_Tuesday, September 25, 2007*

the debate-able

From Alfred Lord Tennyson's poem In Memoriam:27, 1850:

I envy not in any moods
The captive void of noble rage,
The linnet born within the cage,
That never knew the summer woods:


I envy not the beast that takes
His license in the field of time,
Unfetter'd by the sense of crime,
To whom a conscience never wakes;


Nor, what may count itself as blest,
The heart that never plighted troth
But stagnates in the weeds of sloth;
Nor any want-begotten rest.


I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.



what do you think??
better to have loved and lost...
or better to have never loved at all??

OPINIONS PEOPLE!!!
I WANT OPINIONS!!!

*- amanda scribbled at 9/25/2007 07:10:00 PM

+***+

_Sunday, September 23, 2007*

HOLIDAYS!!

trials are over and school's out!! =) i know i'm gonna do well in everything except chem cos i gave up on it before i even saw the paper. had to mug physics cos it's the only sub that's gonna be counted in the finals and i totally rocked the physics paper. haha! i <3 newton, einstein and de broglie.

wheeee!! vicky rocks!! he managed to find my frosties when i went to at least 6 different supermarts and almost gave up hope... so now i'm a happy girl with my 2 huge boxes of frosties. but i'm still short of honeystars and kokocrunch... =( i miss cedar's 1st stall's kokocrunch and milo ice... the best!! and i like that cute auntie.

btw girls with blue tops and grey skirted uniforms totally rock.
no matter what you say they'll always be HOT. =P

and strangely good news seems to like arriving in packs... so...
MY OLD WALLET'S BEEN FOUND!! =D
MY MOM'S MOVED OUT OF MY APT AND GONE BACK TO SG!! =D
WE'RE(my girls and i) GOING TO HONG KONG!!!
I'M SO GONNA KICK ASS DURING THE FINALS NEXT TERM.

you just watch me. =P

*- amanda scribbled at 9/23/2007 03:44:00 PM

+***+

_Wednesday, September 12, 2007*

YEAH!!

Girls rule and guys drool. HAHAHA.

the undercover economist
Snips, Snails, and Puppy Dog Tails
There's finally proof that boys do ruin schools for girls.
By Tim Harford
Posted Saturday, Sept. 1, 2007, at 7:33 AM ET

My colleague at the Financial Times, Isabel Berwick, recently mourned the closure of her fondly remembered all-girls' school and regretted "a slow societal shift away from girls-only schools and colleges." As the father of two young daughters, I am paying attention.

Yet "slow" is the operative word. Girls' schools are clinging on tenaciously in the public sector here in Britain: More girls go to single-sex schools than boys. In inner London, parental preferences for girls' schools are particularly pronounced. The Guardian has reported that more than half of inner-London girls attend girls' schools, and just over a quarter of boys attend boys' schools. The result, of course, is that the mixed schools contain a disproportionate number of boys.

Parents make these choices because of a widely held belief that girls thrive in single-sex environments. But is that true? And what are the implications for the girls left surrounded by emotionally retarded adolescent males?

We are in the realm of so-called "peer effects" here, and they are notoriously hard to measure. Girls' schools produce good academic results, but that could be because particular types of parents favor such schools, because those schools have a strong historical record, or because of selection. I was lucky enough to go to a state-funded, single-sex, selective school in a prosperous neighborhood. My classmates did well in their exams, but there is an embarrassingly large range of explanations as to why.

A new working paper from economists Victor Lavy of Hebrew University and Analía Schlosser of Princeton attempts to unpick the peer effects associated with gender, using data on nearly half a million students passing through Israel's school system in the 1990s. They compared consecutive year groups passing through the same school, figuring that if one year's group was 55 percent boys and the next year's was 55 percent girls, that difference was very likely to be random and thus susceptible to meaningful number crunching.

Their answer chimes perfectly with the conventional wisdom: Boys benefit from being in a classroom with girls, but girls do not benefit from being in a classroom with boys. What is interesting about Lavy and Schlosser's work is that it uses survey data provided by the children to work out what is causing the effects. The survey questions ask, for example, about violence in school, respect for teachers, classroom distractions, and relations among students.

Boys pollute the educational system, it seems, for a number of unmysterious reasons: They wear down teachers, disrupt classes, and ruin the atmosphere for everyone. And more boys are worse than fewer boys, not because they egg each other on but simply because more of them can cause more trouble in total.

It is all rather troubling, especially for the parents of little angels like my daughters. Evidently, it is impossible to satisfy the—apparently justified—parental demand to educate girls in single-sex schools and boys in mixed classes. (Not for the first time in my life, I conclude that the world doesn't have enough girls in it.)

Researchers from the University of London's Institute of Education have asked a related question, comparing mixed schools with single-sex schools (from the 1970s, when nonselective single-sex schools were more plentiful) rather than the varying gender balance within mixed schools. Their conclusions, published last year, were subtly different. They found that boys disrupt mixed classrooms, but found that boys did not do any worse if locked up in a single-sex school.

A social planner might thus conclude that all education should be single-sex. The difficulty is to combine this perspective with the principle of parental choice. I have the answer: a congestion-charge-style tax on parents who insist on polluting girls' education with their testosterone-fuelled little monsters. The money could go toward hiring extra teachers—and riot police.
Tim Harford is a columnist for the Financial Times. His latest book is The Undercover Economist.

*- amanda scribbled at 9/12/2007 06:39:00 PM

+***+

_Monday, September 10, 2007*

do i look like i care?

it's spring-cleaning time...

and i'm throwing you out. =)

bye.

*- amanda scribbled at 9/10/2007 10:47:00 PM

+***+

_Friday, September 07, 2007*

Splish Splash!!

haha!! tracy darling!! here's something for you!! =P
and a tidbit of extra knowledge should you drop your hp into a swimming pool or toilet bowl. >.<

On Call: My phone took a swim
Kent German, Senior Editor, CNET Reviews

Saving a soaked cell Motorola Slvr L6
Q: I just had an accident with my Motorola Slvr L6--it fell into my toilet. I got it out quickly and removed the battery and the SIM card. I was told to wait for three days before checking to see if it works. Is there any chance of knowing if it's OK sooner than that? What are the possibilities of it working? --Maria

A: A wet cell phone is a common problem, but it doesn't necessarily mean the end of your mobile. I can't tell you for certain if your L6 will work, but you did the right thing by getting it out of the water as quickly as possible. Limiting your handset's time in the drink is essential for a speedy cell phone recovery. You were also correct to remove the battery and the SIM card, as water will most likely zap the battery before it will kill the phone.

Now concerning how long you should wait, three days is a good amount of time but I don't think you have to wait that long. It's more important that you make sure the phone is completely dry. And don't try to rush it by using a hair dryer, roasting it in the oven, or putting your L6 in the direct sun, as too much heat can cause further damage. Let it dry naturally by placing it on a table in a warm room and by dabbing it with a cloth. I realize it takes some patience, but either you wait a couple of days to dry it thoroughly, or you fry it into oblivion by turning it on too soon.

Here are some tips for saving a wet phone:
* Again, remove the phone the water as quickly as possible. Also, remove the battery and SIM card and put them aside.
* You can try putting it in a jar of uncooked rice. It can soak up the water more quickly. Also, you might try putting it in a plastic bag with silica packs that absorb moisture. You can find them in some shoe boxes and other packaging.
* If your phone falls in salt water, you should rinse with it distilled water to remove any salt crystals or other minerals before allowing it to dry.
* Some experts recommend using denatured alcohol to remove sediment. I've never tried this method, so I'm a little wary of it.
* Don't attempt to use your phone if the display is foggy.
* Once you think your phone is dry, try reconnecting the battery and turning it on. If it still doesn't work, you can try replacing the battery. Just be sure to use a battery specifically made for your phone.
* Carriers will not replace a phone that has water damage, so don't try to take it back. A wet cell also will void a warranty. Most phones have a small, round sticker behind the battery cover that is used to check for moisture damage. The sticker, which is usually white, will turn pink or red if it's been exposed to water.


=)

*- amanda scribbled at 9/07/2007 05:05:00 PM

+***+

_Thursday, September 06, 2007*

nights like these.

ayeeee! i don't know what to update about!! actually i got nothing to update about either... =S

randomness.

i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics. i love physics.

oh damn, who am i trying to kid.

AH MA, TRACY, BUTT BUTT, PREETOS!!!!!!
frosties... tao huay... chomp chomp... swensens... apple crumble...
cravings. =(

go home dammit!!! i don't want you here

argh... trial exams in 1.5 weeks. what the hell am i doing here?!

i want and i don't want to.

i don't know anymore.

*- amanda scribbled at 9/06/2007 11:04:00 PM

+***+