stumbled into these on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inGjsUbeBFI&feature=related
money politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYCESMtk86M&feature=related
ok, this one is a more compelling argument.
should read the comments on the video. very emotionally charged.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMjK8KXjuM&feature=related
very inflammatory, but there's some truth in the midst.
(yay, i can actually understand most of what he's saying despite my lousy mandarin and having little knowledge of malaysian politics.)
oh, and you notice? he can speak FIVE FREAKING LANUAGES AND DIALECTS! wowowow. that's how multilingual malaysian chinese are...
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
omg this is amazing
please check this out.
OMG DID YOU SEE IT? she looks absolutely stunning.
and she has totally NO plastic surgery (as stated clearly in her personal blog). more proof: she looks a lot like her mom, who's very gorgeous (for her age) too.
i'm like, totally fawning over the pics! haha. if i ever see her in the flesh i'll totally squeal.
ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah!!!
OH OH! I MUST GO TO KINOKUNIYA AND FIND THE MAGAZINE WITH THESE PICS!!
speaking of kino, i stumbled upon 2 amazing finds there!
1. studio ghibli selected music, in piano score!
2. utada hikaru piano score!!!!!!!!!!! from her first three albums + 'colors'
it cost me almost $90 in total but it was totally worth the money. (the studio ghibli one is damn expensive. 53 bucks!!)
damn fun to play the scores la. especially utada hikaru's one because her songs then were r&b, so some of the rhythms are quite challenging to sight read. like, lots of rotations from quavers, dotted quavers, semiquavers and their equivalent rests. yayyy. just that it's too bad the scores were arranged for voice + piano accompaniment. then, cannot hear the melody on the piano (and a lot of right hand is just chords... boo).
this week has been totally exhausting. but quite fun la. haha.
OMG DID YOU SEE IT? she looks absolutely stunning.
and she has totally NO plastic surgery (as stated clearly in her personal blog). more proof: she looks a lot like her mom, who's very gorgeous (for her age) too.
i'm like, totally fawning over the pics! haha. if i ever see her in the flesh i'll totally squeal.
ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah!!!
OH OH! I MUST GO TO KINOKUNIYA AND FIND THE MAGAZINE WITH THESE PICS!!
speaking of kino, i stumbled upon 2 amazing finds there!
1. studio ghibli selected music, in piano score!
2. utada hikaru piano score!!!!!!!!!!! from her first three albums + 'colors'
it cost me almost $90 in total but it was totally worth the money. (the studio ghibli one is damn expensive. 53 bucks!!)
damn fun to play the scores la. especially utada hikaru's one because her songs then were r&b, so some of the rhythms are quite challenging to sight read. like, lots of rotations from quavers, dotted quavers, semiquavers and their equivalent rests. yayyy. just that it's too bad the scores were arranged for voice + piano accompaniment. then, cannot hear the melody on the piano (and a lot of right hand is just chords... boo).
this week has been totally exhausting. but quite fun la. haha.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
behind time
i just started reading 'outliers' by malcolm gladwell - i bought the book many months back but didn't start on it till yesterday. initially had wanted to force myself to finish reading all the other books i bought earlier, but the other books were heavier readings, too heavy for my simple mind to comprehend immediately.
anyway. gladwell writes early on in the book that successful people had at least 10,000 hours of work on what they were to be good at, before they became good at it. thinking about that, that must be reason why i'm not a genius at something yet!
ok, let's so some simplified calculations on our daily life, just to see if we can fall within the category of 'geniuses' yet. let's take, hm, our experience in mathematics for example.
nursery, kindergarten: 0.5 hour/day * 3 school years (40 weeks) = 300 hours (i only counted weekdays)
primary school: 1 hour/day * 6 years + revision for exams = 1200 + est. 100 = 1300 hours.
secondary school: i remember i had 7 1-hour periods of A and E maths every 2 weeks, so that will be 7 * 18 pairs of weeks (because term 4 is only 8 weeks long) * 4 years = 504 hours.
add all that time doing homework and revising for exams, that will be an extra 2 hours per week (homework) and 2 hours per day for 3 weeks leading up to the O levels = 2 * 36 * 4 + 2 * 21 = 330 hours.
junior college: 5 (is it?) periods per week. 2 lectures 3 tutorials right? so that's 5 * 30 weeks (because there's holidays and whatnot all over the place) * 2 = 300 hours.
add the extra time doing work and revising on your own. maybe 3 hours a week? and mugging for promos, prelims and a levels - 2 hours a day for 3 weeks for each exam. it works out to be 3 * 30 * 2 + 2 * 7 * 3 * 3 = 180 + 126 = 306 hours.
add all the other times which you did simple maths in every day life. that could be as little as 10 minutes per week, but let's count it anyway. 1/6 * 52 * 10 (you were too pampered to count for yourself when you were 9 years old, so let's make it 10 years of counting) = approx. 87 hours.
That's like, only 3,127 hours of work! geez. no wonder the average person fails maths, because he wouldn't even have 3000 hours of practice by 21 years old (skipped classes, didn't do work).
and the average junior college graduate would be very far from excellence. only 3000+ hours!?
ok, let me use myself as an example, and calculate the amount of time i spent playing the piano.
i started since 6 years old (that's considered late), so. roughly 0.5 hours/week on piano lessons for 3 years. 0.75 hours/week for the next 3 years. and 1 hour/week for 5 years (sec 1-4 + J2) = 0.5 * 52 * 3 + 0.75 * 52 * 3 + 1 * 52 * 5 = 195 + 260 = a measly 455 hours.
add the random times which i practised (that isn't a lot, since i'm such a lazy person). that could be anything between 0.5 hours a week to 3 hours a week. let's take the average, shall we. 1.5 hours * 15 years (i'm 21 soon, yay.) = 1,170 hours.
a-ha. source of problem. i'm far from the magical 10,000 hours. i have only accumulated 1,625 hours of hard work.
lol. never mind, it's ok to be mediocre-good. tsk, no excuses for not working!
hm, come to think of it. i MUST start drawing now. if i can put in 5 hours a day for the next 2 months, that will be 5 * 60 = 300 hours. that it is a concentrated amount of time and it's when i'm 21 not 4 years old (ie. learning curve should be faster), its effects should be better than if it were spread out through the years. meaning, that 300 hours could be much more than its apparent worth.
ok, so i'll start drawing soon!
anyway. gladwell writes early on in the book that successful people had at least 10,000 hours of work on what they were to be good at, before they became good at it. thinking about that, that must be reason why i'm not a genius at something yet!
ok, let's so some simplified calculations on our daily life, just to see if we can fall within the category of 'geniuses' yet. let's take, hm, our experience in mathematics for example.
nursery, kindergarten: 0.5 hour/day * 3 school years (40 weeks) = 300 hours (i only counted weekdays)
primary school: 1 hour/day * 6 years + revision for exams = 1200 + est. 100 = 1300 hours.
secondary school: i remember i had 7 1-hour periods of A and E maths every 2 weeks, so that will be 7 * 18 pairs of weeks (because term 4 is only 8 weeks long) * 4 years = 504 hours.
add all that time doing homework and revising for exams, that will be an extra 2 hours per week (homework) and 2 hours per day for 3 weeks leading up to the O levels = 2 * 36 * 4 + 2 * 21 = 330 hours.
junior college: 5 (is it?) periods per week. 2 lectures 3 tutorials right? so that's 5 * 30 weeks (because there's holidays and whatnot all over the place) * 2 = 300 hours.
add the extra time doing work and revising on your own. maybe 3 hours a week? and mugging for promos, prelims and a levels - 2 hours a day for 3 weeks for each exam. it works out to be 3 * 30 * 2 + 2 * 7 * 3 * 3 = 180 + 126 = 306 hours.
add all the other times which you did simple maths in every day life. that could be as little as 10 minutes per week, but let's count it anyway. 1/6 * 52 * 10 (you were too pampered to count for yourself when you were 9 years old, so let's make it 10 years of counting) = approx. 87 hours.
That's like, only 3,127 hours of work! geez. no wonder the average person fails maths, because he wouldn't even have 3000 hours of practice by 21 years old (skipped classes, didn't do work).
and the average junior college graduate would be very far from excellence. only 3000+ hours!?
ok, let me use myself as an example, and calculate the amount of time i spent playing the piano.
i started since 6 years old (that's considered late), so. roughly 0.5 hours/week on piano lessons for 3 years. 0.75 hours/week for the next 3 years. and 1 hour/week for 5 years (sec 1-4 + J2) = 0.5 * 52 * 3 + 0.75 * 52 * 3 + 1 * 52 * 5 = 195 + 260 = a measly 455 hours.
add the random times which i practised (that isn't a lot, since i'm such a lazy person). that could be anything between 0.5 hours a week to 3 hours a week. let's take the average, shall we. 1.5 hours * 15 years (i'm 21 soon, yay.) = 1,170 hours.
a-ha. source of problem. i'm far from the magical 10,000 hours. i have only accumulated 1,625 hours of hard work.
lol. never mind, it's ok to be mediocre-good. tsk, no excuses for not working!
hm, come to think of it. i MUST start drawing now. if i can put in 5 hours a day for the next 2 months, that will be 5 * 60 = 300 hours. that it is a concentrated amount of time and it's when i'm 21 not 4 years old (ie. learning curve should be faster), its effects should be better than if it were spread out through the years. meaning, that 300 hours could be much more than its apparent worth.
ok, so i'll start drawing soon!
Monday, May 25, 2009
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!
HAHA I GOT A COPY!
that gives me the right to do an album review, but later. i need to sleep to digest all that food.
good night!
and, seriously, i'm touched by the stuff all of you people bought me. very meaningful stuff... *heart melts like butter into toast*
that gives me the right to do an album review, but later. i need to sleep to digest all that food.
good night!
and, seriously, i'm touched by the stuff all of you people bought me. very meaningful stuff... *heart melts like butter into toast*
Thursday, May 21, 2009
why, why.
why am i more passionate in slacking than pursuing anything. haha.
people my age, and whom i know, are already achieving big things - they're enrolled in top universities around the world, active in social causes, making waves in the arts scene and even appeared on tv programmes which featured themselves.
is it too late to start being spectacular? i remember being rather close friends with a classmate, now an up-and-coming composer. he was already composing piano pieces (and letting me hear them over the phone on many occasions) by the age of, i think 9 or 10. at that age i was still hooked on reading goosebumps and playing starcraft -______-
it's very hard to overcome the inertia before i can try to be awesome. i mean, there's so much pressure to produce something that can be considered 'wow' than if you are an eight-year-old. people are more forgiving if you're young.
depending on what it is to be achieved, i guess? corrinne may pursued her postgrad degree in composition after graduating from nus with a bachelors in english (with blessings from nac, how cool). many an american idol contestant finally realised their dreams at their late-20s. and if you're talking about being a great (office) worker, i guess that can be worked on with time.
it's partially an egoistic thing, i guess, to be great. to make people stare at awe, or to brighten someone's day. it's the feeling you get when you know you're not dispensable, that you matter to someone or some thing. that you're living a purposeful life.
why does knowing your self-worth make you happy? is it the knowing that you're somehow in control of your own life (and others) and thus your happiness? we are all despotic in some way, then.
people my age, and whom i know, are already achieving big things - they're enrolled in top universities around the world, active in social causes, making waves in the arts scene and even appeared on tv programmes which featured themselves.
is it too late to start being spectacular? i remember being rather close friends with a classmate, now an up-and-coming composer. he was already composing piano pieces (and letting me hear them over the phone on many occasions) by the age of, i think 9 or 10. at that age i was still hooked on reading goosebumps and playing starcraft -______-
it's very hard to overcome the inertia before i can try to be awesome. i mean, there's so much pressure to produce something that can be considered 'wow' than if you are an eight-year-old. people are more forgiving if you're young.
depending on what it is to be achieved, i guess? corrinne may pursued her postgrad degree in composition after graduating from nus with a bachelors in english (with blessings from nac, how cool). many an american idol contestant finally realised their dreams at their late-20s. and if you're talking about being a great (office) worker, i guess that can be worked on with time.
it's partially an egoistic thing, i guess, to be great. to make people stare at awe, or to brighten someone's day. it's the feeling you get when you know you're not dispensable, that you matter to someone or some thing. that you're living a purposeful life.
why does knowing your self-worth make you happy? is it the knowing that you're somehow in control of your own life (and others) and thus your happiness? we are all despotic in some way, then.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
even more cool
i spent most of yesterday playing this.
another of my childhood computer games. i must be one of the few people my age who actually played these sort of games, since they were already quite dated when i was old enough to play them - about 10 years since they were released.
i was, like, 4-8 years old when i played all these ms-dos games. digger, alley cat, zeliard (above). not bad, even a young kid can play these games. was a compulsive gamer on the ms-dos computer and super nintendo system (and later, starcraft on pc). lol.
quite good leh. zeliard is a pretty solid rpg, at least to me. 8 stages of labyrinths, items to buy. simple and straight forward gameplay and plot - unlike today's games which are so complicated they intimidate me.
and all within 1MB. oh, the days when the floppy disk was the main medium of memory storage and distribution.
another of my childhood computer games. i must be one of the few people my age who actually played these sort of games, since they were already quite dated when i was old enough to play them - about 10 years since they were released.
i was, like, 4-8 years old when i played all these ms-dos games. digger, alley cat, zeliard (above). not bad, even a young kid can play these games. was a compulsive gamer on the ms-dos computer and super nintendo system (and later, starcraft on pc). lol.
quite good leh. zeliard is a pretty solid rpg, at least to me. 8 stages of labyrinths, items to buy. simple and straight forward gameplay and plot - unlike today's games which are so complicated they intimidate me.
and all within 1MB. oh, the days when the floppy disk was the main medium of memory storage and distribution.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
why i should be kept away from computers...
OMG IT'S SO DAMN ADDICTIVE!
MY CHILDHOOD GAME!
i slept at 1am last night trying to reach stage 5! and it seems, my directional keys and f1 key occasionally get jammed during the game (macbook keyboard is lousy?!)
and i used to play egg breaker on facebook for more than 30 days consecutively. i would play it even if i came home at 11pm, because i would lose hammers to use if i didn't play it for consecutive days (clever ploy by the game designer). i'm so glad i decided not to play anymore after not getting the map prize anymore since my first.
imagine what would happen to me if i were to play anything more addictive?
i don't need to sleep already! so, nobody should EVER recommend me any computer game. ever! D:
i need to do something PRODUCTIVE. without the computer! heh.
MY CHILDHOOD GAME!
i slept at 1am last night trying to reach stage 5! and it seems, my directional keys and f1 key occasionally get jammed during the game (macbook keyboard is lousy?!)
and i used to play egg breaker on facebook for more than 30 days consecutively. i would play it even if i came home at 11pm, because i would lose hammers to use if i didn't play it for consecutive days (clever ploy by the game designer). i'm so glad i decided not to play anymore after not getting the map prize anymore since my first.
imagine what would happen to me if i were to play anything more addictive?
i don't need to sleep already! so, nobody should EVER recommend me any computer game. ever! D:
i need to do something PRODUCTIVE. without the computer! heh.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Friday, May 08, 2009
statistical research
i am bored. rather, i was bored just now on a rainy friday morning. was supposed to exercise but i think i'll do that later.
anyway, i decided to categorise my facebook contacts into where i first met them/know them better. exceptions are choir people, i didn't group (most of) them under 'school' categories but 'choir' instead.
my findings:
a few are still unclassified because they're (mostly) friends' friends
10% of friends were from my secondary school choir
10% of friends were from my junior college choir (note that some friends straddle between both sec sch and jc choirs)
10% from primary school
20% from secondary school
13% from junior college
AND!
A WHOPPING 35% FROM NATIONAL SERVICE!
that's like, more than a third of my friends!?
no wonder i have so many facebook contacts, for someone who's quite low profile in school!
now, assuming that my primary school/junior college/jc choir friends consist of an even mix of guys and girls, i would have...
WHAT!?
81.5% OF MY CONTACTS ARE MALE!
ONLY 16.5% OF MY CONTACTS ARE FEMALE!
(that leaves an undecided 2%)
...
ok, because of double counting between my sec sch and jc choir, i'm sure the percentage of guys on my list should be less.
so maybe, 70/30? ( if i add the undecided 2% into the female category - a sad attempt to boost numbers.)
there is gender imbalance in my contacts!
i wonder if this is the case for people who completed NS and were from boys' schools?
anyway, i decided to categorise my facebook contacts into where i first met them/know them better. exceptions are choir people, i didn't group (most of) them under 'school' categories but 'choir' instead.
my findings:
a few are still unclassified because they're (mostly) friends' friends
10% of friends were from my secondary school choir
10% of friends were from my junior college choir (note that some friends straddle between both sec sch and jc choirs)
10% from primary school
20% from secondary school
13% from junior college
AND!
A WHOPPING 35% FROM NATIONAL SERVICE!
that's like, more than a third of my friends!?
no wonder i have so many facebook contacts, for someone who's quite low profile in school!
now, assuming that my primary school/junior college/jc choir friends consist of an even mix of guys and girls, i would have...
WHAT!?
81.5% OF MY CONTACTS ARE MALE!
ONLY 16.5% OF MY CONTACTS ARE FEMALE!
(that leaves an undecided 2%)
...
ok, because of double counting between my sec sch and jc choir, i'm sure the percentage of guys on my list should be less.
so maybe, 70/30? ( if i add the undecided 2% into the female category - a sad attempt to boost numbers.)
there is gender imbalance in my contacts!
i wonder if this is the case for people who completed NS and were from boys' schools?
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
syf
first, i need to clarify! i'm not the author of the choir syf commentary series, as many of you are, it seems, misled... >.<
am just a contributor, that's all...
anyway, my personal thoughts about syf.
the whole thing is very iffy. how do you compare between choirs that choose difficult pieces, and others that choose easier pieces?
here's a poem, by e e cummings:
i thank You God for most this amazing
day:for the leaping greenly spirits of trees
and a blue true dream of sky;and for everything
which is natural which is infinite which is yes
(i who have died am alive again today,
and this is the sun's birthday;this is the birth
day of life and love and wings:and of the gay
great happening illimitably earth)
how should tasting touching hearing seeing
breathing any--lifted from the no
of all nothing--human merely being
doubt unimaginable You?
(now the ears of my ears awake and
now the eyes of my eyes are opened)
side note: not very easy to understand the poem on first reading, right? like what is 'lifted from the no of all nothing' ??? lol. e e cummings should use more punctuation :P
the whole thing is very iffy. how do you compare between choirs that choose difficult pieces, and others that choose easier pieces?
let's say, you got this lrsm student playing a lrsm piece almost flawless, if slightly clinical. and then you got a grade 7 student (there's a WORLD of difference between grade 7 and lrsm.) bungling up his piece at parts - maybe the runs were unclear and had lots of slipped notes, and the loud sections were too harsh - but he showed some musicality. and he trashes about on his seat like how rachmaninov would probably (i don't know??) have played the piano.
who is better?
maybe my ears were playing tricks on me today, maybe i'm too picky, but i think today's syf was generally no good. practically all the choirs did rather badly at at least one of their songs. usually the set piece and the slow choice piece.
of note is the set piece, it's so badly done by most choirs. i don't get what is happening to parts of the song: no clarity in moving towards cadential points, changes in sections and texture are not highlighted in sound. not to mention, out of tune. go listen to a good chinese orchestra.
personally, i felt some of the best performances which i watched (missed the 3rd quarter of the day) was cjc's pok pok and vjc's my love dwelt in a northern land. although it (pokpok) is a totally overused song. tuning is almost spot on, they were very tidy and coordinated (oh, go listen to youtube versions of this song. almost all choirs messed up the high d-g note sops phrase, but not cjc). and every single phrase and section was done in musical context, ie. coherent, logical sounding. that should be what a good rendition is.
vjc's elgar was very clear. although i personally don't think the song is a good choice for a competition piece (it's rather boring; all my friends didn't like the song), but the choir managed to squeeze out every bit of emotion there could be in that song. the forlorn, wishful thoughts of a lover who reminiscences of the past. i thought it was actually very good. and it shows vjc can do more than just pyrotechnics, it can sound quite clear, too.
then there's (as usual) a dispute regarding the first above-mentioned case. sigh!
whatever it is, i'm still so happy for the beautiful sounds i heard, even more especially the recording on saturday. i have played your recording of the choice pieces on my itunes on loop for ever as i typed this entry :) but you never know, maybe when the hall is filled with people, who seemed to get increasingly restless and noisy after each choir has performed, what the judges heard was totally different from what was intended? whatever the case, hm.
oh well, i hope you'll get over it faster! in the end, what i remember of my batch (apart from our own shocking gold) was how miraculously good we sounded only on the day of (another, separate) competition. we didn't disappoint ourselves because we thought we did sound good, good on an absolute scale.
and most of us, very old alumni, are still meeting up frequently for gatherings :)
my comments do have some weight and sense, right? i was a music student and chorister after all, i could have very well enrolled in a music college (had i tried). haha!
Friday, May 01, 2009
not all scholars are socially adept. HA!
refer to this straits times article.
call me having a case of sour grapes, or whatever.
but, what the hell is a female a*star scholar doing in holland v, naked?
it's total bullshit, that the pair of streakers, both students, checked the local penal code and did not find public nudity explicitly stated as obscenity, so decided to streak, baring all, on a busy saturday evening.
eh, isn't the a*star scholarship awarded to singaporeans or prs? that means she has lived in singapore for long enough to know the local culture, right? we're not like, amsterdam(??) or, i don't know, parts of america and europe. that, she should have known.
utter stupidity! obviously public nudity is a no-no in singapore!
i wonder if her scholarship will be revoked?
call me having a case of sour grapes, or whatever.
but, what the hell is a female a*star scholar doing in holland v, naked?
it's total bullshit, that the pair of streakers, both students, checked the local penal code and did not find public nudity explicitly stated as obscenity, so decided to streak, baring all, on a busy saturday evening.
eh, isn't the a*star scholarship awarded to singaporeans or prs? that means she has lived in singapore for long enough to know the local culture, right? we're not like, amsterdam(??) or, i don't know, parts of america and europe. that, she should have known.
utter stupidity! obviously public nudity is a no-no in singapore!
i wonder if her scholarship will be revoked?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
