Monday, August 9, 2010

Posted by smileyface on 1:23 AM
1

Land Reclamation in Dubai

We had a rather interesting Geography lesson last week, which talked about land reclamation in Dubai. Unlike Singapore, where land is reclaimed because... Singapore is tiny, Dubai's land reclamation projects are actually grand projects aimed at increasing Dubai's tourism income.


The contrast between the 2 countries is quite interesting. As can be seen from http://library.thinkquest.org/C006891/reclaimland.jpg, Singapore's land reclamation (the gray areas) has the sole purpose of expanding Singapore's land area. On the other hand, Dubai's Palm Islands http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Palm_Island_Resort.jpg are unique and eye catching. Apart from being a feat of land reclamation, this also shows how Dubai has shifting its focus from oil to tourism.

Oil was first discovered in Dubai in 1966. The oil economy let to the rapid growth of Dubai's economy, but now Dubai's oil economy accounts for 5% of its income, as opposed to 50% in the 1980s. So how was this shift possible? After the Gulf War, rising oil prices encourage Dubai to shift its focus to tourism and real estate. Dubai built up many world-record breaking architectural marvels to attract tourists, such as the aforementioned Palm Islands, the Burj Khalifa (tallest man-made structure ever built), Emirates Towers and the Burj Al Arab, the fourth tallest and most expensive hotel in the world.

I found this story of Dubai's adapting to survive after its oil ran out fascinating.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Posted by smileyface on 11:23 PM
1

2010 Summer Youth Olympic Games

Finally, after more than 2 years of intense planning, the inaugural 2010 Youth Olympic Games are coming to Singapore. However, as shown in this poll:http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/07/90-per-cent-not-interested-at-all-in-yog/, Singaporeans show a disturbing indifference to the games. 90% of people surveyed were not interested in the YOG at all.


I feel that this is a very worrying trend shown. The apathy and lack of interest toward the games shows how Singaporeans can be small minded and selfish. The YOG is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and with the attitude shown by Singaporeans toward the games, this could very well be an embarassing flop for Singapore.

However, maybe this lack of interest is not solely due to Singaporean's lazy attitudes. Since it was announced, the planning for the YOG was been riddled by
  • financial diffculties: its budget nearly quadrupled from $104 million to $400 million)
  • controversy: the Minister for Community, Youth and Sports Dr. Balakrishnan harshly criticised Singaporeans for their indifferent attitude to the games
  • the aforementioned lukewarm attitude to the games: 3500 people surveyed by channel news asia said they were not interested in the games at all, and only 6% of tickets sold for the YOG were bought by the public
  • a rather embarassing cringe-worthy promotional video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_7g-kFRD1E ): Members of the public have criticised it for its cheesy lyrics and... the hadouken-esque moves
  • the lack of two of the olympic's biggest names (http://www.todayonline.com/Sports/EDC100731-0000092/Swim-sensation-Phelps-and-lightning-Bolt-will-miss-Youth-Olympics): Micheal Phelps and Usain Bolt are both unable to attend the YOG due to their own competition schedules, leaving Yelena Isinbayeva as the only games ambassador coming to Singapore
All in all, I feel that with so many factors weighing against it, it seems that a miracle is needed to prevent the YOG from becoming a national farce.
EDIT Another embarassment for the YOG: compare the mascots for the 2008 Olympic games and the mascots for the 2010 YOG
and
This is another example of how our uncreativity is just...embarassing.

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Posted by smileyface on 1:32 PM
0

Mercy and Justice in the Merchant of Venice

I feel that in the play, while there are examples of mercy being shown, it is too often due to selfish motives to be considered "real" mercy. As Portia said in her speech about mercy in Act 4 Scene 1, "The quality of Mercy is not strain'd". This means that real mercy is not forced, it is done purely out of one's will to show mercy to the offending party.

For example, when the Duke spared Shylock's life in Act 4 Scene 1, "I pardon thee thy life before thou ask it", he has his own motives: he wants to prove himself better than what he considers "an inhuman wretch". As shown later in the scene, he is not really showing mercy to Shylock, as Shylock says "You take my house when you do take the prop/ That doth sustain my house. You take my life,/ When you do take the means whereby I live." This shows how the Duke is not killing Shylock outright but leaving him to die- a far more cruel fate. Shylock, alone in the world after his daughter abandoned him, is left an old bankrupt Christian, preventing him from practicing money lending.

Another example of how "false" mercy is shown in the play is how Portia toys with Shylock in the court scene. She leads him along, making him believe that his case is solid and giving him chances to show mercy-not because she wants him to take them, but rather to make sure that he contradicts himself when she tells him of the loophole in his bond. Portia has no right to be an actual Judge, but still administers the penalty of forfeiting all his goods to the state. This shows how "false" mercy is often merely to lead others into traps.

In Elizabethan times, the anti-Semitic audience would probably have believed that Shylock was shown pure mercy and justice due to their belief that he was a generic villain. However, now in modern times Shylock is seen as a morally grey character, thus showing how some characters are hypocritical in their treatment of him.

Posted by smileyface on 1:09 PM
0

BP Oil Spill finally sealed?

After more than three months, it seems that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is finally drawing to a close:
http://www.thesunnews.com/2010/08/04/1619420/lawmakers-focus-on-chemicals-used.html?storylink=mirelated
While this is certainly great news, it is obvious that there is still a great deal of oil in the ocean to clean up (up to 4 million barrels of oil spilled). The surrounding area should be cleaned up as fast as possible to prevent any further damage and pollution to the wildlife in the area.

As it looks like America can finally begin to put the oil spill behind it, I think there are some lessons to be learnt from the American reaction to this situation. Obviously, regulations involving drilling platforms should be tightened to ensure that this type of accident does not happen again. However, after the oil spill, various Americans cried to to boycott BP (http://www.facebook.com/BoycottBP). They felt that BP was ruining their country. While this is true, they forgot that the explosion was an accident. Boycotting BP would not solve much in the long run. After all, what would someone do if they boycotted BP? Go to Shell? Exxon? Those other oil companies have had their own environmental accidents in the past, and yet people can decide to boycott BP just because theirs was the most recent.

I believe such a problem should be solved from its root- America's dependance on oil. They use the most oil in the world and it is this insatiable thirst for it that has caused oil companies around to world to try and find as much oil as they can. As long as America keeps up its demand for oil, companies are going to be drilling as much as they can- a situation where accidents can easily occur. I am not saying BP is not to blame for the oil spill, but I do feel that American people's responses to it have been rather hypocritical.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Posted by smileyface on 5:30 AM
0

Hwa Chong STOMP Article Controversy

The recent STOMP article written about how teachers took away students' belongings has been a source of controversy both on STOMP and among Hwa Chong students. In the article (submitted by an angry secondary 4 student who wished to complain about the school's practices), it is described how teachers took away student's belongings that were left unattended on tables*. I feel that the student was being very inconsiderate by tarnishing the school's reputation. Although it is understandable that he might be angry after he had his personal space invaded and his belongings taken, he should have taken his complaint to the school administration itself rather than making this issue public. The matter could have been resolved quietly and internally instead of what it has become now- a public mess. The STOMP article has attracted many hateful comments toward Hwa Chong students and the school, questioning their "giftedness" if they can make a mistake as simple as leaving their belongings around.


I feel that the school should make clear what happened that day, why they feel their actions were justified, and meet up with the student and his parents to ascertain the reason for the student's unhapiness with the school's actions. According to one of our recent assemblies, not only are some of the details reported in the STOMP article untrue, the students were already informed that they would be punished in such a way should they leave their belongings unattended.

Therefore, I conclude that the student has no right to sabotage the school's reputation for his own petty anger against it, especially seeing as how evidence suggests that the schools actions were justified.

*The same punishment actually happened to our class earlier in the year. Multiple laptops were taken and students were required to retrieve their laptops back from teachers. However, the matter was quickly resolved and the students' general consensus is that they do not mind since no permanent damage was done/no items went missing.