election comittee, are eligible for the 'public' voting. These include the social elites, tycoons in Hong Kong.


In my own humble opinion? No.

It's actually a play of public conscious when election parties play on the Democracy name to allow all citizens to play a part in the voting process. However, we can see how election parties use various tactics to manipulate the average poor, dumb, selfish public to rally the support they needed to get elected or re-elected. I'm very sure if it weren't for the average stupid americans and taiwanese, Chen Sui Bian and George W Jr Bush wouldn't have been elected in the first place.

The general public are oftenly swayed in approval ratings and public opinions on agendas brought up by these 'cunning' parties, which includes the reduction in taxes, medical benefits, even the acceptance of gay marriage or not to gain support from the public. These people are very much volatile to own perceived gained benefits, not knowing nor understanding the far-out effect it had on the country as a whole. In short, stupid people are manipulated by smart people for empty promises.

However, by limiting the number of people to vote to professors, elites, tycoons that had an in-sight on the intentions of election parties, the swaying of public opinions won't be that EASY, and in the end, a proper leader was elected, stupid decisions won't be made.

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Is Google up to something?

I think i know what Google's up to.
What does average users do in office after they ON their PC ?

Word, Excel, Calendar, Calculator, Solitaire, Email, Spider, Word, Solitaire, Email, Excel, Powerpoint, Excel, Word, Spider. OFF

And to top it off, it's normally a Pentium 4 3ghz PC, with 512MB of RAM, graphics accelerator which inevitably, was running Windowsand those specifications are 'recommended' by them, so "you wouldn't run into trouble for these """"long term investments""""" "

Most PCs that were used in the business world was 'wasted' by running these applications based on the 'recommended' specifications by Microsoft, so that Pentium could continue to sell their processors, Kingston could sell their RAMs, nVidia for their graphics card.

But notice how internet connection speeds had increased over the years? How WiFi is so prominent now? How Google seems to be able to give you the answers directly when you type "200 British Pounds to Malaysian Ringgit" ? And Google's seemingly domination of online search results? Coupled that with Google's recently published collection of excellent applications, which are FREE? Picasa, Hello, Blogger to name a few. And of course those excellent web based applications that process Words, Excel files and a web based Calendar, and those cheeky Google Widgets.

Is it enough for average office users?

What if you have a computer that had the cheapest processors, and perhaps low rams, no Operating Systems, just a simple web browser. BUT, with mega internet connection speeds say 100MB. Would you still buy Microsoft's Vista ?

However, the so-called 'plot' that Google had, wasn't some secret explosives that they'll suddenly announce in Microsoft's face, that'll render everyone panicked and wet their pants. It's called a 'plot' because I think Larry and Sergey realized it.

Google plans to slowly, letting users get online more to settle their daily job tasks, do the little things they've always wanted to do in office, play games, play around with Google Earth, send emails, Words, Excel, Powerpoint, arrange their photos, chat with friends etc.
Without realizing what actually was needed is a simple PC, a web browser and a high internet connection speed connected to a vast array of servers that does the computing power for you, does the storage for you. Add to that, all their applications are FREE.

This, will slowly topple Microsoft's dominance.
By then Microsoft would be like PlayStation 3, which only serious users would buy, and Google, with their cheeky, fun, fuss free Web Browser and a stupid processor (perhaps stupid enough to not be able to run viruses) acting like Nintendo's Wii.

The underdog, had bitten the Pitt Bull.

Friday, March 30, 2007

Why dictionaries aren't getting much thicker?

Have you stumble upon someone who goes "Wrong, that word doesn't exists in dictionaries." ?

Inferiority complex.

Embarassed with own culture and origins, hence felt the need to speak proper english to not 'feel ashamed' for not being in the same league as Americans or British. Huh?!

Language is, just a language. The French and Italians don't give a fuck to the Brits when they can't pronounce the so-called Proper English.

Do you give a damn when you're trying to speak to your Indonesian maid when you couldn't pronounce or having the know-how to speak Indonesian well? Nope. Because you felt yourself being the superior being.

Malaysians deserves every right to speak our accents our way, in which ever language we think it helps in our communication. No single language are 'complete'. It's a partially slow evolution that needs to change from time to time, era to era.

I find it annoying that our ancestors are able to name water as 'Water' and a book as a 'Book' where as we can't even name a 'PDA' as a 'Ghibo'or 'Plipher' because that would be grammatically, socialogically, and politically incorrect; hence we have to result to 'Personal Digital Assistants' because put simply, we are confine to people like you, that we had to speak proper english, with the correct 'accent' or 'grammer' simply because plipher or ghibo doesn't exist in our dictionary.

What if books are called 'BPW' which goes 'Binded Pages of Words' and that we were taught this way since young because calling a 'Binded Pages of Words' as a 'Book' seems weird?

The word Google was derived from the word Googol, which actually means the digit 1 followed by one hundred zeroes. This term was coined in 1920 by nine-year-old Milton Sirotta, nephew of American mathematician Edward Kasner. What if she was spanked by Edward, saying "there's no such term in mathematics !"

Any nomination for PDA ? I'd say we call it Peedeeay because I wouldn't wanna be bombarded by YOU. Given the choice? Plipher, or Ghibo.

To enhance my point it's plipher or ghibo if you catch my drift. OR DORIFTO

Dare to dream

Hayao Miyazaki.

Ever watched his animations? He's a master.

I've watched a couple of them over the past few days and it really inspires me.

Really do hope that if I've watched his animations a couple of years back, I wouldn't have picked the wrong path in life, wouldn't even subject myself to the cruelty of people's so called advice.

Most of the time, advices ruined people's life, especially those with dreams.

The so called "What I'm telling you is for your future!" ruins a kid's life, stopping them from reading comics, stopping them from doing what they liked most, stopping them from frequent football games, and perhaps, there goes a professional footballer.

I've met people who's dreams are to have their own bakery shop, people that dreamed to become very special persons, only to be ruined by their parent's so-called advices and took up accounting courses. It's such a waste of life, why would people nowadays stop other people from realizing their dreams?

Why my parents stopped me from training with Malaysian Snooker Team when I'm 17 ? Why? Because they themselves did not achieved it in life and they fear i would stumble upon the same path? Hence I'm told to study? Why my secondary school forces me to attend chinese caligraphy art classes when i do especially well in illustrations? I hate the classes so much that eventually I've stopped drawing.

Why our current society in Malaysia is so afraid of jumping out of the norm? Only people who succeeded in life will they give advices such as "Go for what you liked, do it, never give up, you'll definitely succeed." Whereas people who failed in life goes "Do not affect your studies! Why did you waste so much time in that? You should be studying!"

I've met a friend who had a brother who played video games, win tournaments and joined clans, but his family claimed he's useless. They claimed he's not good enough to join international tournaments or becoming famous at all. How could this person succeed if his family did not offer the support given, and that he's family stopped him halfway when he's struggling to learn, practice and perhaps becoming really good at it?

There's this famous pianist 'Lang Lang' from China that his success stories inspires me. Read

"Lang's success is closely related to the support and sacrifice of his family. After discovering Lang's gift in music, Lang Quoren, his father, decided to spare no efforts to foster Lang Lang's ability.

To provide Lang Lang with better musical education, Lang Quoren quit from his steady job and left his wife to come to Beijing with Lang Lang. They lived in a shabby room for five years. In searching for the most suitable teacher for Lang Lang, Lang Quoren annoyed quite a few people because of his upright temper. And to send Lang Lang to take part in an overseas competition, Lang Quoren borrowed much money from others and finally got the visa. To his pleasure, Lang Lang became one of the winners of the competition"

Now, this is where he stands, at international arena, playing what he loves most, succeeding in life at a tender young age. There's no way he could've succeeded if his family did not play this important role in supporting him to the fullest.

Fear, is what that stops people from going beyond. The fear of falling, the fear of being behind when failure steps in. This is what that stops people from cultivating their interests.

Go ahead people, fight for your dreams, dare to be different, jump out of the norm. Do not subject yourself to the grey hands of mediocrity.

Charity, Philantrophists. Mere selfish acts?

As in chinese proverbs, human born good? or evil ?
There are people who claim that without education, humans were savage beings, killings, rapings were an act of born traits.
There are also people who claim that humans were born good, fairy-like, would only then turn selfish and cruel through the various temptations in life.
Which is it? It's actually that when human civilisation had reached to a state of going beyond basic self realization, to improvise on various traits of human being. I believe its under the influence of education, socialization that we started to think in a way that stealing from the rich, to buy medicine from one self's ailing mother, is an act of barbaric. How barbaric was that? And we've also come to a state of self realization that some considered eating animals, killing them, chopping off their limbs, are also an act of barbaric, they preferred eating vegetables, which in my opinion, if the cabages and potatoes would scream in streaks of pain when they plucked them off, they would die of hunger. Or would it?
Humans have came to a stage where there are so many options in life, that many simply act fakely, to achieve a state of self improvisation to feed the sense of pride and morality than to feed one self's stomache. How stupid and barbaric was that?
It is only humans that receive educations that would turn back and ask themselves human started good, or evil; and it is only humans that received educations, that would eat vege so as not being cruel, to satisfy their own self morality gain and to have a self perceived state of being more 'advance' more 'civilised' than others. And it is also this state of 'self morality gain' temptation, that Warren Buffet gave 37 Billion USD away? Would poverty and famine end because rich people started to give out to the poor? I however don't think so.
Take this scenario, a family in Africa, the father, with a couple of kids lying around, big bloated stomaches, at the peril of dying away, ok perhaps with Aids as well. Just as this guy is about to die, a loaf of bread reached him, donated by philantrophists like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates; that pain stricken guy ate that loaf of bread, together with his family, gain some strength. While having a good night's sleep (which he was supposed to die off that same night) he felt horny and had sex with his wife, 9 months later, another stomache bloated kid was born. And a couple of years later, another stomache bloated family is there again for the rich to take care of. Is that moeny well spent in helping? Or its dragging on with the overall wellness of human civilisation? So is Bill Gates or Warren Buffet helping the world, or are they merely satisfying their own needs of morality satisfaction?
Of course, i myself would be selfish enough to hope that some rich guy would spare some of his money to me, if i'm in peril. But that is a selfish act ain't it? To hope that someone would help me, because i wasn't lucky enough, but that same loaf of bread, if was passed to 2 dying families next to each other, would they kill one another to survive? I believe they will.
Mother earth is now supporting 6 Billion homosapiens, if the poor and stricken would die off 'in peace' hopefully, maybe we'll have less to support? Less polution? Who cares about less humanity? Morality? We want long term sustainability. I believe if Bill Gates is the one next to the pain stricken family, he himself in peril as well, he would not have spare half loaf of the bread, then tell the other guy :" Ok, you have 8 kids, i have 8 as well, lets let each 4 of them die off tonight so that we can share the loaf of bread. " Not in a million years he would do so. Hence in the end, is he merely doing it for self morality satisfaction? I believe sub consciously, YES.
That's why, sorry to the Indonesian Tsunami victims and African famine 'victims'. I did not pay a single cent in helping them, because i believe its nature's way of making human and earth sustainable. I would sacrifice my earning of self morality satisfaction, and let the Tsunami and famine victim gain that small piece of morality satisfaction by not asking for help and die off in peace for the sake of humanity. Ok, that's probably an excuse, but i do feel bad for them, seriously. But sometimes, i do give out to those decapitated, really felt sorry. Ok, one must be selfish sometimes right? And it does feel good after paying a little in gaining that bit of self morality satisfaction.

Time travel, is it possible?

There's always been this debate of whether we can travel in time. There has been no end to it, almost 99% of people would conclude, oh, we just don't have the technology now, we would be able to do so in the future, perhaps year 2100.

Ok, what is time? It's actually a scheduling tool used by homosapiens to delegate our daily chores, its a dividing of a process we go through. On a smaller scale, hours, on larger scales, years. But is there a definite relativity to our natural world? Does nature comprehends or response in the way we, homosapiens divide our time? NO.

We cannot relate year 1950 to a state where the earth's temperature is 2 degrees celcius colder on average, it's just our recording of a process that nature went pass, and we're in it; not above it. This theory of time travel is based on the same concept that we, homosapiens living on this third rock from the sun, is actually the middle of the universe, and that everything rotates around our sense of understanding.

Time travel is impossible. There is no way we can travel our selves in space and dimension to a world where we have been. The theory of time travel is based on our believing of everything is destined, and that we can change it if technology allows, it is so near to reality because we can perceive the 'benefits' that could be obtained, it is also based on our imaginations, our thinking power which renders us almost 'free' from our basic instincts, to gain a higher level of self consciousness whereby we are able to change destiny.

Let me explain abit, if it is destined that if YOU crossed the road and thus both your legs were decapitated by that truck, and that if you are able to travel in time to stop your own self from crossing the road, or if earlier, sabotaging the truck to not allow it to start, it would be also destined, that time travel would definitely happen !

If the timeline of activities were of a constant line that we humans believe what destiny are to be, then time travel would also be included in this time line, perhaps at a later stage, and this, would literally means time travel would not be able to change destiny after all because it is in it.

Now let's move to a slightly deviated topic, looking into the past. As we all know, light travels at 299,792 Kilometers per second. The vision of something happened at 299,792 KM away will reach you at 1 second later. We also know that by looking up to the Sun, we're actually looking at history because light needs 8 minutes and 20 seconds to reach us, and if you have a powerful enough telescope to take a glimpse into, you'd be able to see the surface of the sun, albeit 8 mins and 20 seconds slower to what was happening there RIGHT NOW, because the vision which could only be comprehended by light, needs that amount of time to reach our very eyes.

Now bring this to Proxima Centauri, the nearest star (Another SUN, closest from earth) is 4.22 light years away from us; now what are lightyears? A light year, is the amount of distance light travels in a year's time, 365 days. Hence light needs 4.22 years to reach us from there, meaning we're looking at something 4.22 years ago, however we do not know what was happening to it NOW.

Ok, vice versa, if some alien being was looking at us thru their high powered telescopes, and they are able to zoom to the surface and see what's actually happening, perhaps on someday in year 2005 (maybe near September) these aliens were shocked by what they actually saw, 2 planes crashing to the twin towers in New York City. Ok, imagine you were there as well, looking back from the very telescopes these ETs were looking thru, are you looking back in time?


Hence to conclude, if we are able to invent something that travels faster than light, say, we could reach a planet 100 million light years away, in 1 year, ok perhaps immediately reaching there, (not much difference ain't it?) and when we looked back thru some portable hubble telescope, what can we see? You'd guessed it, 100 million years ago, T-Rex, from Jurassic

You can see the past, you can never go back.
Image used taken by Photographer Yitzhak Avigur, hosted at TrekEarth.
No intention for commercial purposes.

Dying the Steve Irwin way

Salute to the crocodile hunter Steve Irwin.

His shows had always been a favourite of mine. Yes, he died, what a waste.

But that is a great way of dying ain't it? He died being stabbed thru the heart by a Sting Ray, how heroic could anyone die in this modern society?

Let's put it this way, imagine there is this place called heaven, and Steve reaches there, waiting for some heavenly transit system maybe, next to him, another chap.

They chat :

Chap :" So, how you ended up here?"

Irwin :" Oh, i was filming some show and there was this huge Sting Ray, swimming over me, tried grabbing it like I always do, it turned around, stab me on my heart in the middle of the ocean, the pain was immense, i died shortly thereafter."

Chap :" How sad, hope your wife and parents deal with it well."

Irwin :" So how you end up here?"

Chap :"Neh, nothing much, needn't talk about it."

Irwin :"Oh common, something to share maybe, the transits gotta be here anytime soon."

Chap :"Really, don't felt like talking about it."

Irwin :"Oh it must be really hard then, common, relax, tell me, i might be able to help."

Chap :"I ... there was this fish..............*stuttered* ..... fishball, it was kinda huge as well, i choked...."

Irwin :"...................."

There are many people who should've died the Irwin way, take Michael Jackson for example, if he would have died 15 years ago from some plane while he's on his way to Africa to meet children infected with HIV, what would be of him now?

Preserving dying civilisations

There has always been this outcry for the preserving of dying civilisations, claiming that the 'polutions' of the modern world, would contaminate their thinking, obseleting their habits.

In my opinion that's just an act of selfish, ZOOing act on other slow developing civilisations.

What's the need to actually doing so? So that we can travel with our kids on holiday trips to experience a wholly different world? Ok, the claim to preserve them as to allow our kids to have a glimpse of what are their daily livings like? What for?

The Mayan civilisations died out, so did the Ankhor Wat, so Wat? They did not have an impact on our current society. Your child wouldn't end up dumb and dumber just because they could not catch a glimpse of an aborigine throwing a boomerang, killing a Kangaroo on the way back and biting off the Kangaroo's testiscles to be able to carry on living his life dominated by Play Stations or Barbies right?

Is it because the current world order dominated by Western values have to feel sorry for their acts over the past few centuries? The conquering of Albuquerque on the Malacca Straits, the Opium war, the massacres of Red Indians rendered their off springs to have a different way of down pressing other civilisations? In short, ZOOing them?

Let these civilisations adapt to the changing world, let them have a chance to play World of War Craft, oh, maybe you don't want your kid being bullied on Warnet by an aborigine do you?
I suppose that smart photo of a bunch of African Lawyers had ancestors just like the pictures above right? Give them a break.

Why can't they just ban smoking?

All over the world, governments were talking shit loads about campaigning for people to quit this 'unhealthy' habit, health organizations all over the world talks about banning cigarettes.

Well, these so called Health Specialists think on a micro mode. Gain a wider, broader perspective, and they'll know why governments merely campaign about them and not taking actions to illegalized smoking.

Governments as we all know, measure their 'performance' by the re-elected probability they would have for their next upcoming elections. Thus on a society level, there's this commonly perceived 'goodness' of quit smoking, governments will response to this in order to get the votes they needed, and the seemingly mutual understanding of public's wants and needs; for doing so, they'll be in-line with public's perception of a GOOD GOVERNMENT.

Tell me, is it better to let one die, or a couple of millions? Can i conclude that the tax obtainable from smokers for a government, is enough to sustain the much needed infrastructure build ups, the health and medicinal budgets, the sustaining of social order, the sewage lines, the money to build barriers to sustain over floods over river bannks?

To ban cigarettes, that literally means stopping all production and manufacturing of cigarettes, or the importing of them.

This serious act would definitely trigger the whole tobacco industry to flow underground, triads would be the happiest, prices per pack would inflate, profits will all turn to triads, and the more money they have, the stronger they get. This is a basic economic term call DEMAND and SUPPLY.

One fine example, America banned liquor in the 1920s to 1930s; what hapened? The whole industry turned underground, triads and gangs earned so much and became so powerful and influential that Mayors were controlled by the mafias, police forces corrupted, social security dropped to a level America has never experienced before. Remember Al Capone? (Picture from above) Want that thug to re-emerge? Ban Smoking.

To conclude, stop banning of something that had low immediate effect on a social level, allow casinos, prostitution, gambling, tobacco industries as such to grow in the bright, everything will be under control, taxes would be insurmountable, government stays strong, citizens will have higher per capita earning, educate themselves, and deter whether they wanted to get involved in these so called 'unhealthy' habits.

Smoking is a bad habit for a person, on a micro view, this person smokes, dies. What bad is it for the society? Less one person, less one to fight for your job that you might be interviewing this coming Monday, less one person buying the expensive coffees from StarBucks, the cheaper it will be, less one person, the overall GDP Per Capita of a country will be marginally higher.
If suckers out there would continue to smoke, to thrive the economy, like me, let this sucker die of lung cancer, at least the profits generated through taxes amounted since this bugger starts smoking, lets say, 16 year old, and dying around perhaps 58 year old, this bugger would have contributed more tax to the government than mere average you or him.
Ok, i might die young, sorry mom and dad, but thank me homosapiens.