Showing posts with label General. Show all posts
Showing posts with label General. Show all posts
Why do people troll?
14 July 2014
What is trolling?
Trolling is the act of provoking or inciting arguments with the deliberate intent to obtain an emotional response and to disrupt genuine discussion on the Internet. Trolling by definition, is to be a disingenuous bastard on the Internet. Trolling seeks to attack people emotionally through a screen but not real-life. It is a psychology on human-computer interaction and virtual worlds. Comparing human to human interaction in real-life (e.g. bullying, playing pranks) to trolling is incorrect, because the user can choose to simply ignore, filter, block, delete, scroll or even move to the next page. The user has full control over what he/she wants to see and how he/she wants to respond through anonymity, privacy settings and so on.
So why troll?
There is no definitive answer as to the reason for trolling; however, trolling usually poses a question to you, your existence or your life. Usually, it's one of the following:
1. Why so serious?
2. What fun is there in poker if you cannot see the reactions of the players?
3. Do you truly understand and respect what freedom of speech is?
4. Are you aware of the concept of "ignore", "block", "delete", "scroll down" and "move to the next comment/page"?
5. How would you and the people here actually react to this?
The very existence of these questions is the very reason why people troll - to see you become clueless to these questions through your angered response. It's funny in the same way children make fun of one another through words like "your mother" where mature adults don't find it funny. In essence, trolling is childish.
If trolling is a problem for you, think about this example. Why do you simply ignore those 200 junk mails you get everyday? Why don't you report each and every one of them for harassing you over and over again, even when some of them are phishing scams? Well, because they're anonymous so you don't know how to get to them, and they're in your Junk folder. Problem solved. So why should trolling be a problem for you? The user has control over what he/she wants to see, and how he/she wants to respond. Remember that.
What about trolling with threats?
Some trolls target people with threats, like Justin Bieber for example. Some even go to the extent to blur the line between a real death-threat and trolling for fun. If no real threat is observable, then it is not wrong thanks to freedom of speech and expression. Of course, that itself is a hotly debated topic. There is a concern where even satirical comments can be regarded as a threat. One shouldn't be so sure to regard trolling as an ultimately wrong thing to do. It's just not as simple as one would like to think of it.
How to Get Instant Profit?
01 April 2011
This method will apply to any end-of-the-world believers.
April Fool's, but this may not be a joke, it might as well be a legit method of getting some serious profit! It's simple really. There's a Christian belief that the rapture is on 21st May 2011. There's also 2012, if you haven't forgotten about that. So, let's see how it works!
The Method
1. Since the world is going to end, get the believer to sign a legit agreement that allows them to offer you their belongings after the end-of-the-world date.
2. If they refuse, offer them USD$10,000 to buy all their belongings (make sure you only do this offer to people who have at least a house or an apartment).
3. They sign the contract.
4. Wait till the date comes.
5. ???
6. PROFIT!
April Fool's, but this may not be a joke, it might as well be a legit method of getting some serious profit! It's simple really. There's a Christian belief that the rapture is on 21st May 2011. There's also 2012, if you haven't forgotten about that. So, let's see how it works!
Sample agreement.
The Method
1. Since the world is going to end, get the believer to sign a legit agreement that allows them to offer you their belongings after the end-of-the-world date.
2. If they refuse, offer them USD$10,000 to buy all their belongings (make sure you only do this offer to people who have at least a house or an apartment).
3. They sign the contract.
4. Wait till the date comes.
5. ???
6. PROFIT!
5 Common Myths Debunked
05 March 2011
Here are 5 common myths which I come across quite often.
Some people believe in these myths seriously, but I think it is best that these silly beliefs be cleared up because it may just cause inconveniences to yourself or the people around you.
Myth #1
If your laptop's battery is full, and you want to use it with a power source, you must take off the battery. Otherwise, it will shorten the battery's life.
This is a funny myth that I come across very often in my country among my friends. This is not true, that's just not how Li-Ion battery works. When it is full, the battery stops charging automatically because there is nothing more to charge, and new technology allows better power management. You cannot "overcharge" your Li-Ion battery, and it will not overheat by charging.
On the other hand, taking your battery out is worse and may shorten your battery life instead. The battery ages even if not used. If you really need to take out your battery or have a spare battery to store, most people store batteries at around 40% charge in a cool, dry place for best results.
Myth #2
You MUST take antibiotics to treat your flu/fever/sorethroat.
For sore throats, there are two kinds of infection.
- Bacterial Infection (most commonly strep bacteria)
- Viral Infection (happens about 90% of the damn time)
A viral infection is common and you get it mostly together with the flu. These sore throats are also highly contagious, and is basically how most people have it. Antibiotics work only on bacteria, because it kills bacteria. For viruses, no, it doesn't work at all, and it may even make it worse (your body should be able to tolerate a bit, as long as you don't overdose). For sore throat, antibiotics only work for bacterial infections, which is not too common.
Flu is a virus. Antibiotics don't do anything to flu.
Fever may be caused by bacteria, but most fever is also due to virus. Again, if it is due to virus, antibiotics don't do anything.
Why do doctors keep prescribing antibiotics then? The doctor may think you have a bacterial infection, or the doctor may just prescribe you antibiotics to be on the safe side. I've had a bacterial infection sore throat before, but only once.
Myth #3
Eating lots of fried food or "heaty" food makes you sick.
In Malaysia or asian countries, we adapt the concept of Yin and Yang especially in food where dry, hot, spicy food are called "heaty" food and wet, cool, juicy food are called "cooling" food.
Of course, in Western medicine, it makes no sense at all. The Yin and Yang may serve as an easier explanation for many things, (imagine Newton's 3rd Law being simplified just like that) but it is not necessarily true.
For those who are not familiar, it basically means if you eat too much "heaty" food, you need to balance it up with "cooling" food or you'll get sick, since your body cannot handle the energy (associated with 'chi') ...
To make long story short, basically you need a balanced diet. Some people also have food intolerance, such as not being able eat too much spicy food or they'll have a reaction, such as acne or getting sick. Besides, people in the Western countries eat these grilled, fried, cooked to perfection "heaty" food almost every day.
You can eat rice when you're having a fever. You can eat watermelons if you have cough. I did it, it has made no difference. Just because I didn't recover doesn't mean my sick has gone worse due to the food. At one time, I also drank big bowls of Tom Yam soup for 3 days in a row, every day, and eat burgers, fastfood, the "heaty" stuff, and I was alright.
Myth #4
You must drink 8-10 glasses of water a day.
Depends on your body. One thing to note though, that 8 glasses of water per day includes the water you get from food, not just plain water. Coffee and tea is also water, they just go through the coffee beans or tea leaves, that's all. All these things that we drink are also water, and you'd be surprised that we actually get a lot of water from what we eat.
And that is why, some people drink like 1-2 cups of liquids, not necessarily water but maybe coffee, beer, or anything else but they're hydrated and healthy as ever, no different from you who drinks a lot. It is not a necessity to drink 8 glasses of water a day to be healthy. In some situations like in Malaysia, the weather is extremely hot almost all the time, so it may be good to drink more water though.
The more important rule is, if you feel thristy, drink.
Myth #5
The human penis has a bone.
It's just tissue and blood, no bones, no muscles. It is found in other mammals though, and other primates such as chimpanzees, but not humans. It's called a baculum.
Love,
Nicholas.
Some people believe in these myths seriously, but I think it is best that these silly beliefs be cleared up because it may just cause inconveniences to yourself or the people around you.
Myth #1
If your laptop's battery is full, and you want to use it with a power source, you must take off the battery. Otherwise, it will shorten the battery's life.
This is a funny myth that I come across very often in my country among my friends. This is not true, that's just not how Li-Ion battery works. When it is full, the battery stops charging automatically because there is nothing more to charge, and new technology allows better power management. You cannot "overcharge" your Li-Ion battery, and it will not overheat by charging.
On the other hand, taking your battery out is worse and may shorten your battery life instead. The battery ages even if not used. If you really need to take out your battery or have a spare battery to store, most people store batteries at around 40% charge in a cool, dry place for best results.
This is designed in a way that it should remain in your laptop forever...
Myth #2
You MUST take antibiotics to treat your flu/fever/sorethroat.
For sore throats, there are two kinds of infection.
- Bacterial Infection (most commonly strep bacteria)
- Viral Infection (happens about 90% of the damn time)
A viral infection is common and you get it mostly together with the flu. These sore throats are also highly contagious, and is basically how most people have it. Antibiotics work only on bacteria, because it kills bacteria. For viruses, no, it doesn't work at all, and it may even make it worse (your body should be able to tolerate a bit, as long as you don't overdose). For sore throat, antibiotics only work for bacterial infections, which is not too common.
Flu is a virus. Antibiotics don't do anything to flu.
Fever may be caused by bacteria, but most fever is also due to virus. Again, if it is due to virus, antibiotics don't do anything.
Why do doctors keep prescribing antibiotics then? The doctor may think you have a bacterial infection, or the doctor may just prescribe you antibiotics to be on the safe side. I've had a bacterial infection sore throat before, but only once.
Strepsils is named after the strep bacteria which is common in causing sore throats.
Myth #3
Eating lots of fried food or "heaty" food makes you sick.
In Malaysia or asian countries, we adapt the concept of Yin and Yang especially in food where dry, hot, spicy food are called "heaty" food and wet, cool, juicy food are called "cooling" food.
Of course, in Western medicine, it makes no sense at all. The Yin and Yang may serve as an easier explanation for many things, (imagine Newton's 3rd Law being simplified just like that) but it is not necessarily true.
For those who are not familiar, it basically means if you eat too much "heaty" food, you need to balance it up with "cooling" food or you'll get sick, since your body cannot handle the energy (associated with 'chi') ...
To make long story short, basically you need a balanced diet. Some people also have food intolerance, such as not being able eat too much spicy food or they'll have a reaction, such as acne or getting sick. Besides, people in the Western countries eat these grilled, fried, cooked to perfection "heaty" food almost every day.
You can eat rice when you're having a fever. You can eat watermelons if you have cough. I did it, it has made no difference. Just because I didn't recover doesn't mean my sick has gone worse due to the food. At one time, I also drank big bowls of Tom Yam soup for 3 days in a row, every day, and eat burgers, fastfood, the "heaty" stuff, and I was alright.
Mmm...moar! Moar!
Myth #4
You must drink 8-10 glasses of water a day.
Depends on your body. One thing to note though, that 8 glasses of water per day includes the water you get from food, not just plain water. Coffee and tea is also water, they just go through the coffee beans or tea leaves, that's all. All these things that we drink are also water, and you'd be surprised that we actually get a lot of water from what we eat.
And that is why, some people drink like 1-2 cups of liquids, not necessarily water but maybe coffee, beer, or anything else but they're hydrated and healthy as ever, no different from you who drinks a lot. It is not a necessity to drink 8 glasses of water a day to be healthy. In some situations like in Malaysia, the weather is extremely hot almost all the time, so it may be good to drink more water though.
The more important rule is, if you feel thristy, drink.
Myth #5
The human penis has a bone.
It's just tissue and blood, no bones, no muscles. It is found in other mammals though, and other primates such as chimpanzees, but not humans. It's called a baculum.
Love,
Nicholas.
SMS Legal "Scam" Awareness
14 February 2011
There is a SMS scam that appears to be legal and it basically charges you continuously when you send only ONE SMS to them as a "subscrpition."
Hello and let me talk about the SMS LEGAL "SCAMS" (they can be called fraud as well) which are practiced here openly in Malaysia. Of course, legally they're selling something to you (which mostly are files which you can download through your phone) but you will most probably never manage to get the file, or it's big enough to give you a headache when your phone bill arrives.
Do people subscribe? Yes, people do. Sometimes it's because it's a harmless survey, like say... "Answer this survey and get to know your IQ!" or a harmless lucky draw like, "Stand a chance to win an iPhone 4!" which appears to be a one-time thing, but it is actually a SUBSCRIPTION which they will send you more SMS over time. The thing is, it's everywhere, even on Facebook AND EVEN ON TELEVISION!.
How the "Scam" Goes
1. SMS ON (something) to (some number)
2. Notice you have to pay, maybe RM4 for that SMS?
3. Think you're done with it and everything's okay.
4. They further send SMS to you, and charge you for each of those SMS.
5. You get infuriated and say, "THIS IS NOT IN THE TERMS & CONDITIONS!"
6. You managed to unsubscribe, but have to pay for all that loss.
The "Scam" Part
The scam part is, yes, it is not in the terms & conditions. When you view the terms & conditions, they give you the company's general terms & conditions which apply to all of the subscriptions IN GENERAL. They do not state that they will charge you for each SMS there (either that, or they try to hide it as much as possible). But, they will state it during the subscription only, and it will be as unnoticeable as it can be. Some of them don't even state it actually, but manage to come up with certain sentences that have the same meaning, which will be very misleading.
Furthermore, you do not have to really AGREE with the terms & conditions. All you have to do is to send the SMS to subscribe, and you will automatically be seen as agreeing to the terms & conditions.
Every week, your subscription will be renewed, and they will charge you again for it. If I'm not mistaken, they also charge you every week.
The thing is, they charge you for every single damn thing, and the only thing that allowed them to do so is by you agreeing to the terms & conditions, which is by sending that single SMS.
How to Unsubscribe
You have to remember what is the number you've subscribed to. To unsubscribe, simply type in
STOP ALL
and send it to the number. Different companies may have different methods of unsubscribing, but this is the most common one I guess. You will get charged for this SMS as well, and then you will receive an SMS saying that you've unsubscribed.
Are These Legal?
Yes, they are legal, but in a very exploited and overpriced way. They set high prices for letting you download files which you can get easily on the Internet. They also make it seem as if it's a one-time subscription, but if you do not read carefully, it is actually renewed every week and you get charged for each SMS they send to you.
This may appear illegal for simply charging you stuff, but the terms & conditions allowed so. As long as you send ONE SMS to them, you AGREE to the terms & conditions, which is shit and shouldn't be allowed because there is too little information, and nobody confirms you about anything when subscribing.
Precautions
- Do not give your phone number to companies or websites you don't know.
- Do not send SMS to register for anything.
- Do not bother to participate in surveys or harmless things that require SMS.
This may seem like general information that everyone knows, but it is presented in many different ways, especially in magazines (Astro magazines used to have them, or do they still have it now?) or basically anywhere, even in Facebook. They present it to look extremely harmless and make it seem as if you only pay once, but you actually pay a lot more. This makes people think that it's okay to pay for a cheap ringtone, but actually they're paying for the whole subscription. It is basically a scam, or more precisely, a fraud.
Love,
Nicholas.
Hello and let me talk about the SMS LEGAL "SCAMS" (they can be called fraud as well) which are practiced here openly in Malaysia. Of course, legally they're selling something to you (which mostly are files which you can download through your phone) but you will most probably never manage to get the file, or it's big enough to give you a headache when your phone bill arrives.
Do people subscribe? Yes, people do. Sometimes it's because it's a harmless survey, like say... "Answer this survey and get to know your IQ!" or a harmless lucky draw like, "Stand a chance to win an iPhone 4!" which appears to be a one-time thing, but it is actually a SUBSCRIPTION which they will send you more SMS over time. The thing is, it's everywhere, even on Facebook AND EVEN ON TELEVISION!.
Epic face when realizing phone bill iz gay.
How the "Scam" Goes
1. SMS ON (something) to (some number)
2. Notice you have to pay, maybe RM4 for that SMS?
3. Think you're done with it and everything's okay.
4. They further send SMS to you, and charge you for each of those SMS.
5. You get infuriated and say, "THIS IS NOT IN THE TERMS & CONDITIONS!"
6. You managed to unsubscribe, but have to pay for all that loss.
Some will say, FREE RINGTONES! Yes, the ringtones are free, but the subscription is not. And most probably they won't tell you the terms & conditions. You have to personally go look in the website for the terms & conditions.
The "Scam" Part
The scam part is, yes, it is not in the terms & conditions. When you view the terms & conditions, they give you the company's general terms & conditions which apply to all of the subscriptions IN GENERAL. They do not state that they will charge you for each SMS there (either that, or they try to hide it as much as possible). But, they will state it during the subscription only, and it will be as unnoticeable as it can be. Some of them don't even state it actually, but manage to come up with certain sentences that have the same meaning, which will be very misleading.
Furthermore, you do not have to really AGREE with the terms & conditions. All you have to do is to send the SMS to subscribe, and you will automatically be seen as agreeing to the terms & conditions.
Every week, your subscription will be renewed, and they will charge you again for it. If I'm not mistaken, they also charge you every week.
The thing is, they charge you for every single damn thing, and the only thing that allowed them to do so is by you agreeing to the terms & conditions, which is by sending that single SMS.
Notice it doesn't say anything about ACCEPTING terms & conditions for this scam. It also doesn't say anything about SUBSCRIBING. But it is a subscription. Before this page, there's only one sentence which reads, "Sign up today and have your horoscope delivered to your mobile phone!"
How to Unsubscribe
You have to remember what is the number you've subscribed to. To unsubscribe, simply type in
STOP ALL
and send it to the number. Different companies may have different methods of unsubscribing, but this is the most common one I guess. You will get charged for this SMS as well, and then you will receive an SMS saying that you've unsubscribed.
Are These Legal?
Yes, they are legal, but in a very exploited and overpriced way. They set high prices for letting you download files which you can get easily on the Internet. They also make it seem as if it's a one-time subscription, but if you do not read carefully, it is actually renewed every week and you get charged for each SMS they send to you.
This may appear illegal for simply charging you stuff, but the terms & conditions allowed so. As long as you send ONE SMS to them, you AGREE to the terms & conditions, which is shit and shouldn't be allowed because there is too little information, and nobody confirms you about anything when subscribing.
Precautions
- Do not give your phone number to companies or websites you don't know.
- Do not send SMS to register for anything.
- Do not bother to participate in surveys or harmless things that require SMS.
This may seem like general information that everyone knows, but it is presented in many different ways, especially in magazines (Astro magazines used to have them, or do they still have it now?) or basically anywhere, even in Facebook. They present it to look extremely harmless and make it seem as if you only pay once, but you actually pay a lot more. This makes people think that it's okay to pay for a cheap ringtone, but actually they're paying for the whole subscription. It is basically a scam, or more precisely, a fraud.
Love,
Nicholas.
Is Abortion Wrong?
12 February 2011
Why is abortion wrong? Is it okay for an abortion?
First off, please think yourself as a girl when it comes to this topic. Women go through lots of shit during pregnancy, so we'll take a look at whether abortion is really wrong or not. This article will tell you why it isn't wrong.
Also, to know whether abortion is right or wrong, we have to be secular. We cannot say that it is wrong because god says so. This is not a valid reason. We cannot put in religious beliefs here.
So let's take a look at why people think it is wrong.
Why Do People Think It is Wrong?
1. Life is sacred/god's gift/baby has a soul/along these lines.
This is an example of a religious arguement, and we shall omit this. Beliefs remain as beliefs. Please do not make it real or a make it a fact, and please do not use it in a logical arguement.
You need to consider the evident cause and effect, which we will go through here, and arrive a conclusion based on logical means, for the benefit of everyone.
2. It's cruel to inflict pain on the foetus.
The foetus can only feel pain at roughly 20 weeks after pregnancy. If the foetus is not developed enough, it will not feel pain. Also, the method of killing the baby is quick, so that it doesn't feel too much of a pain. Even though it looks gory, but yes, the baby dies quick.
Cruel or not? If you do abortions for fun, then it is. But do people do abortions for fun? No. We'll see other points as well, so you know why there is a necessity for abortions.
*You might see ugly, gory, bloody pictures of babies being aborted. Yes, it's gory, I know, and being ugly/gory or not does not make it any more right or wrong. Most people tend to say that it's wrong just because they saw the pictures.
3. Abortion is murder.
Nobody aborts for fun or for worse. People abort because it is a necessary/selectable choice. If the baby has AIDS or is severely handicapped, why is aborting the baby wrong? Here are the unnecessary troubles that you can avoid:
- Financial burden for medical fees of the baby, you can go bankrupt and in the end the baby still dies.
- Psychological burden for both parent and the child, you'll go crazy.
- Emotional stress for both parent and the child, you'll cry a lot.
- Extreme depression, you might even think of suiciding.
- Blah blah blah...
It is extremely cruel and selfish, to allow your child to be born just to experience psychological burden for about a decade and dies because of AIDS. You might think that the baby still DESERVES to live for the amount of time, but you would be disregarding all the suffering, pain and psychological effects the family (especially the child) has to go through, which can lead to even more problems, not just this.
4. It goes against morals.
If you cannot support this baby, and in the end you have to give it up and leave it at some orphanage, it is even more immoral and cruel for the child. Then you ask, why have the baby if you cannot support it in the first place? The answer is, there is a reason why it's called a "mistake" and things happen during the course of pregnancy. The father may run away and escape all responsibility, leaving the mother to support the baby on its own. The mother is now poor, lonely, depressed, and probably at her worst now. It is not according to plan, and the mother can NO LONGER support the baby without the father anymore. Not in her psychological or financial state.
If this is the case, and you still say, "NO! YOU MUST CARRY ON!" then you are being cruel and have no sympathy to the mother.
Likewise, if someone gets pregnant because she was raped, please be considerate of her psychological wellness. The mother did not want the pregnancy. If you still say it's wrong to abort the baby, then you must be raped and we'll see how well you would do. Killing the baby here is not because of vengeance, it's because of your HUMAN RIGHTS which was deprived because of some idiot who raped you, and now you have to carry the responsibility of the rapist?
It would be even more immoral to allow this suffering to go on.
5. It affects other people.
So...you don't care about the mother? It affects the mother THE MOST.
What May Happen if Abortion is Abolished?
1. Women who want an abortion will have a higher chance of DYING because they had to cause a "miscarriage"
If you think abolishing abortion will stop the act or necessity/want of an abortion, you're wrong. If someone wants an abortion, that person will do it, with various methods from traditional methods to purposely hurting themselves to cause a "miscarriage" ...and this is a HUGE negative effect. Women might DIE in this attempt.
2. Babies are born but unwanted.
No abortion? Then the babies will be unwanted instead. If someone REALLY doesn't want the baby, or really cannot support the baby, the baby has to go somewhere. And since we can't kill it, it shall be dumped. An unwanted baby goes through much more suffering, it is much more immoral. If more people were to adopt children, then it would be easier. Apparently, this is not the case. And you'd think the child will live a happy life if it is up for adoption? Not necessarily.
3. Suicide.
When the mother hits the limit, and can no longer carry this burden of the family, then the mother will be mentally unstable. And when this happens, probably, somehow or rather, the mother may suicide. Either with the kids, or without the kids.
Ironically, we blame them for suiciding and call them stupid, when all of this can be prevented by just a single abortion which we did not allow.
4. The baby gets to live.
Yes, this is the only positive effect. Whether the family will live a happy life or not, we don't know. However, a mother who wants to abort a child but couldn't, will not be happy about this. Then the child will receive the burden from an emotionally unstable mother. The child will probably go through a very sad life. This is the irony. And if at any time, the child finally decides to die or suicide, we blame the parents or the child for being stupid or not wise enough. Very ironic.
Closure
No matter how wrong can abortion be, when you look at the effects of it being abolished, you will see more negative effects.
You can put in all the religious arguements you like, such as heaven and hell, souls, god, sacred life and all that. But it does not help anyone, nor does it make anyone happier if there is no abortion. It does not alleviate the negative effects one bit.
Please be considerate of the 9 months a mother has to go through. It is not easy, it is nothing petty and it is not something you can disregard. After the 9 months, taking care of the baby is also a difficult task. Unless you are prepared for all these, it would be extremely difficult for you.
Love,
Nicholas.
First off, please think yourself as a girl when it comes to this topic. Women go through lots of shit during pregnancy, so we'll take a look at whether abortion is really wrong or not. This article will tell you why it isn't wrong.
Also, to know whether abortion is right or wrong, we have to be secular. We cannot say that it is wrong because god says so. This is not a valid reason. We cannot put in religious beliefs here.
So let's take a look at why people think it is wrong.
You must place yourself as a woman, to at least get a gist of the sufferings experienced by women.
Why Do People Think It is Wrong?
1. Life is sacred/god's gift/baby has a soul/along these lines.
This is an example of a religious arguement, and we shall omit this. Beliefs remain as beliefs. Please do not make it real or a make it a fact, and please do not use it in a logical arguement.
You need to consider the evident cause and effect, which we will go through here, and arrive a conclusion based on logical means, for the benefit of everyone.
2. It's cruel to inflict pain on the foetus.
The foetus can only feel pain at roughly 20 weeks after pregnancy. If the foetus is not developed enough, it will not feel pain. Also, the method of killing the baby is quick, so that it doesn't feel too much of a pain. Even though it looks gory, but yes, the baby dies quick.
Cruel or not? If you do abortions for fun, then it is. But do people do abortions for fun? No. We'll see other points as well, so you know why there is a necessity for abortions.
*You might see ugly, gory, bloody pictures of babies being aborted. Yes, it's gory, I know, and being ugly/gory or not does not make it any more right or wrong. Most people tend to say that it's wrong just because they saw the pictures.
3. Abortion is murder.
Nobody aborts for fun or for worse. People abort because it is a necessary/selectable choice. If the baby has AIDS or is severely handicapped, why is aborting the baby wrong? Here are the unnecessary troubles that you can avoid:
- Financial burden for medical fees of the baby, you can go bankrupt and in the end the baby still dies.
- Psychological burden for both parent and the child, you'll go crazy.
- Emotional stress for both parent and the child, you'll cry a lot.
- Extreme depression, you might even think of suiciding.
- Blah blah blah...
It is extremely cruel and selfish, to allow your child to be born just to experience psychological burden for about a decade and dies because of AIDS. You might think that the baby still DESERVES to live for the amount of time, but you would be disregarding all the suffering, pain and psychological effects the family (especially the child) has to go through, which can lead to even more problems, not just this.
Much happier with abortion. We can't hate them for wanting to be happy.
4. It goes against morals.
If you cannot support this baby, and in the end you have to give it up and leave it at some orphanage, it is even more immoral and cruel for the child. Then you ask, why have the baby if you cannot support it in the first place? The answer is, there is a reason why it's called a "mistake" and things happen during the course of pregnancy. The father may run away and escape all responsibility, leaving the mother to support the baby on its own. The mother is now poor, lonely, depressed, and probably at her worst now. It is not according to plan, and the mother can NO LONGER support the baby without the father anymore. Not in her psychological or financial state.
If this is the case, and you still say, "NO! YOU MUST CARRY ON!" then you are being cruel and have no sympathy to the mother.
Likewise, if someone gets pregnant because she was raped, please be considerate of her psychological wellness. The mother did not want the pregnancy. If you still say it's wrong to abort the baby, then you must be raped and we'll see how well you would do. Killing the baby here is not because of vengeance, it's because of your HUMAN RIGHTS which was deprived because of some idiot who raped you, and now you have to carry the responsibility of the rapist?
It would be even more immoral to allow this suffering to go on.
5. It affects other people.
So...you don't care about the mother? It affects the mother THE MOST.
The life of the unborn baby is FULLY dependent on the mother until it is born.
What May Happen if Abortion is Abolished?
1. Women who want an abortion will have a higher chance of DYING because they had to cause a "miscarriage"
If you think abolishing abortion will stop the act or necessity/want of an abortion, you're wrong. If someone wants an abortion, that person will do it, with various methods from traditional methods to purposely hurting themselves to cause a "miscarriage" ...and this is a HUGE negative effect. Women might DIE in this attempt.
2. Babies are born but unwanted.
No abortion? Then the babies will be unwanted instead. If someone REALLY doesn't want the baby, or really cannot support the baby, the baby has to go somewhere. And since we can't kill it, it shall be dumped. An unwanted baby goes through much more suffering, it is much more immoral. If more people were to adopt children, then it would be easier. Apparently, this is not the case. And you'd think the child will live a happy life if it is up for adoption? Not necessarily.
3. Suicide.
When the mother hits the limit, and can no longer carry this burden of the family, then the mother will be mentally unstable. And when this happens, probably, somehow or rather, the mother may suicide. Either with the kids, or without the kids.
Ironically, we blame them for suiciding and call them stupid, when all of this can be prevented by just a single abortion which we did not allow.
4. The baby gets to live.
Yes, this is the only positive effect. Whether the family will live a happy life or not, we don't know. However, a mother who wants to abort a child but couldn't, will not be happy about this. Then the child will receive the burden from an emotionally unstable mother. The child will probably go through a very sad life. This is the irony. And if at any time, the child finally decides to die or suicide, we blame the parents or the child for being stupid or not wise enough. Very ironic.
Gore or uglyness of abortion does not contribute to whether it is right or wrong. All deaths are ugly.
Closure
No matter how wrong can abortion be, when you look at the effects of it being abolished, you will see more negative effects.
You can put in all the religious arguements you like, such as heaven and hell, souls, god, sacred life and all that. But it does not help anyone, nor does it make anyone happier if there is no abortion. It does not alleviate the negative effects one bit.
Please be considerate of the 9 months a mother has to go through. It is not easy, it is nothing petty and it is not something you can disregard. After the 9 months, taking care of the baby is also a difficult task. Unless you are prepared for all these, it would be extremely difficult for you.
Love,
Nicholas.
Should Begging be Illegal?
17 January 2011
Begging and panhandling as a legal issue, should it be illegal to beg or not?
Now, in most other countries or states where panhandling is strictly prohibited. Some may have rules here and there as well. But in Malaysia, there is no law prohibiting this act.
What is Begging or Panhandling?
These involve asking for donations/money with no legalized/official means of support, "camping" in an area waiting for people to drop coins, actively asking people to spare some money, using emotions to convince people of their money, and so on.
What are the Harms of This Act?
Begging is seen more like a trickery, and by exploiting humans' sympathetic qualities, they often earn quite a lot of money just by going around collecting spare change. The thing is, there is no lying/cheating/falsifying information in begging. If it involves lying, it becomes a con, which mostly is the case.
More professional panhandlers include those asking for donations for charity using specified donation boxes. They often prepare donation boxes with a SET amount of money only, such as $5, $10 and $20, so that your minimum donation is at least $5. This makes people feel that they should give more, which makes you feel cheated of your money.
Besides that, the beggar himself may become lazy and just spends the rest of his life begging because it's easy and can be quite a payoff. Normally, it is because the beggar lacks education or capabilities to work. Knowing that he will only be employed for a very small amount of salary that is insufficient to support himself or his family, begging seems to be the better choice.
Why I Think Begging is Okay
1. You have a choice.
If the beggar is not a conman, then it is okay. Nobody forces you to give your money. Begging should be distinguished from conning as not all beggars are conmen. There are some sincere and honest beggars who may be really lazy and lack the education, but it is our choice to give them money or not.
2. You shouldn't blame people for being an annoyance.
Everyone in the world can be annoying at times. If these beggars just seem annoying to you, you should be open and accept them. If you do not wish to pay them, simply walk away or tell them that you're not willing to give anything. If it becomes a harassment, THEN it becomes illegal.
3. Humans have the rights to do what they want.
We cannot simply say it is wrong just because people are lazy and come out to beg for money which may bear an awful sight. We cannot say that it is wrong just because there is a possibility that many people will become lazy, and become beggars, thus slowing down the development of the country.
It is their choice if they're lazy to work, or lack the education/capabilities to work. Beggars don't bring much of a harm to anyone, it is the conmen who do.
If too much beggars brings down the development of the country, spend some money and bring up a welfare so that you can find them a job. Accept them and employ them. If they refuse to be employed, what are we to do? Force them to work? Force them to stay at home? Just let them do whatever the hell they want to do.
There cannot be too many beggars, don't worry. If there are too many, then begging would become very difficult, and nobody would want to be one anymore. The public will be more aware not to donate to beggars.
Begging Companies
There are some sort companies which employ beggars to beg for money. Basically they send out beggars all over the place to get money, and then they'll get some salary for it.
It might be quite cheating or unfair, but I'm fine with it since I don't donate to beggars anyway. Why make it illegal? If we don't donate, the company will get bankrupt too. They're not doing any sort of business, they merely rely on donations, which is under our control.
BUT BEGGING IS STILL WRONG!
It may be wrong, but it is not necessary to make it illegal and fine/jail someone for it. If you think begging is unfair, cheating and is a trick, then simply don't give your money. When everyone does not give their money, begging will automatically perish.
I'm basically talking about honest beggars who don't lie about themselves. The beggars who are not conmen. If they didn't con anyone, why jail them? They're just lazy, that's all.
Love,
Nicholas.
Now, in most other countries or states where panhandling is strictly prohibited. Some may have rules here and there as well. But in Malaysia, there is no law prohibiting this act.
What is Begging or Panhandling?
These involve asking for donations/money with no legalized/official means of support, "camping" in an area waiting for people to drop coins, actively asking people to spare some money, using emotions to convince people of their money, and so on.
Panhandling that might make you feel better if you want to scream and curse at someone.
What are the Harms of This Act?
Begging is seen more like a trickery, and by exploiting humans' sympathetic qualities, they often earn quite a lot of money just by going around collecting spare change. The thing is, there is no lying/cheating/falsifying information in begging. If it involves lying, it becomes a con, which mostly is the case.
More professional panhandlers include those asking for donations for charity using specified donation boxes. They often prepare donation boxes with a SET amount of money only, such as $5, $10 and $20, so that your minimum donation is at least $5. This makes people feel that they should give more, which makes you feel cheated of your money.
Besides that, the beggar himself may become lazy and just spends the rest of his life begging because it's easy and can be quite a payoff. Normally, it is because the beggar lacks education or capabilities to work. Knowing that he will only be employed for a very small amount of salary that is insufficient to support himself or his family, begging seems to be the better choice.
There are some honest beggars who really can't make much of a living with no education and lacking capabilities to work.
Why I Think Begging is Okay
1. You have a choice.
If the beggar is not a conman, then it is okay. Nobody forces you to give your money. Begging should be distinguished from conning as not all beggars are conmen. There are some sincere and honest beggars who may be really lazy and lack the education, but it is our choice to give them money or not.
2. You shouldn't blame people for being an annoyance.
Everyone in the world can be annoying at times. If these beggars just seem annoying to you, you should be open and accept them. If you do not wish to pay them, simply walk away or tell them that you're not willing to give anything. If it becomes a harassment, THEN it becomes illegal.
3. Humans have the rights to do what they want.
We cannot simply say it is wrong just because people are lazy and come out to beg for money which may bear an awful sight. We cannot say that it is wrong just because there is a possibility that many people will become lazy, and become beggars, thus slowing down the development of the country.
It is their choice if they're lazy to work, or lack the education/capabilities to work. Beggars don't bring much of a harm to anyone, it is the conmen who do.
If too much beggars brings down the development of the country, spend some money and bring up a welfare so that you can find them a job. Accept them and employ them. If they refuse to be employed, what are we to do? Force them to work? Force them to stay at home? Just let them do whatever the hell they want to do.
There cannot be too many beggars, don't worry. If there are too many, then begging would become very difficult, and nobody would want to be one anymore. The public will be more aware not to donate to beggars.
If nobody gives money to beggars = beggars no money = beggars find something else to do.
Begging Companies
There are some sort companies which employ beggars to beg for money. Basically they send out beggars all over the place to get money, and then they'll get some salary for it.
It might be quite cheating or unfair, but I'm fine with it since I don't donate to beggars anyway. Why make it illegal? If we don't donate, the company will get bankrupt too. They're not doing any sort of business, they merely rely on donations, which is under our control.
BUT BEGGING IS STILL WRONG!
It may be wrong, but it is not necessary to make it illegal and fine/jail someone for it. If you think begging is unfair, cheating and is a trick, then simply don't give your money. When everyone does not give their money, begging will automatically perish.
I'm basically talking about honest beggars who don't lie about themselves. The beggars who are not conmen. If they didn't con anyone, why jail them? They're just lazy, that's all.
Love,
Nicholas.
Quick Christmas Gift Ideas
25 December 2010
Wishing all of you a Merry Christmas!
Yeah, I ain't back yet, but I'm just here to wish all of you a Merry Christmas and many thanks to those who continue to visit my blog from time-to-time to check for updates. I'll be back on new year, 1st of January.
Have you bought presents for your loved ones already?
I'll assume that's a yes. But if no, how about saying a sincere "I Love You" with a self-made Christmas note/card as a sincere gift? Go to a shop, get some stickers and start making one! It's not too late even if you've already opened all the presents...
Gift Ideas
1. Christmas Card + Necklace
These are some stickers with a heart pendant, all in one packet. I got it from DAISO Japan in Sunway Pyramid, Malayisa. DAISO Japan is a store that sells everything for RM5, so you can take a look. They have really cute stickers there. What? I'm a guy, and yeah I love cute stickers.
So use these stickers and make a Christmas card. Then, get a chain and attach the pendant on it to make a necklace. You can add some beads and Swarovski crystals if you want...TADA! A very sincere Christmas present.
2. Starbucks' Christmas Blend Coffee + Coffee Press
Okay, the coffee press is there if you don't have a coffee maker. French press is cheap, so yeah.
This is the Starbucks' Christmas Blend. It contains cedar and spice, for year 2010 though, not sure about other years. Each year it tastes a bit different, but many people really liked the Christmas Blend. If you're using French Press, be sure to tell them to grind the coffee for the French Press, and not for other coffee makers.
If let's say you're buying this for your father but you don't have a coffee maker, buy the coffee maker for your father and buy the coffee for your brother or something!
3. Very Cute Books
If you ask me, I really like decorative book designs with awesome covers. I usually write and plan things on books and papers, so if I had a beautiful book, I can use it for many occassions.
4. Origami Angel
Visit this website on how to make one...
http://www.lastufka.net/lab/misc/angel.htm
You can make other origamis as well and decorate them with some cute stickers or even accompany them with a Christmas card. If you're doing this angel, look at the website and follow the steps.
Love,
Nicholas.
Yeah, I ain't back yet, but I'm just here to wish all of you a Merry Christmas and many thanks to those who continue to visit my blog from time-to-time to check for updates. I'll be back on new year, 1st of January.
Merry Christmas! Is it me, or does this picture (Stacy Keibler) has the pose of the dance, Caramelldansen?
Have you bought presents for your loved ones already?
I'll assume that's a yes. But if no, how about saying a sincere "I Love You" with a self-made Christmas note/card as a sincere gift? Go to a shop, get some stickers and start making one! It's not too late even if you've already opened all the presents...
Gift Ideas
1. Christmas Card + Necklace
These are some stickers with a heart pendant, all in one packet. I got it from DAISO Japan in Sunway Pyramid, Malayisa. DAISO Japan is a store that sells everything for RM5, so you can take a look. They have really cute stickers there. What? I'm a guy, and yeah I love cute stickers.
So use these stickers and make a Christmas card. Then, get a chain and attach the pendant on it to make a necklace. You can add some beads and Swarovski crystals if you want...TADA! A very sincere Christmas present.
2. Starbucks' Christmas Blend Coffee + Coffee Press
Okay, the coffee press is there if you don't have a coffee maker. French press is cheap, so yeah.
This is a French Press coffee maker. It's probably around RM60 or so.
This is the Starbucks' Christmas Blend. It contains cedar and spice, for year 2010 though, not sure about other years. Each year it tastes a bit different, but many people really liked the Christmas Blend. If you're using French Press, be sure to tell them to grind the coffee for the French Press, and not for other coffee makers.
If let's say you're buying this for your father but you don't have a coffee maker, buy the coffee maker for your father and buy the coffee for your brother or something!
3. Very Cute Books
If you ask me, I really like decorative book designs with awesome covers. I usually write and plan things on books and papers, so if I had a beautiful book, I can use it for many occassions.
4. Origami Angel
Visit this website on how to make one...
http://www.lastufka.net/lab/misc/angel.htm
You can make other origamis as well and decorate them with some cute stickers or even accompany them with a Christmas card. If you're doing this angel, look at the website and follow the steps.
Love,
Nicholas.
Is Moral Education Important?
01 December 2010
What EXACTLY is Morality? Many people have interpreted it wrongly, including myself.
In Malaysia, secondary school Moral Education is dumb as it requires students to memorize IN EXACT, WORD FOR WORD the definition of each moral value in order to score marks in the examinations.
However, when I entered college, the Moral Education is far different and is based on psychological and philosophical theories proposed (by known people such as Aristotle, Kant and so on) throughout the past as a logical means to convey information about morality.
In this post, I'm going to talk about Moral Education that is taught in my college, which is through psychological, philosophical and religious aspects and theories.
I've just finished my final examinations for this subject, and these are examples of what my coursemates say...
"Moral studies can rot in hell now. Just keep your ass there and I'll be in peace. Thanks."
"NOOB MORAL EDUCATION... MAKES NO SENSE!!"
The Main Importance of Moral Education
From what I realized, MORAL EDUCATION in my college did not TEACH us how to apply morality. It has basically provided theories and philosophy proposed by wise people and their criticisms. This allows us to be more aware of HOW WE DETERMINE MORALITY, as different individuals have different views on it (egoism? utilitarianism? how do you determine what is moral or not?).
There is no supposedly correct theory, and for every theory proposed, there were criticisms. We were educated on ALL theories, including how certain religions think. When we learn it the philosophical way, we learn how to consider, accept and reason things out that covers many aspects. We learn WISDOM. THAT is the aim of the subject.
This subject is talking about how the WORLD thinks, and how different groups/individuals may apply different values. We always say that in the real world, we do not care about moral values, but morality is not as simple as you think. Whatever we do, whatever we think is UNDER the influence of our moral conciousness.
For Example, How are Selfish People Applying Morality?
From what I have learned in this subject, this is what morality means.
Morality is a social instrument that guides individuals and groups in their daily lives. All these concepts refer to the concept of human behavior that deals with right or wrong and also known as ‘good’ or ‘bad’.
This, in actual...is what MORALITY means. It means the "CONCEPT OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR THAT DEALS WITH RIGHT OR WRONG", it does not mean to be respectful, good or considerate, which I once thought so.
As you can see, it is a concept of human behaviour that may vary from individual to individual. Morality applies to an individual. A selfish person is actually not "immoral" as we speak, but is actually applying one of the theories of ethics called Egoism.
Egoism is the theory where if an act brings benefits to self, it is considered moral/good. So are we correct to say that selfish people are bad and immoral? We only say so because we have our own understanding and theory of morality, and selfishness is contradicting our own moral laws.
Morality as the Cause of Conflict
Learning this subject well enough would have taught you by now that it is due to the difference in morality, values and beliefs that cause conflicts.
Whatever seems rude to you, may not seem rude to others.
Whatever seems nice to you, may not seem nice to others.
WHAT IS CORRECT TO YOU, MAY BE WRONG TO OTHERS.
You may think doing something is okay and benefits others. But some may think that you are overboard and trying to pick on them.
Moral Education presents you WHY and HOW the many different theories of human behaviour and judgement that results in conflict. They even proposed strategies of solving conflict, and the most important one was SEEKING COMPROMISE.
So What Exactly is Good and Bad?
In what I have been taught, the good and bad can only be determined through LOGICAL REASONING. This is what philosophers have been trying to do, everything must be logical and there must be a reason. Question everything. Most of us had already treated something as bad or wrong without even considering it because it is customary.
But due to how different individuals can reason things differently in different situations based on different experiences, this is relative as well.
For example, the act of dishonesty may be considered bad. However, sometimes we have to lie in order to make people happy. Thus, if we say that whatever is bad are the acts that hurt people, it may not be correct because sometimes we have to do so for the good of others. Whatever that is good brings happiness may also be incorrect because anyone can be happy over anything (you can feel happy whenever you want to) as long as they feel happy to do it.
So in my opinion, the good and the bad can only be based on ABSOLUTE values with logical reasoning that all parties involved benefit from it and CAN (not must) apply the rule. They are values that can be applied to everyone. For example,
STEALING violates human rights.
Human rights is the freedom to do whatever a human wants as an average person.
(Everyone has rights, humans can do whatever they want by nature)
Stealing takes away a person's possessions and his rights to his own possessions.
It benefits the thief, but brings loss to the victim.
Cannot be applied to everyone because nobody wants to lose his possessions without his/her consent.
Therefore, stealing is wrong.
Of course, there will be some arguments about this, but I guess this (utilitarianism based ethics) is the most logical fundamentals of right and wrong.
Conclusion
Many people think that a certain act is good or bad without even realizing that is is relative and subjective to different individual's thoughts and beliefs.
Moral Education teaches us not to blame people solely on what we BELIEVE is wrong.
Belief is not the right way in doing anything. Logic and reasoning is. To know the correct logic and reasons, we must study and have a very deep understanding on how different people think and act. In other words, we must be wise. Moral Education is teaching us how to do this, and most of us don't even realize it. So is it important? In my opinion, yes it is.
Love,
Nicholas.
In Malaysia, secondary school Moral Education is dumb as it requires students to memorize IN EXACT, WORD FOR WORD the definition of each moral value in order to score marks in the examinations.
However, when I entered college, the Moral Education is far different and is based on psychological and philosophical theories proposed (by known people such as Aristotle, Kant and so on) throughout the past as a logical means to convey information about morality.
In this post, I'm going to talk about Moral Education that is taught in my college, which is through psychological, philosophical and religious aspects and theories.
I've just finished my final examinations for this subject, and these are examples of what my coursemates say...
"Moral studies can rot in hell now. Just keep your ass there and I'll be in peace. Thanks."
"NOOB MORAL EDUCATION... MAKES NO SENSE!!"
Immanuel Kant. Many criticisms on this guy.
The Main Importance of Moral Education
From what I realized, MORAL EDUCATION in my college did not TEACH us how to apply morality. It has basically provided theories and philosophy proposed by wise people and their criticisms. This allows us to be more aware of HOW WE DETERMINE MORALITY, as different individuals have different views on it (egoism? utilitarianism? how do you determine what is moral or not?).
There is no supposedly correct theory, and for every theory proposed, there were criticisms. We were educated on ALL theories, including how certain religions think. When we learn it the philosophical way, we learn how to consider, accept and reason things out that covers many aspects. We learn WISDOM. THAT is the aim of the subject.
This subject is talking about how the WORLD thinks, and how different groups/individuals may apply different values. We always say that in the real world, we do not care about moral values, but morality is not as simple as you think. Whatever we do, whatever we think is UNDER the influence of our moral conciousness.
For Example, How are Selfish People Applying Morality?
From what I have learned in this subject, this is what morality means.
Morality is a social instrument that guides individuals and groups in their daily lives. All these concepts refer to the concept of human behavior that deals with right or wrong and also known as ‘good’ or ‘bad’.
This, in actual...is what MORALITY means. It means the "CONCEPT OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR THAT DEALS WITH RIGHT OR WRONG", it does not mean to be respectful, good or considerate, which I once thought so.
As you can see, it is a concept of human behaviour that may vary from individual to individual. Morality applies to an individual. A selfish person is actually not "immoral" as we speak, but is actually applying one of the theories of ethics called Egoism.
Egoism Cartoon. Notice that Egoism is good when a person is of good nature like Gabe. Egoism is not entirely wrong.
Egoism is the theory where if an act brings benefits to self, it is considered moral/good. So are we correct to say that selfish people are bad and immoral? We only say so because we have our own understanding and theory of morality, and selfishness is contradicting our own moral laws.
Morality as the Cause of Conflict
Learning this subject well enough would have taught you by now that it is due to the difference in morality, values and beliefs that cause conflicts.
Whatever seems rude to you, may not seem rude to others.
Whatever seems nice to you, may not seem nice to others.
WHAT IS CORRECT TO YOU, MAY BE WRONG TO OTHERS.
You may think doing something is okay and benefits others. But some may think that you are overboard and trying to pick on them.
Moral Education presents you WHY and HOW the many different theories of human behaviour and judgement that results in conflict. They even proposed strategies of solving conflict, and the most important one was SEEKING COMPROMISE.
Some people believe praying helps, some do not.
So What Exactly is Good and Bad?
In what I have been taught, the good and bad can only be determined through LOGICAL REASONING. This is what philosophers have been trying to do, everything must be logical and there must be a reason. Question everything. Most of us had already treated something as bad or wrong without even considering it because it is customary.
But due to how different individuals can reason things differently in different situations based on different experiences, this is relative as well.
For example, the act of dishonesty may be considered bad. However, sometimes we have to lie in order to make people happy. Thus, if we say that whatever is bad are the acts that hurt people, it may not be correct because sometimes we have to do so for the good of others. Whatever that is good brings happiness may also be incorrect because anyone can be happy over anything (you can feel happy whenever you want to) as long as they feel happy to do it.
Good and evil?
So in my opinion, the good and the bad can only be based on ABSOLUTE values with logical reasoning that all parties involved benefit from it and CAN (not must) apply the rule. They are values that can be applied to everyone. For example,
STEALING violates human rights.
Human rights is the freedom to do whatever a human wants as an average person.
(Everyone has rights, humans can do whatever they want by nature)
Stealing takes away a person's possessions and his rights to his own possessions.
It benefits the thief, but brings loss to the victim.
Cannot be applied to everyone because nobody wants to lose his possessions without his/her consent.
Therefore, stealing is wrong.
Of course, there will be some arguments about this, but I guess this (utilitarianism based ethics) is the most logical fundamentals of right and wrong.
Conclusion
Many people think that a certain act is good or bad without even realizing that is is relative and subjective to different individual's thoughts and beliefs.
Moral Education teaches us not to blame people solely on what we BELIEVE is wrong.
Belief is not the right way in doing anything. Logic and reasoning is. To know the correct logic and reasons, we must study and have a very deep understanding on how different people think and act. In other words, we must be wise. Moral Education is teaching us how to do this, and most of us don't even realize it. So is it important? In my opinion, yes it is.
Love,
Nicholas.
Aminulrasyid Amzah's Shooting Case
27 November 2010
Justice for Aminurlrasyid Amzah.
There has been a recent case that happened on April 2010 in Selangor, Malaysia that attracted many people's attention. I've been to many websites and blogs and I keep seeing people saying that the police were just doing their job and were not wrong. Please let me explain why I feel that these idiots don't know what they're talking about.
For those of you who don't know this case, let me tell you about it. I will first tell you about the statements from the police and witnesses, and then my rants.
Police's Statement
2 policemen detected a Proton Iswara at Section 14, Shah Alam in a suspicious manner.
Police gave signal for the car to stop but was ignored and the driver sped off.
This caused the 2 policemen to start a chase with the aid of another 2 policemen with another patrol car.
Police had successfully stopped the car after the drive run against several traffic lights.
The police opened fire after Aminulrasyid attempted to reverse the car into them in Section 11 which caused them to shoot in self-defence.
They also claimed that a parang was found in the car.
Witness: Azamudin Omar's Statement
Azamudin Omar and the deceased intended to go Ali Corner at Section 7 to give a hand to a friend whose motorcycle tyre was punctured.
On the way, the car drove by the deceased was involved in slight accident with a car parked along the road.
They fled the scene of the accident and were in panic state.
About 5 motorcyclists apparently the friends of the car owner (the one in the slight accident) chased the deceased's car.
The deceased intended to go back to his home at Section 11.
At Kayangan Roundabout Section 12, a motorcyclist hit the car from the back and fell down and the motorcyclists stopped chasing them.
They overtook a police car at Section 14 and they were chased till Caltex petrol Station at Section 11.
The shooting began when they entered into Jalan Tarian junction.
The deceased was shot in the head and fell to his lap upon dying, but the car was still moving because the decease still had his foot on the pedal.
The car rammed into a wall and stopped.
Azamudin Omar crawled out from the car and fell into a drain. He tried to surrender himself, but was immediately kicked by a police offier at the back of his head. He was beaten up further by several other policemen.
He managed to escape and ran through the school (SMK Seksyen 11) and immediately went home.
They did not bring/have a parang in the car.
Witness: Zafrullah Ahmad Zainal Abidin's Statement
He heard gunshots, sirens and the crashing of the deceased's car outside his house (the car crashed near his home).
He rushed out to see what happened and saw the crashed car at the wall in front of his house.
The front wheels of the car were in the drain which makes reversing impossible.
He saw one of the perpetrators (first witness, Azamudin Omar) who was running from the police and successfully escaped in doing so.
There was no occassion where the police found or took out any weapon or parang from the car after searching the car.
There were other people who came to the scene to see what happened as well.
The 2nd witness proved 3 points testified by the 1st witness which are:
a) There was no reversing of the car or attempt to fight back.
b) Azamudin Omar successfully escaped from the police.
c) There was no weapon/parang found in the car.
Consistent enough to prove that the 1st witness was telling the truth. The parang the police claimed to have found also did not contain any DNA or fingerprints and was deemed useless/not an evidence.
Chronology of the Incident
Cause of Death
Hospital Tengku Ampuan Rahimah senior forensic consultant, Dr. Khairul Azman Ibrahim testified at the Sessions Court that, the 15-year-old died within seconds of the bullet penetrating his skull. Other abrasions found on his body could due to "impact of blunt objects and friction."
Dr Khairul said it penetrated the skull from the back of the head and hit the brain stem which caused massive bleeding. With no other abnormalities in organs or any sort of forensic evidence, the kid most likely died due to a SINGLE GUNSHOT TO THE HEAD.
Based on this article.
Court & Trial
The trial is still going on and the police were not charged yet. The recent trial is on Corporal Jenain Subi, 48 under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison and a fine.
My Opinions
Look at the post posted by the Anonymous. I would like to point out a few things...
Firstly, the deceased's car overtook the police car and did not stop when asked to. The car was only speeding. The police can only open fire for self-defence or when other's lives are threatened. The deceased did not have a weapon and did not attempt to fight back. RUNNING AWAY is not FIGHTING BACK! At best, the police can only fire ONLY to stop the car, in which is to fire at the tires or set up road block/spike-traps. What? The Malaysian police doesn't know how to set up road blocks and traps?
Now look, the kid's got a bullet to the head. Even if the police fired in short controlled bursts, so what? The police aimed for DRIVER, not the car. The police may have had the intention to only stop the car, but soon it became the intention to kill.
Now another thing, about the "what-if-there-was-a-suicide-bomber-in-the-car?"...
The police cannot fire at someone based on "SUSPICION" only. Running away from the police when being called upon is against the law, but the police cannot fire at the person if the person does not fight back like I said earlier. Furthermore, it is the middle of the night. It's impossible for the police to make correct speculations that the driver is up to something bad just because he's speeding. There is also a possibility that the driver is drunk, so you begin to fire at him?
Additional Note: If you think it's correct to gun down drunk drivers because you think they deserve to die, you're wrong. Nobody cares the moral values you believe in. This is the law.
Just because there is a possibility of a suicide bomber does not give the rights to the police to open fire. If so, I could suspect everyone and open fire at anyone I like. Do you guys even know the law? The sole fact that they fired at the car is already wrong. You cannot shoot someone just because you're not sure what they're up to.
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/fmt-english/news/general/5218-aminulrasyid-to-blame-says-psychologist
This is another article which is about a psychologist saying that the deceased is to be blamed. I can't express how stupid this is. I'll comment based on the quotes there.
"And police on this shift are usually armed with automatic firearms because they don't know what they will be up against. The usual procedure is to pull a suspicious car over and shine a torchlight inside, but they didn't have a chance to do that in this case. So, they opened fire," said Dr. Teoh the psychologist.
YOU CANT OPEN FIRE JUST BECUZ SOMEONE'S SUSPICIOUS DAMNIT, KNOW THE LAW! It's what Malaysian cops do, they have no balls. When they suspect someone, they open fire first. If they're correct, they get all the credit. If the person is innocent, they make up some story.
"An automatic weapon sprays bullets. It is likely that a stray one hit the boy. I have handled firearms before and I can tell you an object moving quickly in the dark is almost impossible to shoot at."
What? You think the police never handled a firearm before? The police have professional training of firearms and were taught to shoot in controlled bursts like what Anonymous said. If they could let a stray bullet hit the boy, it is also their fault and can be charged for man-slaughter.
Due to professional training, there is no room for error. If the police's actions have a slight possibility of killing someone that is not armed or does not attempt to fight the police (can be anyone, even robbers and gangsters), the police CANNOT open fire or he will be charged in court.
“People are overlooking a most important issue, which is that a minor was behind the wheel. As far as the law is concerned, he was in the wrong.”
Here, this is the stupidest part. The most important issue was the child behind the wheel? Are you dumb? The child was wrong, DUH. That does not give the right to the police to open fire, I repeat again. "Do not fire unless fired upon," this is what the police have learned in training school. The most important issue is the police had killed the child.
Conclusion
The police fabricated evidence (parang in car) and misled the public by giving false information about the case. Aminulrasyid did not have a weapon and did not attempt to fight the police. He only tried to escape because he was in a panic state. The police had no reason to fire at him. Suspicion is not a valid or legal reason to open fire leading to the child's death.
With all that evidence, the police should be charged with MURDER instead. The kid died with a single bullet to the head and dozens of bullet holes in his car. The police saw a speeding car, chased after it and gunned it down with the intention to kill.
JUSTICE FOR AMINULRASYID AMZAH. Please don't say the police aren't wrong! Don't be stupid! Even the police knew they could be charged, that's why they tried to cover up the case by fabricating stuff! Gather publicity so that the police can't cover up their wrongdoings!
Love,
Nicholas.
There has been a recent case that happened on April 2010 in Selangor, Malaysia that attracted many people's attention. I've been to many websites and blogs and I keep seeing people saying that the police were just doing their job and were not wrong. Please let me explain why I feel that these idiots don't know what they're talking about.
For those of you who don't know this case, let me tell you about it. I will first tell you about the statements from the police and witnesses, and then my rants.
15-year-old shot dead (26 April 2010) in a car chase by the police.
Police's Statement
2 policemen detected a Proton Iswara at Section 14, Shah Alam in a suspicious manner.
Police gave signal for the car to stop but was ignored and the driver sped off.
This caused the 2 policemen to start a chase with the aid of another 2 policemen with another patrol car.
Police had successfully stopped the car after the drive run against several traffic lights.
The police opened fire after Aminulrasyid attempted to reverse the car into them in Section 11 which caused them to shoot in self-defence.
They also claimed that a parang was found in the car.
Witness: Azamudin Omar's Statement
Azamudin Omar and the deceased intended to go Ali Corner at Section 7 to give a hand to a friend whose motorcycle tyre was punctured.
On the way, the car drove by the deceased was involved in slight accident with a car parked along the road.
They fled the scene of the accident and were in panic state.
About 5 motorcyclists apparently the friends of the car owner (the one in the slight accident) chased the deceased's car.
The deceased intended to go back to his home at Section 11.
At Kayangan Roundabout Section 12, a motorcyclist hit the car from the back and fell down and the motorcyclists stopped chasing them.
They overtook a police car at Section 14 and they were chased till Caltex petrol Station at Section 11.
The shooting began when they entered into Jalan Tarian junction.
The deceased was shot in the head and fell to his lap upon dying, but the car was still moving because the decease still had his foot on the pedal.
The car rammed into a wall and stopped.
Azamudin Omar crawled out from the car and fell into a drain. He tried to surrender himself, but was immediately kicked by a police offier at the back of his head. He was beaten up further by several other policemen.
He managed to escape and ran through the school (SMK Seksyen 11) and immediately went home.
They did not bring/have a parang in the car.
Witness: Zafrullah Ahmad Zainal Abidin's Statement
He heard gunshots, sirens and the crashing of the deceased's car outside his house (the car crashed near his home).
He rushed out to see what happened and saw the crashed car at the wall in front of his house.
The front wheels of the car were in the drain which makes reversing impossible.
He saw one of the perpetrators (first witness, Azamudin Omar) who was running from the police and successfully escaped in doing so.
There was no occassion where the police found or took out any weapon or parang from the car after searching the car.
There were other people who came to the scene to see what happened as well.
The 2nd witness proved 3 points testified by the 1st witness which are:
a) There was no reversing of the car or attempt to fight back.
b) Azamudin Omar successfully escaped from the police.
c) There was no weapon/parang found in the car.
Consistent enough to prove that the 1st witness was telling the truth. The parang the police claimed to have found also did not contain any DNA or fingerprints and was deemed useless/not an evidence.
Chronology of the Incident
Cause of Death
Hospital Tengku Ampuan Rahimah senior forensic consultant, Dr. Khairul Azman Ibrahim testified at the Sessions Court that, the 15-year-old died within seconds of the bullet penetrating his skull. Other abrasions found on his body could due to "impact of blunt objects and friction."
Dr Khairul said it penetrated the skull from the back of the head and hit the brain stem which caused massive bleeding. With no other abnormalities in organs or any sort of forensic evidence, the kid most likely died due to a SINGLE GUNSHOT TO THE HEAD.
Based on this article.
Court & Trial
The trial is still going on and the police were not charged yet. The recent trial is on Corporal Jenain Subi, 48 under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison and a fine.
My Opinions
Look at the post posted by the Anonymous. I would like to point out a few things...
Firstly, the deceased's car overtook the police car and did not stop when asked to. The car was only speeding. The police can only open fire for self-defence or when other's lives are threatened. The deceased did not have a weapon and did not attempt to fight back. RUNNING AWAY is not FIGHTING BACK! At best, the police can only fire ONLY to stop the car, in which is to fire at the tires or set up road block/spike-traps. What? The Malaysian police doesn't know how to set up road blocks and traps?
Now look, the kid's got a bullet to the head. Even if the police fired in short controlled bursts, so what? The police aimed for DRIVER, not the car. The police may have had the intention to only stop the car, but soon it became the intention to kill.
Now another thing, about the "what-if-there-was-a-suicide-bomber-in-the-car?"...
The police cannot fire at someone based on "SUSPICION" only. Running away from the police when being called upon is against the law, but the police cannot fire at the person if the person does not fight back like I said earlier. Furthermore, it is the middle of the night. It's impossible for the police to make correct speculations that the driver is up to something bad just because he's speeding. There is also a possibility that the driver is drunk, so you begin to fire at him?
Additional Note: If you think it's correct to gun down drunk drivers because you think they deserve to die, you're wrong. Nobody cares the moral values you believe in. This is the law.
Just because there is a possibility of a suicide bomber does not give the rights to the police to open fire. If so, I could suspect everyone and open fire at anyone I like. Do you guys even know the law? The sole fact that they fired at the car is already wrong. You cannot shoot someone just because you're not sure what they're up to.
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/fmt-english/news/general/5218-aminulrasyid-to-blame-says-psychologist
This is another article which is about a psychologist saying that the deceased is to be blamed. I can't express how stupid this is. I'll comment based on the quotes there.
"And police on this shift are usually armed with automatic firearms because they don't know what they will be up against. The usual procedure is to pull a suspicious car over and shine a torchlight inside, but they didn't have a chance to do that in this case. So, they opened fire," said Dr. Teoh the psychologist.
YOU CANT OPEN FIRE JUST BECUZ SOMEONE'S SUSPICIOUS DAMNIT, KNOW THE LAW! It's what Malaysian cops do, they have no balls. When they suspect someone, they open fire first. If they're correct, they get all the credit. If the person is innocent, they make up some story.
"An automatic weapon sprays bullets. It is likely that a stray one hit the boy. I have handled firearms before and I can tell you an object moving quickly in the dark is almost impossible to shoot at."
What? You think the police never handled a firearm before? The police have professional training of firearms and were taught to shoot in controlled bursts like what Anonymous said. If they could let a stray bullet hit the boy, it is also their fault and can be charged for man-slaughter.
Due to professional training, there is no room for error. If the police's actions have a slight possibility of killing someone that is not armed or does not attempt to fight the police (can be anyone, even robbers and gangsters), the police CANNOT open fire or he will be charged in court.
“People are overlooking a most important issue, which is that a minor was behind the wheel. As far as the law is concerned, he was in the wrong.”
Here, this is the stupidest part. The most important issue was the child behind the wheel? Are you dumb? The child was wrong, DUH. That does not give the right to the police to open fire, I repeat again. "Do not fire unless fired upon," this is what the police have learned in training school. The most important issue is the police had killed the child.
Conclusion
The police fabricated evidence (parang in car) and misled the public by giving false information about the case. Aminulrasyid did not have a weapon and did not attempt to fight the police. He only tried to escape because he was in a panic state. The police had no reason to fire at him. Suspicion is not a valid or legal reason to open fire leading to the child's death.
With all that evidence, the police should be charged with MURDER instead. The kid died with a single bullet to the head and dozens of bullet holes in his car. The police saw a speeding car, chased after it and gunned it down with the intention to kill.
JUSTICE FOR AMINULRASYID AMZAH. Please don't say the police aren't wrong! Don't be stupid! Even the police knew they could be charged, that's why they tried to cover up the case by fabricating stuff! Gather publicity so that the police can't cover up their wrongdoings!
Love,
Nicholas.
How is Respect Determined?
23 November 2010
In the world, people keep telling each other about being respectful. But how is respect measured or determined?
Many people nowadays are said to have lack of respect. The word respect is kind of overused as well, even the slightest things can be "disrespectful" to some people. We're just going to look at respect in a more philosophical/logical way. In what cases does respect really apply?
Definition of Respect
Based on Wikipedia,
Respect denotes both a positive feeling of esteem for a person or other entity (such as a nation or a religion), and also specific actions and conduct representative of that esteem.
According to a journal article research on PubMed Central,
What Does ‘Respect’ Mean? Exploring the Moral Obligation of Health Professionals to Respect Patients
Respect is the recognition of the unconditional value of patients as persons.
Although the second one is for doctors and patients, but I'll combine it in a way that it makes sense. The definitions here suggest that respect is a PERSONAL feeling for ONE person/entity that has no condition. Why personal? Because not everyone has the same positive feeling/recognition towards something. In other words, what actions do you consider it rude? Different people don't mind about rudeness at all. And to say that it is UNCONDITIONAL is true, you don't need a reason to respect someone...since everyone says, "You're supposed to respect everyone!"
ADDITIONAL NOTE - DEFINITION OF RUDENESS (WIKIPEDIA)
Rudeness (also called impudence or effrontery) is a display of disrespectfulness by not complying with the social "laws" or etiquette of a group or culture. These laws have been established as the essential boundaries of normally accepted behavior. To be unable or unwilling to align one's behavior with these laws known to the general population of what is socially acceptable is to be rude.
I don't know about you, but it's dumb if we have to spend our time learning all these social "laws" of different groups and cultures all over the world just to be NOT RUDE. Not only different GROUPS...but different INDIVIDUALS may have their own perception of "ACCEPTED BEHAVIOUR" as well. Why not just wipe away all that and look at mine? There are only 4 situations of disrespectfulness which you'll see later on.
To Whom Does Respect Apply To?
Respect comes from humans. To whom does it apply to? Humans. But let us not forget the fact that for different human beings, they have a different perception of respect.
What may seem respectful to you, might not be respectful to them or vice versa. So, how do you know when a person is respecting another or not? These are the few points I would like to point out that some actions should NOT be deemed "disrespectful."
OBJECT OF RESPECT refers to the person/entity to be respected.
Non-Disrespectful Acts
1. Doing acts in a situation where the object of respect is not affected of his/her original actions.
For example, in a class of 10 students, if the object of respect is a teacher and only one student does not pay attention by silently fiddling with his handphone, it should not be considered disrespectful.
The main reason being that the teacher is able to teach without any disturbances, and the teacher is able to move, think, and say freely without any restrictions from the so-called "disrespectful" student.
If in any case where the other 9 students focus their attention to the one student who's playing with his handphone, the teaching process may still go on. However, the main response from most people would be this,
"Stop that. Other people want to study, don't be selfish."
Sitting quietly and playing with the handphone does not take away the teacher's ability to teach/talk nor the other students' ability to learn/listen. It is not possible for students to pay 100% attention at 100% of the time, it is human nature and the people who really want to study would not bother about minor distractions at all. Consider the fact that many people do miss out important details in a class even when there are no distractions becuase it is impossible for a student to maintain complete focus throughout the class. It comes down to the person and his/her self-discipline. (Not to mention, a good multitasker can pay attention to two or more things at once, really!)
If a person is not deprived of his/her original rights and actions, it should not be disrespectful at all.
2. Disagreement of a certain topic or difference in point of views.
Nothing is the truth, everything is permitted. There are endless possibilities in the world and some researches are not even evident enough to prove a fact. Despite the lack of evidence and other possible factors, some people make it as if it is true immediately.
If another person disagrees with what you have to say, it is not disrespectful. He/she is not your dog, he/she doesn't need to listen to you. Being ignorant is not disrespectful. Unless, the person puts the topic aside and does personal attacks on you. This might be disrespectful because the original topic/action is ignored/interrupted and it is a waste of time as you hear irrelevant information that does not benefit anyone (not because of the attacks were personal).
3. Difference in tone of speech or writing.
Most people would say the tone in speech or writing pretty much defines whether a person is showing respect or not. However, I disagree with this point.
Firstly, you cannot determine the tone in writing properly because it is not a face-to-face communication.
Secondly, a person's view on another's tone of speech may differ from one person to another.
A person may seem as if he's shouting his words out, but to him, he's just speaking normally. Is this person disrespectful? Annoying, maybe. Again, it comes down to your open-mindedness to accept that people may not be as skilled as using different tones in their speech like you can. Judging whether a person shows respect through their speech is judgemental and may lead to you yourself being disrespectful instead.
4. Difference in religion or belief.
Your own race or religion is not the only one that exists in the world. Also, just because the others may have the same religion or race as you, it does not mean that the person has to believe in all superstitions or traditions like you do.
To some people, wearing a hat indoors is disrespectful and to some others it is not. We must accept the other person that he doesn't apply your tradition. Who cares if you follow a tradition or not? Don't expect everyone to follow you; again, they're not your dogs.
Another example would be the American A-Okay sign. In some other regions, that sign may be a vulgar expression (invitation to hump the hole!) or something. Look, if you interpret it as something bad or good, that's just you. In this situation, this is not being disrespectful. This is called a miscommunication.
Situations of Disrespect
- Taking away a person's right to do something.
- Interrupting a person's intended/original actions.
- Taking away a person's belongings (time is included).
- Threatening a person's life/security.
Situations of respect is just the opposite of this...almost all the points are related to each other anyway.
I DONT SEE SHIT ABOUT ESTEEM OR PRIDE! Yeah, because as how you cannot measure respect, you cannot measure a person's feeling for the esteem of another person/entity as well.
How does a person's self-esteem or pride gets challenged? According to Wikipedia again, a person's self-esteem is a term used in psychology to reflect a person's overall evaluation or appraisal of his or her own worth.
Different people think differently. Just in what situation do you think your self-esteem is challenged? When people call you dumb and incompetent for no reason? This is psychological. If you have great self-esteem, I bet you know what they have said does not affect your self-esteem at all. Now that's what self-esteem is all about, dude. Therefore, challenged pride is not a situation of disrespect. Wasted time and interrupted actions are better points.
Conclusion
The conclusion is simple. Remember the second definition for doctors and patients? The recognition of patients as persons. As long as you do not deprive someone from their rights or actions as a human being, an average person, then it is not disrespectful. This is how respect should be determined, and not from "whatever seems nice" to you.
Love,
Nicholas.
Many people nowadays are said to have lack of respect. The word respect is kind of overused as well, even the slightest things can be "disrespectful" to some people. We're just going to look at respect in a more philosophical/logical way. In what cases does respect really apply?
Definition of Respect
Based on Wikipedia,
Respect denotes both a positive feeling of esteem for a person or other entity (such as a nation or a religion), and also specific actions and conduct representative of that esteem.
According to a journal article research on PubMed Central,
What Does ‘Respect’ Mean? Exploring the Moral Obligation of Health Professionals to Respect Patients
Respect is the recognition of the unconditional value of patients as persons.
Although the second one is for doctors and patients, but I'll combine it in a way that it makes sense. The definitions here suggest that respect is a PERSONAL feeling for ONE person/entity that has no condition. Why personal? Because not everyone has the same positive feeling/recognition towards something. In other words, what actions do you consider it rude? Different people don't mind about rudeness at all. And to say that it is UNCONDITIONAL is true, you don't need a reason to respect someone...since everyone says, "You're supposed to respect everyone!"
ADDITIONAL NOTE - DEFINITION OF RUDENESS (WIKIPEDIA)
Rudeness (also called impudence or effrontery) is a display of disrespectfulness by not complying with the social "laws" or etiquette of a group or culture. These laws have been established as the essential boundaries of normally accepted behavior. To be unable or unwilling to align one's behavior with these laws known to the general population of what is socially acceptable is to be rude.
Srsly. WTF?
I don't know about you, but it's dumb if we have to spend our time learning all these social "laws" of different groups and cultures all over the world just to be NOT RUDE. Not only different GROUPS...but different INDIVIDUALS may have their own perception of "ACCEPTED BEHAVIOUR" as well. Why not just wipe away all that and look at mine? There are only 4 situations of disrespectfulness which you'll see later on.
To Whom Does Respect Apply To?
Respect comes from humans. To whom does it apply to? Humans. But let us not forget the fact that for different human beings, they have a different perception of respect.
What may seem respectful to you, might not be respectful to them or vice versa. So, how do you know when a person is respecting another or not? These are the few points I would like to point out that some actions should NOT be deemed "disrespectful."
OBJECT OF RESPECT refers to the person/entity to be respected.
Non-Disrespectful Acts
1. Doing acts in a situation where the object of respect is not affected of his/her original actions.
For example, in a class of 10 students, if the object of respect is a teacher and only one student does not pay attention by silently fiddling with his handphone, it should not be considered disrespectful.
The main reason being that the teacher is able to teach without any disturbances, and the teacher is able to move, think, and say freely without any restrictions from the so-called "disrespectful" student.
According to Stony Brook University, disruptive behaviour ACTIVELY INHIBITS (yes, actively inhibits!) students' ABILITY TO LEARN, instructors' ABILITY TO TEACH, or the regular operation of the campus. I just wanted to show what is considered disruptive, it ACTIVELY INHIBITS the ability of a person to do something.
If in any case where the other 9 students focus their attention to the one student who's playing with his handphone, the teaching process may still go on. However, the main response from most people would be this,
"Stop that. Other people want to study, don't be selfish."
Sitting quietly and playing with the handphone does not take away the teacher's ability to teach/talk nor the other students' ability to learn/listen. It is not possible for students to pay 100% attention at 100% of the time, it is human nature and the people who really want to study would not bother about minor distractions at all. Consider the fact that many people do miss out important details in a class even when there are no distractions becuase it is impossible for a student to maintain complete focus throughout the class. It comes down to the person and his/her self-discipline. (Not to mention, a good multitasker can pay attention to two or more things at once, really!)
If a person is not deprived of his/her original rights and actions, it should not be disrespectful at all.
2. Disagreement of a certain topic or difference in point of views.
Nothing is the truth, everything is permitted. There are endless possibilities in the world and some researches are not even evident enough to prove a fact. Despite the lack of evidence and other possible factors, some people make it as if it is true immediately.
If another person disagrees with what you have to say, it is not disrespectful. He/she is not your dog, he/she doesn't need to listen to you. Being ignorant is not disrespectful. Unless, the person puts the topic aside and does personal attacks on you. This might be disrespectful because the original topic/action is ignored/interrupted and it is a waste of time as you hear irrelevant information that does not benefit anyone (not because of the attacks were personal).
And that's why you get BANNED!
3. Difference in tone of speech or writing.
Most people would say the tone in speech or writing pretty much defines whether a person is showing respect or not. However, I disagree with this point.
Firstly, you cannot determine the tone in writing properly because it is not a face-to-face communication.
Secondly, a person's view on another's tone of speech may differ from one person to another.
A person may seem as if he's shouting his words out, but to him, he's just speaking normally. Is this person disrespectful? Annoying, maybe. Again, it comes down to your open-mindedness to accept that people may not be as skilled as using different tones in their speech like you can. Judging whether a person shows respect through their speech is judgemental and may lead to you yourself being disrespectful instead.
This is Graham's Hiearchy of Disagreement, which is quite true. Response to Tone, Ad Hominem and Name-Calling are the disrespectful reactions which are quite common.
4. Difference in religion or belief.
Your own race or religion is not the only one that exists in the world. Also, just because the others may have the same religion or race as you, it does not mean that the person has to believe in all superstitions or traditions like you do.
To some people, wearing a hat indoors is disrespectful and to some others it is not. We must accept the other person that he doesn't apply your tradition. Who cares if you follow a tradition or not? Don't expect everyone to follow you; again, they're not your dogs.
Another example would be the American A-Okay sign. In some other regions, that sign may be a vulgar expression (invitation to hump the hole!) or something. Look, if you interpret it as something bad or good, that's just you. In this situation, this is not being disrespectful. This is called a miscommunication.
Situations of Disrespect
- Taking away a person's right to do something.
- Interrupting a person's intended/original actions.
- Taking away a person's belongings (time is included).
- Threatening a person's life/security.
Situations of respect is just the opposite of this...almost all the points are related to each other anyway.
I DONT SEE SHIT ABOUT ESTEEM OR PRIDE! Yeah, because as how you cannot measure respect, you cannot measure a person's feeling for the esteem of another person/entity as well.
How does a person's self-esteem or pride gets challenged? According to Wikipedia again, a person's self-esteem is a term used in psychology to reflect a person's overall evaluation or appraisal of his or her own worth.
Different people think differently. Just in what situation do you think your self-esteem is challenged? When people call you dumb and incompetent for no reason? This is psychological. If you have great self-esteem, I bet you know what they have said does not affect your self-esteem at all. Now that's what self-esteem is all about, dude. Therefore, challenged pride is not a situation of disrespect. Wasted time and interrupted actions are better points.
Random picture. Respect for nurses, anyone? :D
Conclusion
The conclusion is simple. Remember the second definition for doctors and patients? The recognition of patients as persons. As long as you do not deprive someone from their rights or actions as a human being, an average person, then it is not disrespectful. This is how respect should be determined, and not from "whatever seems nice" to you.
Love,
Nicholas.
How to Earn Money Online Easily?
17 November 2010
This applies to Southeast Asia region only.
Well people have been earning money through advertisements they put up on their site and the sort. Today, we're going to learn how to earn money by just sharing a link in Facebook or in anywhere possible, even your blog.
How Does It Work?
There's this site called YouthSays, which is a reward platform for youths. It currently supports Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia and Philliphines. Other countries will be supported soon.
All you need to do is to sign-up or you can sign in with your Facebook account (if you're afraid that it's a scam, you can always sign-up a Youthsays account instead). Then, take a look at the campaigns which offer money per click. All you have to do is to click Share This and put it up anywhere you like, even on Facebook! And for every unique click, you get the amount of money that is there.
Basically what you're doing is you're advertising campaigns for them. There are 3 types of campaigns: Sponsored Campaigns, Community Campaigns and User Campaigns. You get CONTRIBUTION POINTS (CP) by sharing Community and User Campaigns which you can use to bid for rewards or make your own campaigns. You get money for sharing Sponsored Campaigns. Each campaign has a set amount of money/CP to give out, so if all money/CP is given, then you won't receive any for that particular campaign anymore.
Well people have been earning money through advertisements they put up on their site and the sort. Today, we're going to learn how to earn money by just sharing a link in Facebook or in anywhere possible, even your blog.
How Does It Work?
There's this site called YouthSays, which is a reward platform for youths. It currently supports Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia and Philliphines. Other countries will be supported soon.
All you need to do is to sign-up or you can sign in with your Facebook account (if you're afraid that it's a scam, you can always sign-up a Youthsays account instead). Then, take a look at the campaigns which offer money per click. All you have to do is to click Share This and put it up anywhere you like, even on Facebook! And for every unique click, you get the amount of money that is there.
Basically what you're doing is you're advertising campaigns for them. There are 3 types of campaigns: Sponsored Campaigns, Community Campaigns and User Campaigns. You get CONTRIBUTION POINTS (CP) by sharing Community and User Campaigns which you can use to bid for rewards or make your own campaigns. You get money for sharing Sponsored Campaigns. Each campaign has a set amount of money/CP to give out, so if all money/CP is given, then you won't receive any for that particular campaign anymore.
The last two campaigns are marked Completed which means there is no more money to give out.
How Do I Get Paid?
The minimum pay-out is RM50.00. Although you don't put in your address while making your account, you get to put the address for them to send when you want to receive your money.
I Want To Try It Now!
You can click on the link to go to the site to sign-up (under my invitation). Hey, it doesn't matter if you can or cannot earn money, you get to try it out! Even if your afraid that it's a scam, you can just create an account there instead of signing in with your Facebook account.
To me, it looks much more easier than putting up ads on your site. Try it!
Love,
Nicholas.
Are Video Games Useless?
14 November 2010
Do video games bring any benefits at all or they just make you addicted and regret years after that you've wasted your time?
Right, today's my birthday and it's a Sunday, so there are two notices before I start on this post.
1. No WNx comic strip today because I'm busy on my animation project.
2. Yes, it's my birthday! :D
Now take a look at this video. It says about how video games affected this person's life and how much time he has wasted. He regrets and warns people not to play video games because you'll eventually get addicted and so on.
FIRST THING'S FIRST
Okay, the first thing I would like to say...which is not-related to the video is this.
There are PLENTY of people giving inspiration nowadays and I'm surprised that they could come up with dumb and wrong inspirations that people believe to be good and correct. Take for example, this quote from a talk in INTI University Nilai, in Malaysia where Bill Clinton gave a talk.
"You cannot focus on what you can't do, but you focus on what you can do and find people to do what you can't do."
- William J. "Bill" Clinton.
USE LOGIC AND THINK FOR YOURSELF
1. What do you mean by something that you cannot do? Do you even need to go out there and find people that can do what you can't do? Just learn it and do it yourself!
2. If you can find people to do things for you, you probably need to pay them. There is no free lunch. If you're not capable yourself, just do something simpler or learn how to do it. Leading a team of people who are 5x more knowledgable than you is not going to get you anywhere and you'll just get overwhelmed. You first need to be capable and intelligent in what you do, then become a wise and strong leader, then you lead people.
3. Someone posted this on Facebook and I don't know what in the world is so inspirational about this. There was even this comment, "so inspiring" wtf...?
NOW MY OPINIONS ABOUT THE VIDEO
Back on topic.
Video games waste a hell lot of our time? This is relative and to be honest it is a swooping statement. If you read tons of stories like Harry Potter and the sort as much as a gaming addict plays video games, you are also wasting your time as much as a gaming addict does.
The benefits of reading are just about the same of the benefits of video games. But in video games, I bet you get more of it than reading. Such benefits are:
1. Strategic planning, anticipating changes, solving puzzles, do logical reasoning and so much more especially in strategy, puzzle and simulation games.
2. Socialize. Games unite the world through online gaming and gaming competitions, people share the same interest and stuff. To say that a video game makes you less sociable because you stay at home all day in front of the computer is the same as how bookworms sit at home all day and read books. What's the difference? In games, you get to socialize online and you get to compete with others, that's the difference.
3. Games increase your creativity that lets you solve problems in various ways. Look at Touhou. The fans create videos and music that are so awesome and imaginative, they could've made a hell lot of money if it were original creations.
4. Teamwork, leadership and co-ordination. I got this out of L4D and COD4, and I could watch the actions of my teammates to sync with them without any sort of communication. I was able to use this skill in reality and it's like learning psychology.
5. Hand-eye coordination that helps you do everything with ease. Games like COD4 actually improve your vision and reflexes where you actually strain your eyes to see people blending with the backgrounds and other entities. In COD4, they even had snipers with ghille suits and they're hiding in the grass. Serious gamers could spot them and take them out...while I couldn't. Now that's improving vision...even the slightest colour difference could be seen and your field of vision (you could interpret things even if it is at the corner of your eye) is increased.
These are just the few benefits I thought of on my mind while writing this. Do you get these benefits in reading? No! Games also portray their story and some games even give you a bunch of stuff to read as if you're reading a novel. Games interact with players so much more and give really healthy benefits.
Why put the blame on video games?
WHO IS TO BE BLAMED
The one to be blamed is the player who lacks self-control and self-discipline. If you're a parent, just get games that a Teen rated or games for kids if your children are still young. Play in moderation. Too much of anything will bring negative effects, DUH.
CONCLUSION
So look, don't say video games are bad. They're only bad if you play too much with no self-control and sense of time. Almost everything's like that. I'm a gamer and I benefit from gaming a lot. I gained confidence and logic skills to sort out things in my life. I am great in my studies, I accept criticism, I do not get angry easily (after all, online gamers like to talk crap and scold you over the simplest things, but in the end you're having fun) and I could manage time properly (the Sims helped me in my time management). And yeah, I'm not friggin' obese. My BMI's normal and I spend my time bboying as well.
I am relaxed and I feel great as ever. Without games, I couldn't have gotten so many benefits. If you do not play excessively, you get a bunch of benefits, so why not?
Love,
Nicholas.
Right, today's my birthday and it's a Sunday, so there are two notices before I start on this post.
1. No WNx comic strip today because I'm busy on my animation project.
2. Yes, it's my birthday! :D
Now take a look at this video. It says about how video games affected this person's life and how much time he has wasted. He regrets and warns people not to play video games because you'll eventually get addicted and so on.
FIRST THING'S FIRST
Okay, the first thing I would like to say...which is not-related to the video is this.
There are PLENTY of people giving inspiration nowadays and I'm surprised that they could come up with dumb and wrong inspirations that people believe to be good and correct. Take for example, this quote from a talk in INTI University Nilai, in Malaysia where Bill Clinton gave a talk.
"You cannot focus on what you can't do, but you focus on what you can do and find people to do what you can't do."
- William J. "Bill" Clinton.
USE LOGIC AND THINK FOR YOURSELF
1. What do you mean by something that you cannot do? Do you even need to go out there and find people that can do what you can't do? Just learn it and do it yourself!
2. If you can find people to do things for you, you probably need to pay them. There is no free lunch. If you're not capable yourself, just do something simpler or learn how to do it. Leading a team of people who are 5x more knowledgable than you is not going to get you anywhere and you'll just get overwhelmed. You first need to be capable and intelligent in what you do, then become a wise and strong leader, then you lead people.
3. Someone posted this on Facebook and I don't know what in the world is so inspirational about this. There was even this comment, "so inspiring" wtf...?
NOW MY OPINIONS ABOUT THE VIDEO
Back on topic.
Video games waste a hell lot of our time? This is relative and to be honest it is a swooping statement. If you read tons of stories like Harry Potter and the sort as much as a gaming addict plays video games, you are also wasting your time as much as a gaming addict does.
The benefits of reading are just about the same of the benefits of video games. But in video games, I bet you get more of it than reading. Such benefits are:
1. Strategic planning, anticipating changes, solving puzzles, do logical reasoning and so much more especially in strategy, puzzle and simulation games.
2. Socialize. Games unite the world through online gaming and gaming competitions, people share the same interest and stuff. To say that a video game makes you less sociable because you stay at home all day in front of the computer is the same as how bookworms sit at home all day and read books. What's the difference? In games, you get to socialize online and you get to compete with others, that's the difference.
It is true that games unite people. This is a picture of me and a bunch of other gamers from other states/country in a gathering. We were going to play paintball.
3. Games increase your creativity that lets you solve problems in various ways. Look at Touhou. The fans create videos and music that are so awesome and imaginative, they could've made a hell lot of money if it were original creations.
IOSYS is a circle that creates high quality (THE BEST) fan-made music and flash animations based on the Touhou game series.
4. Teamwork, leadership and co-ordination. I got this out of L4D and COD4, and I could watch the actions of my teammates to sync with them without any sort of communication. I was able to use this skill in reality and it's like learning psychology.
5. Hand-eye coordination that helps you do everything with ease. Games like COD4 actually improve your vision and reflexes where you actually strain your eyes to see people blending with the backgrounds and other entities. In COD4, they even had snipers with ghille suits and they're hiding in the grass. Serious gamers could spot them and take them out...while I couldn't. Now that's improving vision...even the slightest colour difference could be seen and your field of vision (you could interpret things even if it is at the corner of your eye) is increased.
COD4's Ghille Suits look exactly like grass.
These are just the few benefits I thought of on my mind while writing this. Do you get these benefits in reading? No! Games also portray their story and some games even give you a bunch of stuff to read as if you're reading a novel. Games interact with players so much more and give really healthy benefits.
Why put the blame on video games?
Rinnosuke is a character in Touhou, not much is said/shown about him. The fans called him MANnosuke and gave him MANLY skills. That's just random... and most importantly..FUNNY & CREATIVE! This comic strip is drawn by Wong (not me).
WHO IS TO BE BLAMED
The one to be blamed is the player who lacks self-control and self-discipline. If you're a parent, just get games that a Teen rated or games for kids if your children are still young. Play in moderation. Too much of anything will bring negative effects, DUH.
CONCLUSION
So look, don't say video games are bad. They're only bad if you play too much with no self-control and sense of time. Almost everything's like that. I'm a gamer and I benefit from gaming a lot. I gained confidence and logic skills to sort out things in my life. I am great in my studies, I accept criticism, I do not get angry easily (after all, online gamers like to talk crap and scold you over the simplest things, but in the end you're having fun) and I could manage time properly (the Sims helped me in my time management). And yeah, I'm not friggin' obese. My BMI's normal and I spend my time bboying as well.
I am relaxed and I feel great as ever. Without games, I couldn't have gotten so many benefits. If you do not play excessively, you get a bunch of benefits, so why not?
Love,
Nicholas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)