Jittery?

It's late at night. And by late, I mean after-midnight late. The clock ticks softly, second by second, sometimes louder, sometimes softer, as if it has a mind of its own. The door hangs ajar, held only by a measly door stopper. The room is silent except for the cars on the street downstairs and your typing. You yawn in fatigue, but a tiny voice in your head keeps sounding false alarms. You begin to feel afraid, and you feel a cool breeze of air envelop your body. The door moves slowly, and shuts itself.

NERVOUSNESS -how to stop it.

Here are some personal tips that help me when I get jittery and start imagining things that aren't there... or may be there. Firstly, upon hearing or (touch wood) seeing something unexplainable, think of a reasonable explanation. Secondly, breathe in and breathe out. This helps to remove the nervousness building up within you bit by bit, calming you so that you can still think rationally. Thirdly, if you have the guts, investigate the happening. Or, if you are a coward like me, take cover within the confines of your mind, and keep doing a repetitive task like typing a blog post, try to keep a train of thoughts moving along, and don't stop until you feel the fear totally gone.

Fourthly, if you chose the investigation path, get back to your chair if you feel that it's safe and there's nothing out there. If you chose a cowardly path, then stay in a single position and continue coaxing yourself out of your fear until the train of thoughts help to lower the fear rate visibly.

Lastly, if the fear continues, ignore whatever is causing the noise or sighting, turn on an electronic device and crank some of your favourite music to the highest volumes. If this doesn't help, you either 1) really have something to fear or 2) are just a badly frightened person. Don't move, and wait till someone arrives at your current position, or invite someone over if there is no one available.

That's the end of my personal tips to survive fear that comes from imagination.

Nose-picking

This is a universal act, driven by the urge to breathe freely through one's nose, and limited by society and it's norms. Nose picking as defined by Wikipedia is the act of of extracting dried nasal mucus or foreign bodies from the nose with a digit. It is so weirdly interesting that this habit, despite its defiance of social norms, is universal. It is estimated (again, info from wikipedia) that the average adult human does this act 4 times a day. I believe that people with the flu (and who have just recovered from it) would do this more than ten times a day, or for one very long period of time at a stretch. I believe that this act of nose picking is already inherent in our cultures as a hole, if not inherent in one of our conscious habits, next to scratching and swallowing.

Alright, I admit the last sentence was pretty far-fetched, but that doesn't make it any less of a habit / daily ritual. The thing is that this habit is overlooked, and people go to great extents to hide their nose-picking behaviours. Take for example this morning. I was at the lift door waiting for my lift, and when it came, I saw a young lady in her 20s picking her nose with a tissue and her little finger. I could see that she was visibly embarrassed as she did not expect the lift to stop before she finished her nose-digging. Immediately, she stopped the act and pretended that she was blowing her nose.

As you can infer from the example, people may be afraid that others may think differently (in a negative way) of them if they see that person picking his / her nose. And in a way it is true. Society dictates that the digging and scratching of any body part prone to odours or dirt is forbidden, and probably will be looked down upon. A list of body parts that produce odours or have been in contact with a substance looked upon as dirty would include the armpits, the foot, the ears, the butt, the butt-crack, the belly-button and the nose. What this means is that anything which is a hole or is prone to odour is off-limits for scratching.

Aside from what society may believe, nose-mining is a good habit. It allows one to keep the insides of the primary breathing apparatus clean, and may also make you some friends.

Looks like nose-picking may not be such a bad thing after all, huh?

Machine versus Human

When a machine attempts to replace the teacher, there is much to debate about. What machine am I talking about exactly? It is a software designed to mark essays to save teachers the time of marking an essay, especially if the writer is not very used to writing English. Can the machine replace the teacher?

In my opinion, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

A human cannot be replaced by a machine until the Singularity occurs (that is, if it will even happen). For those who do not know, the Singularity is the point where the machine rivals and supersedes the brain, after which that machine would continue creating a smarter machine, and that machine would create an even smarter machine. It would continue in a never-ending cycle, posing threats to the human race should the machines deem the human race unsuitable for the Earth. In any case, writing cannot be marked by an emotionless software. A software that can never detect any emotion in any words whatsoever, or feel what the writer says. A software can never take the spirit of writing into numbers, and calculate it.

It's a little like AI versus humans. What differentiates them? That single defining quality is what will define us as human, and upon losing that trait, we are beasts, we are no longer human. Compassion. THAT is the defining quality. While machines may think with a utilitarian perspective, humans on the other hand weight the pros and cons less and may depend on their feelings more often. Thus, writing cannot be easily weighed by a compassion-less robot, one that cannot feel for the characters.

However, where teachers fail, software can help. Some teachers fail to point out obscure grammar errors that may occur in conversational Singlish (thus becoming "correct"). A software can fix this problem, and as long as it is glitch-proof, the software would be perfect for marking out structural and phrasal errors.

Machines can NEVER take over humans in marking essays. What I would suggest is that they work together, such that no problem is posed in marking essays.

Recent Egyptian uprising

I'm sure everyone has read about the recent Egyptian uprising, and how it was fuelled by years and years of pent-up rage at the authoritarian government and corruption within the ranks of the military and security forces.

The main driving force was unprecedented: It was the younger generation, the ones so commonly called "politically apathetic". Their main source of communication and information? Not propaganda-infused newspapers, not government-approved radio stations, not mind-numbing television, but the Internet. Yes, by Internet I mean social networking sites made popular four years ago like Facebook and Twitter, and information through search engines like Google (a search engine)and news sites.

There is a reason why they call it 'Infocomm', or Information Communication.

To the main questions: 1) What are the implications of this rise in the power of technology? 2) How can or might it change the way we live or govern? 3) Consider the pros and cons at the great influence of facebook and twitter.

Let's note that the technology could work two ways. If one could use it for revolution and rebellion in Egypt, one could also use it for the same purpose in China, the United States and even Singapore. It will always work as long as the key purpose, communication, is not taken away by the government or the web host. Assuming I'm a terrorist and I use the sites to bring people to my cause. It would work if neither the government nor the site takes action against me.

In this way, the country would become less safe. Terrorists would spring up everywhere (or maybe violently racist people). Your friend might be innocent one day, and a cultist the next. We would then need to create the virtual equivalent of an army to police and combat potentially dangerous ideas. Following the idea of influence over the younger generation through the internet, politicians might get themselves on the internet and try to appeal to the younger generation.

Another implication would be the over reliance on technology. Assuming I want to get a message out, I'd logically use the internet, seeing that it has worked so well. However, the internet crashes because of failure of the phone line. I am now technologically crippled and thus cannot get my message out. This is a bad outcome of over reliance on technology.

Third question (because combining it with the other two would look weird) - The influence of Facebook and Twitter does not come close to being great; rather, it just serves as more of a messenger. Facebook and Twitter have always been addictive for people wanting to stay updated on new events. When you first learnt about the Egyptian uprising, would you take to the streets? Yes, if you are already angry at the government. Would you support some obscure fund-raising ceremony that appears on your homepage? Probably not.

I guess my point is that Facebook and Twitter as networking sites do not influence one's opinion, it just serves to inform. Whether one takes action or not is another case. The good thing about it is that it brings one's message across to a audience quickly, especially if it is a message concerning the masses. However the bad things about those networking sites is that they can be pretty addictive, causing failing grades in students.