Social Media Blackout – What you no longer read

Yesterday was the first time social media stopped writing about Singapore news. What the people could read was only news from the main media. Does it make any difference if there is no social media around and the people continue to read only news from the main media? Not really, life will go on as normal.

So, what is the point of a social media blackout or the total obliteration of social media? The main media will continue its responsible and professional role of feeding the people with the right thing to read and all the feel good news. The negative side of the news, the other version of the news, the other truth, will not be seen or heard. The people will be safe from reading the wrong news or not right news. No one will miss anything.

Would things be just as fine? It all depends on whether the main media is doing an adequate job in reporting all the right news. It all depends on whether the people are satisfied with reading all the right news. It all depends on whether the people, having been exposed to the other side of the news think the main media is doing enough and giving them a balanced news.

More than a hundred social media blogs and sites went black yesterday. Many of the bloggers saw the need for a protest to prevent the clamping down of information flow and news about Singapore from being black out in the social media in the future. What happened yesterday was a little blackout, a temporary blackout. The new regulation with its all encompassing rules could lead to a total blackout, a permanent blackout if not stopped in its path.

Remember the incremental changes to the CPF rulings, the incremental changes to the housing policies, the incremental changes to the import of foreigners to the country. The new social media regulation has set out with a very wide net. The implementation of bringing 10 websites under the regulation is only a very small step forward. The assurance by the ministers may seem comforting to some and brought about a false sense to relief that this is all about the new regulation. But with the provisions, incremental steps could be taken along the way and one by one could come under the net. Soon, when one becomes too complacent, the net could rope in every blog and social media site before you know it.

Don’t be complacent and drop your guards. Don’t ever think this is it and everything is ok or will be ok. Be afraid.

PS: The internet gives everyone a voice, a say in what he/she wants to say. Without social media, the people's mouth is shut for good.

FREEMYINTERNET

BLACK OUT DAY BLACK OUT DAY
BLACK OUT DAY BLACK OUT DAY
BLACK OUT DAY BLACK OUT DAY

MDA’s clarification on new regulation

After Yaacob and Chuan Jin’s clarifications the MDA’s position on the new regulation has been sieved and some concerns are slightly clearer though not conclusive. Both have stated that the regulation is meant more specifically for news sites or sites that report regularly on Singapore news. Blogs are not the concerns of the new regime and bloggers are encouraged to keep on doing what they have been doing, writing commentaries about Singapore affairs.

Both are taking a kinder and conciliatory approach towards bloggers and were in a way telling the bloggers to keep commenting on local affairs and express their opinions. The Govt’s position, presumably they are expressing the real Govt’s position, is that bloggers or citizens have the right to discuss and comment on local affairs.

This is actually a new situation as it takes a more positive turn from the past when anyone commenting on local affairs was frown upon and may be visited by Sue. There was this over aching fear that something untowards could happen any time. The invisible hand of the dark side is always around the corner waiting to lash out at the most unsuspecting moment.

The lighter touch and the more accommodating posture of the Govt is noted and welcomed. Let’s hope this will stay and citizens are encouraged to participate in the affairs of the country and not seen as enemies of the Govt when they hold contrarian views or are critical of Govt policies. This departure is a little progress towards a more liberal and inclusive society.

Another point that was acknowledged by Yaacob and Chuan Jin is that the internet is not easy to regulate and a lot of works need to be done if the Govt ever intends to take on the big international news providers. So who is the Govt going after other than Yahoo Singapore? TRE and TOC have been cleared as not the target news sites, and they are not news sites at least for the time being. Both have exceeded the two criteria of reporting on Singapore news and the 50,000 IPs by more than a mile. Having confirmed the fate of two of the biggest local aggregators, these two sites would now be the barometer for other bloggers to gauge themselves if they have crossed the line vis a vis the new regime.

Some of the doubts and worries of the bloggers and internet community have been explained and the fear allayed. But more assurance is needed from the MOM to include provisions in the new regulation to exclude the bloggers if they are to sleep in peace. Would there be amendments directly on this regulation or would MOM wait till the major review of the Broadcasting Act next year as mentioned by Chuan Jin? Before the ink is dry, before anyone breathes a sigh of relief, anything can still happen. This new regulation is encompassing as cyberspace.

Abe and a militant Japan

The road that Abe and his rightist ministers is taking is leading to an intractable position and war with China over the Diaoyu Islands is inevitable. The logic and slant taken by Abe's group is that of Imperial Japan when might is right.

The accusation that only in 1971 that China made a claim on Diaoyu was proof that China did not own the island is a white lie. China was weak, had too many issues to deal with domestically, that should it try to make any claims before, it could lead probably to another military defeat by Japan or a lot of embarrassment as it could not do anything about its claims with a military more powerful Japan and a hostile US.

The Diaoyu was taken by force, as war loot signed away by the 1895 Unequal Treaty. And Abe is claiming that this was legitimate. In a way, yes it is treaty, an agreement. In order for China to take back Diaoyu, if Japan refuses to return it peacefully, will be to take it back by force with another treaty with Japan to over ride this treaty. Is that what Japan wants?

China is no longer a pushover though Japan may think it could repeat its aggressive invasion of China once again. Let's see if Japan is up to it and if China can turn the table around and invade Japan to return the favour.

Many on the side of Japan are refusing to see the historical records of Diaoyu and claimed that Japan has some grounds to claim it. The only legitimate ground is the Treaty of Shimonseki which if Japan is insisting on it, will be to abolish this treaty by the same means, war.

Abe and his hawkish ministers are taking Japan back to militarism. The pretension that it is difficult to change the pacifist constitution is simply bullshit. Many Japanese are waiting to relive their glorious Imperial Japan days. Put it to the Diet and a 2/3 majority to change the constitution is just a formality. The Japanese psychic of domination and superiority and militarism has never changed. It is reviving with greater gusto and arrogance.

The lie that Japan did not have a military force but a Self Defence Force is only unnoticeable to the blind. Japan is already a big military force and can engage in wars of aggression. Its 5 trillion yen annual budget for defence is no small feat.

And what is wrong with China expanding its military expenditure and the deceit of claiming that China has expanded it by 30 folds? China's military expenditure came from a very small base. China should be spending similar amount in defence as the US for a country of that size and for its own defence from its bad experience of being invaded when it was militarily weak.

The right of self defence is the right of every nation. China's defence expenditure is defensive in nature as against the US that is for world domination and hegemony.

Abe will lead Japan to a war with China if he is allowed to continue in this path.

MDA – Loosening the G string

I sat through the live telecast of Talking Point on the issue of new licensing of online news sites. The most unbelieveable thing to happen in the programme is that the MDA personnel was not there, not Yaacob or Koh Lin Net but the Minister of MOM, Tan Chuan Jin. Isn’t this odd? Don’t tell me the new regulation was initiated and approved by Chuan Jin and he has to kuai kuai come out to explain his stand? Quite possible isn’t it? If I were Yaacob or Lin Net, even if my name is named after internet, I would not want to explain anything so unpopular if I have nothing to do with it. Your guess why Chuan Jin has to front this show.

What came through very clearly was that the regulation was rushed out without much thought, with many blanks left unanswered. Now they are going to relook at the details and to fill in the blanks. The main purpose is to target sites that are reporting on Singapore news and not so much about the right news. But right news still came out for some discussion and by the end of the show, no one really knows what is the right news or what is the right news all about.

The other point that came out clearly is that bloggers or individual websites will not be targeted. Then why was this not spelt out in the first place? Or is this an after thought, that bloggers were originally in the scheme of things? Imagine how much venom would have been taken out from the bloggers if from the first move the MOM clearly said bloggers will not be affected by the new regulation. It is still not too late to make an amendment to make it official that bloggers will not come under this regulation. Will the MOM just do that?

The truth is that MOM was not sure how things would develop and they wanted the provision that when blogs take on the characteristics of news site, reporting on Singapore news, then they will come under the regulation. Then I must say many bloggers will eventually come under the regulation despite the denial. Don’t trust me, let me explain. What if I keep reporting on the number of crocodiles in Sungei Buloh Wetland? Is that not reporting on Singapore news? What if I keep reporting about MRT jams or breakdowns as I take the train daily? Is that not reporting on Singapore news? There is no where to run when the definition of news is everything under the Singapore sky. Would MDA want to make this ‘Singapore News’ more specific?

Bertha Henson kept asking the minister what was the real intent of the regulation. And some callers asked a very simple question, ‘Is there anything that is not covered by existing regulations that made the rushing out of this new regulation that necessary and urgent?’ Anything criminal, defamatory or inciting violence on racial and religious issues are fully covered by existing laws. Then why ah? Why in such a hurry to rush out this regulation without making sure that the G string is properly tied and in the right place. Now the G string is found to be too tight and a lot of loosening and readjusting will need to be done, exposing many embarrassing holes and parts that should not be exposed.

What is the real intent of pulling this G string?

Let’s continue to deceive the stupid Singaporeans

‘Banks lead push for local talent pool.’ This is the title of an article in the ST on how ‘serious’ the banks are in pushing for the development of a local pool of banking and finance talents. The point that they are still using the term local instead of Singaporean is a give away warning sign. And when you read the statistics, the Singaporeans and PRs are all lumped together as local talents. Fuck it, PRs are not Singaporeans, and even new citizens are Singaporeans only for a few months or a few years.

Let’s be serious and say the RIGHT thing about Singaporeans and not PRs as locals. Among the local banks that are serious in employing Singaporeans are UOB and OCBC. Period.

Citibank and Stanchart are well known for hiring more foreigners than the other banks. And they claimed to employ 80% and 90% locals respectively. Would they give a breakdown on the number of Singaporeans among the locals, and the percentage of Singaporeans in top management? I am not sure of the Number One local bank, DBS, as no numbers were given. DBS must set a good example as the employer of Singaporeans and not locals which means primarily PRs. I hope DBS will show some nice numbers about how many Singaporeans are in top management. 12 out of 19 in management committee are locals or 63%? How many are Singaporeans?

The more the banks refuse to tell the proportion of Singaporeans and kept hiding behind locals, the more wary Singaporeans should be. Singapore must be for Singaporeans first. It must be that way. Fair employment practice must still emphasise Singaporeans first as being fair. No silly govt in the world would adopt fair employment opportunities for citizens and non citizens. It cannot be fair employment opportunities when citizens are concerned, in our own country.

Ramp-up in supply of new flats not sustainable: Khaw

What? Ramp up supply of new flats not sustainable? What about not building enough, sustainable? What about ramping up the population to 6.9m, sustainable? What about having more foreigners here?

What about rising property prices? Sustainable? What about ever higher salaries for the elite, sustainable? What about car prices and COEs, sustainable? Higher minimum sums in CPF sustainable? Higher hospital fees sustainable?

What is sustainable?

Dr Ker Sin Tze - Hongkong as role model for population growth

Dr Ker, an ex PAP MP and Consul General to Hongkong wrote an article published in the ST yesterday. The gist of his argument is that what Hongkong can do we can too. And the principles can be summarised by this statement, “As the economy of a territory or nation grows and expands, more manpower is needed. Successive inflows of immigrants contribute to the growth of the economy.”

Dr Ker conveniently lumped a country’s economy and its polity together as an inseparable entity. A country is not just the economy with only economic interest and no other interests. The political interest and consideration of a country, of its people, is far more important than just the economy and economics.

Dr Ker can be right in describing a commercial organisation, a business concern. When an enterprise grows and expands, it needs more manpower and other factors of production to grow even bigger. A country is not just an enterprise but also a home. When the owner of a home gets richer, he does not fill up his home with more outsiders/guests to occupy every room and share all his wealth. A country is like a home to its citizens. The guests may be needed to work on the economy but never become part of the owners of the home. The home must never be taken over by the guests.

What Dr Ker has said reflects on his economic mindset. He is only thinking economics. And this is a dangerous premise to start with and that is where the PAP has fumbled and getting itself into bigger problem, losing its bearing and purpose, losing the confidence of the people and losing the country to foreigners. The party thinks that it is running a corporation and as such citizens, PRs, foreigners and what not, do not matter as long as they contribute to the economic pie. How dreadfully wrong can the party be? How blind can the party be that it cannot even understand that it is walking down a slippery road of building an economic enterprise but losing the core interest of its people and the country in the process?

Singaporeans will be turned into a stateless people, with no country to talk about, if this grave mistake is not dealt with immediately. Growing the economic pie is important, economic growth and well being are equally important. But blindly pursuing economic growth and losing the country is a great tragedy that only fools, economists and corporate honchos will do without a single care if there is a country and a citizen to care for. Where are the politicians, the political leaders of a nation?

And they are all so blind to this simple political consideration, the primacy of the state and its people? Unbelieveable!

When are they going to stop selling this snake oil of bigger population?

Shangrila Dialogue - China must take the initiative from the USA

For the past decades, the US has been setting the agenda and taking the initiative to attack China under the vague concept of human rights and hegemony. They have, in every opportunity, launched attacks against China on these two issues and forced China to be on the defensive. The irony is that the US is the greatest violator of human rights and hegemony. The rights of many innocent civilians are violated, maimed or killed by the Americans are mounting daily through so many wars started involving the Americans. And the Americans, as the Empire, the biggest hegemonic power of the day is accusing the Chinese of hegemonic ambition.

It is time the Chinese seize the initiative from the Americans and put the Americans on the defensive. China should announce to the world that it is against hegemony, against interference in another country’s domestic affairs, against war, against violation of human rights and killing of innocent civilians, and against deployment of military bases outside one’s territory. China should then take on the Americans every time the Americans violated these principles.

China should rally world opinions against the Americans. There are many countries that are victims of the American hegemony and will be most willing supporters of such principles. Put the Americans on the defensive instead of being defensive and submissive. China should act and behave like a responsible big power and hold the Americans to such principles and challenge the Americans on such principles. China cannot be on the defensive for all the wrong reasons when the Empire is violated every principle it claims to hold and claiming China is the violator.

The ball game must be balanced on the grounds of principles and actions. China must start to take the offensive against American rhetoric and game of misinformation. The next Shangrila Dialogue China must set the agenda.

Free My Internet Protest 8 Jun 4 pm

A group of bloggers is organising a protest against the new regulations on social media licensing and control. The event will be held this Sat 8 Jun at 4 pm at Hong Lim Park.

This protest is about defending the rights of citizens to freedom of speech as enshrined in the Constitution and any legislation that is against freedom of speech is against the Constitution. Singaporeans are encouraged to support this protest for their own good, to be allowed to speak freely, read freely and listen freely, not only of the RIGHT thing but all things.

Singaporeans are smart enough to know what is the RIGHT thing, wrong thing and the neither right nor wrong thing, and do not need any demi gods or immortals to tell them so.

There is an internet Blackout Day on 6 June and all bloggers supporting the protest can blackout their blogs in their own suitable manner.

There is also a petition and all supporters can visit and sign at http://www.petitions24.com/petition_for_the_immediate_withdrawal_of_the_licensing_regime

What is the RIGHT thing to read?

 I think it is important for us to ensure that they (ordinary Singaporeans) read the RIGHT thing. Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister of Information on BBC.

What is the RIGHT thing to read? I think everyone must be very interested to know what this RIGHT thing is. Yaacob could do the ordinary Singaporeans a favour by explaining what this RIGHT is all about. I also want to know the RIGHT thing, to write the RIGHT thing, so that my readers will also have the benefit of reading the RIGHT thing.

Doesn’t anyone of you want to know the RIGHT thing also? After reading so many wrong things in cyberspace, Singaporeans need to be enlightened by the ‘us’ to teach them the RIGHT thing which presumably must be good for the Singaporeans. Yaacob must be generous to tell us what it is and not keep the RIGHT thing for us. It must be something good and he should not keep us in suspense, wondering what this RIGHT thing is all about.

I confess I have not the faintest idea what this RIGHT thing is. Please help, please enlighten us. Thank you so very much.

Bloggers popping champagne

Many bloggers must be popping champagne and celebrating over the weekend. For one whole week, many were living in fear that they have to put money out front, $50k to be exact, for a performance bond just to have the right to blog. Not only that, applying for a licence can still be rejected. Otherwise they may still blog as long as they post only one article on news related to Singapore. They can’t even post anything on the saucy affairs being read out in courts.

And when the MDA clarified by saying that bloggers will be spared from this new regime to regulate social media, to raise the quality and standard of these part time or voluntary bloggers writing ‘news’, which often are their monologue of what they see or hear, there was a kind of deja vu. Whew, can wipe the sweat off the forehead, bloggers are safe now. Bloggers have been given the freedom to write their stuff in cyberspace. What a great mercy. Thank you MDA. Thank you minister Yaacob. You people are just so kind, gentle and merciful. With leaders like that, what more do you want?

Wait a minute, let’s not be too happy too early. If one is to interpret this new regulation, many bloggers would technically and legally fall into it if the authority so decides to wield the axe. There is no escape as the regulation said so. Unless and until it is written into the regulation that bloggers are exempted, the verbal clarification is just a verbal clarification that may not be recognised in the courts of law. By then nobody will remember who said bloggers are exempted and in what capacity or authority. And how can anyone simply say bloggers are exempted when bloggers met the criteria spelt out in the regulation?

I am ‘recocking’ my bottle and put it back into the wine cooler. Shit, had let off some gas in the process but hopefully it will still taste the same the next time it is ‘uncocked’. I hope no one is going to introduce another regulation that breathing fresh air also needs a performance bond. And the people will not jump in joyous celebration when there is another piece of good news that free air will still be free though the regulation said other wise.

How to make a nation of stupid people? Possible?

Shangrila Dialogue – The Empire threatens

The USA, the most irresponsible Empire of modern history, speaks at the Shangrila Dialogue in Singapore yesterday. And true to its acquired demeanour as the Empire for the last seven decades, it opening speech was to warn an aspiring new power that it is still the Empire and calling the shot. Its Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, lashed out at China for cyber spying. What is new?

The Empire has been spying for the last decades by all means, from flying high altitude spy planes blatantly, in broad day light, across every country it wants to snoop at, knowing no one had the technology to bring them down, or facing the consequences if they did so, to an extensive network of spy agencies, and cyberspace spying is just another cup of tea. What the Empire said is that only the Empire has to right to do so, to spy on other countries, overt and covert, espionage, and the whole menu of collecting intelligence, including assassination or termination with extreme prejudice, and anyone else doing it is not acceptable, irresponsible behaviour.

It is the same story as acquisition of nuclear weapons and WMD. Only the Empire can do so and other aspirants are dangerous and irresponsible and will face an invasion by the Empire troops, for regime change. And only the Empire can foment, support, feed and train insurgents and terrorists to overthrow existing govts. No other country can do that or be branded as evil, or the Axis of Evil.

It is also the Empire’s right to police the seas and space, to bring their military forces to any country’s back yard or front yard, to conduct war games simulating an invasion, and no other country can do so. Only the Empire is the responsible power and other countries and powers are behaving irresponsibly without starting or fighting a war. The right to start a war, to fight wars, to invade another country for whatever pretext, is the privilege of the Empire. When the Empire did do, for the right or wrong reason, for real or fabricated reason, it is normal. It is the Empire!

In the Shangrila Dialogue, the Empire will be setting the tone, warning other smaller powers to behave when the only power that is not behaving is the Empire. The Empire will call the shot and set the agenda for the Dialogue, and to stamp its approval if it agrees with the final statement of the Dialogue. The Empire is always the responsible one, and the rest are either irresponsible or evil.

Who is the real Evil One? Whose vocabulary consists of nothing but threats, sanctions, military intervention, military power, use of military power, war games, regime change, etc etc?

More taxi drivers being beaten by FTs

I was quite aghasted at a video showing two locals charging at a taxi driver and wanting to beat him up for sounding his irritating horn. And then there was this uncle taxi driver that did not give way properly and was punched in the tummy by the other driver.  Seems like taxi drivers are getting into situations where they become easy punching bags.

And in the ST a few days ago, an angmoh FT lecturer whacked a taxi driver till his umbrella broke, and punched his face as well, and did not pay for the fare. In the same report another FT was also reported to have beaten another taxi driver.

Is this a new reality game in Sin City, beating up taxi driver and see who can do it best, and get a free ride at the same time? Why are taxi drivers such easy targets and can anything be done to protect them in this only protected occupation for Singaporeans? This also means that when a taxi driver is beaten, a Singaporean is beaten while doing his job, and for driving his passenger around, driving them home, providing them a chauffer service.

What a way to be rewarded! Where is Singa? Retired? Just as well. Singa is only meant for Sinkies, to be polite even if beaten.

Notable Quote by Yaacob Ibrahim

I think it is important for us to ensure that they (ordinary Singaporeans) read the RIGHT thing.  Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister of Information on BBC.

Who is this ‘us’? And what is so righteous about this ‘us’ to decide and ensure what is the RIGHT thing for Singaporeans to read? I think Singaporeans should read the right things in mysingaporenews. Boleh, betul?

MDA: Bloggers need not apply for licence

MDA has clarified that individual bloggers need not have to apply for licence under the new regulation. This is no cold comfort as things may change along the way. This controversial move to regulate something that is virtual and unlikely to be feasible without playing rough is still a mystery to many, and keeps everyone wondering why it is found so necessary to do so.

When a blogger puts up a post in cyberspace, it is just that, a post in cyberspace. Where is this cyberspace? It is in a way a void that you cannot see or touch, just like a memory in a human brain, there but not there. And the blogger making a post can be sitting here, in London, New York, Beijing or Tokyo, and he does not specify that his post is to go to Sin City or whatever place. Once in cyberspace, it is out there but not there at the same time. Only those who want to view them will see them, with a conscious effort of going to the url. Without making this effort, the post is transparent to anyone and virtually not there, non existence.

How can information (slander or personal attack etc aside) in cyberspace come under anyone or any country’s jurisdiction? And in a way, messing up someone’s blog in cyberspace is an intrusion into someone’s private space even if it has no privacy restriction. Why should anyone be given the right to go out there to block someone’s url because he does not like what the other person is writing? Put it in another way, can anyone go into a person’s diary to do as he pleases? Or can anyone, including govt, think it is ok, it has the right, to mess around with an individual’s diary or blog?

Every individual should have his right to write as he pleases in his own diary or blog, as long as he does not venture into areas of libel and scandal or posting offending comments to violate others or incite violence against anyone. Tiok boh? And there is no law to say he cannot leave his diary or blog about for people to assess them at their own free will.

The whole thing about licensing and regulating blogs is crazy and vain, and only control freaks or people with an obsessive fear of being exposed of their freakish acts or wrongdoings would be so perturbed by it. If one has nothing to hide, why is there so much fear, so much obsession, to want to control people speaking their minds? The doer has all the freedom to do as he pleases, and the commentator must also has all his freedom to have his views, contrary or conflicting views. Cannot meh? Any part that violates whatever safeguards to an individual’s right is all there in the legal provisions of the state.

We are just having a peep into this paranoid thinking process, that being in the govt, one is given the god forsaken right to do what one pleases, even in interfering with the free flow of information and speech, in what people can see, read, hear, write or say. And even the audacity to set standards in civility or language or way of writings. KNN, I want to write in whatever way or style or broken English, what has that got to do with the Govt?  Boh song huh? This is indeed a funny circus.

How dangerous can cyberspace be?

Before the new MDA regulation comes into effect tomorrow, social media is just another social site for individuals to write, comment, and chat to whoever they want as long as they don’t flirt with scandals and libels that will expose them to Sue. When the new regulation takes effect, website owners have to be extra careful with what appears on their website, intentionally, unintentionally, or being spooked.

Other than having to apply for a licence, put up a $50k bond, their pockets can be burnt real bad. The licence fee could be small change, the $50k bond is not. But the more treacherous is that the $50k bond would be the first to go, as advanced ransom payment. Then comes the big one, $200k to be exact, the maximum fine that can be imposed. And if suay suay kena fined for this sum, and unable to pay, hey, there is a jail to go to.

Now, is social media a dangerous thing, or can social media or cyberspace become such a dangerous place? Don’t forget that there are all kinds of strange fellas floating around in cyberspace and can turn an innocent website into hell.

Why go to university?

This is going to bug many parents and the children when going to university is being played down as something not really necessary. In the past, going to university is very simple. A degree will mean a good life, getting a good job to earn bigger pay and to bring up a family with all the trappings of wealth and comfortable things. It was so simple then.

Many people are still going to university for exactly this reason and nothing else. Getting a degree is for a practical reason, to land a better job and a better life. When this is no longer a valid reason, when the outputs, in monetary terms, time and resources, do not make up for the rewards of a university education, would people start to stop thinking of going to the university? Must study hard is losing its meaning.

There are of course many varied reasons for people wanting a university education. There are obvious benefits of a university education, a more knowledgeable and enlightened person, a perfecting of self. Though this can be done differently, like going through university of hard knocks, a formal education is a short cut with a well planned training programme.

To some people, going to university is a personal fulfillment of sort, acquisition of knowledge and the joy of learning. But this group is a minority. Not many will go to pursue a degree for the sake of getting a degree. It is luxury, a past time, a hobby and satisfaction.

Back to the basics, get a degree for practical reasons. Now, with the new development, getting a degree has lost its practical reasons. The practical thing to do is to acquire skills and training to increase one’s market value, to be employable. I think it boils down to this and nothing else. Training to value add, and to get that job or promotion and a better salary and a better life.

Would you believe that many people are training to downgrade, to get a lower paying job, because their skills and experienced and training are no longer marketable or not wanted because the world’s talents are here to compete with them? Still there are some who would train to switch jobs for a matter of interest and satisfaction. But to train for a lower paying job because of necessity, because the employers do not want to employ them for their better skill and expertise, quite a different proposition altogether. Very defeatist and depressing isn’t it?

Do the people have a choice to train to upgrade rather than to train to downgrade, or worst, train for the sake or belief in training but going no where, does not contribute to improving their market value?

What should the young be told in schools if going to university is no longer the lucrative and assured road to a better job and a better life? Close the universities, close the schools?

MDA’s licensing of social media, a pawn’s gambit

In a sudden move, MDA stunned the world of social media and the whole wide world with a pawn’s gambit, by requiring social media website reporting on Singapore to be licensed, to put up a $50k bond and risk a $200k penalty if the news site violated its regulations. A few of the official media websites were put up as bait to this new move, and the proverbial inconsequential sacrificial pawns. Some may think that this is a foolish move as the social media exists in cyberspace with no space or territory to talk about, and can’t be under any country’s jurisdiction in the normal sense. A news site in cyberspace appearing here also appears across the whole wide world. How can the govt of a country claims jurisdiction over the site and requiring the site to apply for a national license?

I was thinking of suggesting to Yaacob Ibrahim to retract this new regulation as it does not appear to be very sound, unreal. The Govt may be able to deal with Singaporeans owning the sites, but as for foreigners or sites located overseas, there is really nothing much that the Govt can do except to declare ‘war’ against the site and its owners. Many would not even have a presence here in terms of staff and offices and nothing can be held in ransom. They can show the MDA their middle finger. It would be interesting for Yahoo, Singapore to do just that.

Then again, I think this meticulous and highly talented Govt would not have done something that looked silly to the common folks, but the imposition of this regulation must have been carefully thought through, with the inputs of all the great talents available. It must be something workable, reasonable, logical, and ingenious, and for a very important objective.

As the case turns out, the reception was anything but hostility and many people, not only the website owners, but anyone familiar with cyberspace, are not taking this move kindly. It will definitely increase the anti PAP votes in the next election.

Why would the Govt want to tempt this fate, the same question that the people are asking about the Population White Paper? A simple guess is that by not doing so, the power of social media is going to increase and affect the votes for the PAP negatively. And applying Machiavelli’s Theory, if nasty and unpopular decisions need to be taken, let’s do it swiftly and hopefully by the next GE the pain will be forgotten or softened.

The PAP must have many cards up its sleeves and many things must be carefully planned ahead to take away this sting. How about a big big angpow then, one that will floor every anti PAP voters and put a smile in their faces? The Govt’s policy and trump card has always been the pocket. Hit the pocket hard or fill it fully to win the votes. If the angpow is coming, and a real big one, it will be another ‘pau chiat’ GE in 2016. What is there to fight if the people can see the goodies coming?

The PAP must have known that this is going to be a very unpopular policy domestically and even internationally. This must be another first chalked up by the PAP, regulating and licensing websites, not only applicable to Singaporeans but also to foreigners. They must know that the foreigners will also comply and put up the bond, and prepare to be fined $200k if charged by the Singapore courts. If the foreigners were to stand up in defiance, there is really nothing the Govt can do and can be quite embarrassing, to be seen as bullying the Singaporeans and a toothless tiger to the foreigners.

The owners of all the major local websites are up in arms in protest. Unlike the Hong Lim Park protest against the Population White Paper that died down immediately after the event, these major websites are going to blow their trumpets, bugles, horns and beat their drums daily to make sure not only the Govt will hear the noise, but the whole wide world will get the din as well. It is going to be very noisy without a sound. The only thing is how long will the website owners be able to keep their fighting spirit up and high and to see if they wear out first, or the Govt wears out first? What would be the deciding factor to tip the balance and for a winner to appear? Can it be public opinion of the citizens or the opinion of the whole wide world, or a combination of both? Would the citizens chip in, or would the main media chip in, to give more weight to the combatants?

The time line is likely to be 2016. If this protracted war is dragged on, it will only increase in temperature and intensity as it approaches the 2016 GE. Round One the MDA has clearly lost with social media and bloggers and netizens throwing all the punches. Ouch! Next to throw punches are likely to be the citizens who voted for a Govt and finding it unacceptable for the same Govt to want to gag their mouth, stuff their ears and put blinkers on their eyes. Why would they want to vote for such a Govt? Would this be the big question in the next GE?

The show has just begun.

50,000 IPs, what is this?

My concern with IPs stemmed from my experience in redbeanforum.com. When the brigades were attacking my site, dunno who they are or where they are from, every morning my site will be hit by a few hundred spam postings of all kinds of stuff, from porno sites to fictitious retail sites. And it was quite a task trying to delete them. Eventually I gave up and locked the site from comments. It is now a read only forum : )

The IPs can become more mischievous if the new MDA regulations come into force. Any site can be hit by a few hundred or thousand spams daily and getting 50,000 IPs showing in the counter is a piece of cake. Can these sites then tell MDA, sorry, the IPs are spammers. And would MDA accept that reasoning? What do you think?

Would someone say, put in firewalls or blocks, or allow a special counter to be inserted into the blog or site for counting minus spams? And you can have cheeky buggers creating little programmes to ramp up the IP hits of any site they want to hit and sorry folks, your 50,000 IPs are up. Please apply for a licence, and put up a bond. No worry, a banker’s guarantee will do. How much is a banker’s guarantee? Freely issued by the bankers?

Would MDA provide free software to make the counter numbers genuine and not flooded by spammers? Would a blog or site allow MDA to insert programmes into it? Or in case of blogs, would Google allow such interference to their system?