Today's library, tomorrow's 'googlary'?

Students of the past used to spent countless hours in the library reading up, regardless of whether it was for a project, for leisure, or simply for supplementing their knowledge. It would be hard to imagine modern day students seating in libraries, patiently, researching, because in present times, the cyberspace serves as a platform that allows everyone accessibility to online research materials. To put it simply, one of the greatest online portal for research is "Google.com".

The author is quite right in saying that Google has indeed revolutionised and that it itself is now a verb that is widely used and accepted. How we can see for ourselves the success of Google include the fact that Google has been the website with the most traffic flow for quite some time now in the USA. Google does have the potential of taking over as the world’s library, being connected to millions and millions of sites which provide tons of information.

But Google has its problems. As with the internet, there is a veil of anonymity which the online user can hide himself or herself such that no responsibility will be taken should something go wrong. Therefore, as much as Google can link all these sites to us, it cannot ensure, nor can McAfee screening, that the information provided is correct and will help in our research. Therefore, researchers that use Google have to discern for themselves which of the sources are authentic and can be trusted, which therefore takes more time. Furthermore, there is the problem of contradicting sources that can happen, particularly when one site contradicts another, and we do not know which one to trust.

Therefore, just a Googlary alone may not be enough to fulfil the requirements that people all around the world need for research. For example, the internet will never be smart enough to provide the most adequate help in researching and finding sources, while when we go to proper libraries, there is always a helpful librarian to help us on our projects and stuff, and to guide us to the correct books that will help us in the research. Also, we can agree that those books in libraries can generally be trusted more than the sources online, as they go through editing and publishing.

I would recommend that while resources be made available online for those who want to access them, that the libraries should still be our main source of information when it comes to proper research that we want to be credible as future references. By doing this, we can prevent several important issues such as plagiarism and things like copyright and permission issues. Therefore, while online resources are definitely much easier to access, there are pros of using a library for research that a Googlary might not be able to give us.

While a Googlary sounds like a nice idea, it would be better for us to follow the traditional guide of using a library for our research.

Integrated Resorts- How far do you agree with PM Lee’s decision? Propose a solution to any 2 social repercussions encountered.

Choosing whether to set up the IR must have been a difficult decision for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. IRs are resorts that contain casinos that avid gamblers patronize. Many take it as a place to strike rich excluding those that are already rich. Furthermore, building IRs are a major way to boost Singapore’s economy which has been facing intense competition from other destinations around the region, particularly from nearby Bangkok and Hong Kong, which has since also considered legalization of casinos in the wake of initiatives in Singapore. Even closer to home, Malaysia has long had a legal casino cum theme park on Genting Highlands, which proved popular with Singaporean tourists.

Hence, due to the extreme effects IRs might have, there were fierce debates on whether it should or should not be set up. I for one agree with PM Lee’s decision.

We all know that due to Singapore’s limited land space and resources, we have very few industries. Hence, we heavily rely on tourism and the export market. Presently, tourists that visit Singapore stay no more than 5 days, if we increase their time spent here, our economy will definitely benefit from it. So, what must we do to persuade them to stay? Building more zoos, bird parks, theme parks and shopping malls will not increase their stay because we already have those. However, building an IR, which we do not have presently, will get the job done. We cannot deny that building the IR is a necessary evil if we want our economy to improve. Everything comes at a cost, this applies to the IR as well however, we must find ways to reduce that cost instead of totally rejecting the product.

Building the IR not only attracts more tourists, it also provides lots of jobs for the jobless. In the current economic condition, there are more jobless people than jobs available. Hence, the jobs provided by the IR will come especially in handy at this period of time. This will also contribute to the economy greatly.

As I have said earlier on, everything comes at a price. Hence, the price will be social repercussions. The most obvious one will be gambling addiction due to man’s lust for greed. Following that will be a string of problems like money related crimes, breaking up of family and so on.

I suggest that family with members that are gambling addicts step up to ban their own family members. Heavy counselling should also be used on addicts. People who are already in dire straits should be banned from entering the casinos and so on.

All in all, I think that IRs are not totally a bad thing and we should embrace it with open arms. However, I think that we must learn to reduce the impacts of the consequences so that are society is not harmed by it.

National Service- How can this be amended or improved further to alleviate the problem of dodging?

The problem of dodging in the national service has been getting more and more serious as dodging becomes more rampant among those who are about to be drafted. Therefore, it is essential that this problem be addressed immediately.

There are many reasons why these young men dodge NS. Many of which do not know the true meaning of NS. Many of them only look at NS at face value; they do not go on and find out about the true reason why they need to serve NS. Some of them just have the mindset that NS is a waste of their time. Many of them think that they can put the time to better use. For example, many of them think that they could use their time to further their studies to have a better standard of living in the future. Furthermore there are those that are scared out of their pants by the stories that their seniors tell them. These stories, true or untrue, have left a very bad impression on these people that are about to get drafted, causing them to have the intention of dodging. They all have the premature fear even before they enter NS.

It is essential that these people realize the need for them to not dodge NS. They must realize that we are living in a small red dot. We do not have a population as big as china or the U.S. they must know that if everyone is like that, Singapore would soon crumble under an invasion.

I would suggest having stricter punishment meted out to dodgers. By saying stricter, I mean that the punishment should freak the potential dodgers out so that they would not even think of dodging. These strict punishments should bring about undesirable consequences so as to deter people. However, we should also consider education talks in schools, road shows to raise public awareness and more advertising so as to inform people of the rationale behind national service and why they should not dodge it. This way, people would be warned before hand and they are less likely to dodge.

I think that commitment is the key to prevent dodging. I think that schools should take some time to instill commitment in their students. Students should be taught how to be committed to the country. They should also learn to be committed to serving and defending their country.

We should also consider giving compensation to those whom are about to go to university but is delayed by NS. Giving compensations might also help to deter people from dodging. However, compensation should not be overdone so that it does not become the main reason why people serve National Service.

I think that educating and informing parents is also important. With the right point of view, parents can persuade their children not to dodge and serve NS whole-heartedly. Nowadays, there are many parents that encourage or help their child to dodge NS because they are afraid that their child might suffer under the harsh conditions. Fines should be imposed on families who have children that dodge NS. Heavier fines should be imposed on the rich and influential. This will act as a good deterrent to parents.

All in all, I think that this problem is aggravating and needs to be attended to immediately.

How advertising informs to our benefit

Our world is full of advertisements which promote nearly everything from daily necessities to luxurious items to health advertisements. We look at them every day and most of the time, we learn from them.
I
n the passage, the author argues how advertising can work to our benefit. However, I disagree with him to a certain extent. It is true that advertisements provide us with information and some use the information to tempt us to buy their products. However, the information that is provided with the advertisements is not always complete. The advertisers are bound to conceal the information which will cause the advertisements to lose its effectiveness. The target audience of the advertisements will not get the full picture and they will have the impression that this specific product is flawless. This will cause them to be tempted and might eventually lead to buying that product without knowing of its flaws until the buyer actually uses it.

This lack of full information also causes us to spent unnecessary money. An excellent example would be the advertisements of food. They will show you how “humongous” the meal is and then, they will state that it is “very affordable” and that it is very healthy. These kinds of advertisements will usually achieve the effect which is to attract the customer to eat their food. However, the customers will not return. “Macdonald’s” and the likes of such fast-food restaurants like to over-exaggerate their meal servings. “Macdonald’s” also boasts of how healthy and how economic their food is. These factors will probably attract many people including me. We will think that what we see is what we will get as seeing is believing hence, we went ahead to try. However, it was very disappointing when we get the real thing. It was anything but what we saw. The burger was pathetic and the amount of French fries was so measly. Furthermore, many people got fat because of fast food. Hence we can see that actually advertising does not work to our benefit but actually causes us more harm than good.

Personally, I think that advertisers should have honesty and integrity so as not to “scam” people into buying. It is to also save people from unnecessarily temptations. It is essential for a buyer to get the full picture of the product that they are buying so that they can make a good choice. Especially in the area of health products. If the buyer does not know of its side effects, the consequences could be catastrophic. From this, we can see the importance of honesty and integrity. However, sometimes it is near impossible to be fully honest and uphold integrity. Companies which need to sell their products will need to compromise heavily on this as their advertisements would be rendered useless if they state all the bad points of their products.

Honesty and integrity would be something that I like to see in the future. It would also help the buyer to make the right choice as the advertisements is ridden of gimmicks and hidden conditions. However, we all know that it is almost impossible to for advertisers to compromise on honesty and integrity.

Being a creative director of a tobacco company, my main aim will be for the advertisements to achieve its optimum effect and in the end, benefit the company’s sales. Hence, not adhering fully to honesty and integrity cannot be avoided. Everyone knows that tobacco is detrimental to health. However, the main selling point of tobacco is that it provides an escapade from daily troubles and that it is a good form of entertainment and enjoyment.

Everyone knows that the use of tobacco commonly leads to diseases which affect the vital organs of the body. It is a major risk factor for heart attacks and pulmonary diseases and most importantly, it can cause cancer. People who smoke also have a tenfold increase in the risk of dying from chronic obstructive lung disease. Over usage of tobacco can cause people to double their chances of getting stroke. These hard cold facts are right in front of people who use tobacco and I will leave the job of finding out the facts to the people who want to smoke.

The point is, if we list out all the adverse effects of tobacco, we are scaring customers away which is not the point of our advertisement and there is no point in advertising. I will design my advertisement such that they only show the good points. Having said this, it does not mean that I am dishonest; I only assumed that the buyers are in full knowledge of the product. Furthermore, I did not change the anything about tobacco. On the point on integrity, it necessary to compromise on it as giving the full picture reduces the effect of your advertisements.

All in all, there must be some compromise on honesty and integrity if my advertisement were to work, but I will not go to the extent of fully compromising honesty and integrity as it will not make a good advertisement. I will not change the facts but will only show positive aspects of tobacco. This way, compromise on honesty and integrity will be reduced and the advertisement will also have its optimum effect, boosting the company’s sales.

Science- a menace to mankind?

Picture a world as portrayed by Isaac Asimov’s I-Robot where a world where humans are solely dependent on advanced technology without which our lives will fail to function. Imagine what will happen when technology fails

Science. Is it a menace to mankind? This is question that we must ask ourselves; especially in the age we live in where many will say that the recent scientific breakthroughs like the invention of the nuclear bomb harms more than helps. However, I think that there is no definite answer. We have to weigh the pros and cons ourselves. Although science has made killing so easy with newer and better weapons created, they are only a part of the many new findings and invention in the modern age. We should also consider the advancements of science which benefits mankind. However, it is because many people tend to look at the “big and obvious” things like the aftermath of a nuclear bomb rather than the minute things like how easy it is to kill cancer cells with laser.

The truth about science is that it is neither our friend nor our foe. It all depends how it is used and who uses it. We can compare it to two drivers driving the same car. Driver A chooses to use his car to ferry people around, driver B chooses to be the devil and go on a killing rampage and rams his car at anybody he sees. The above can be analogous to a sadistic scientist that uses science to create weapons to kill and a researcher who wants to save lives and uses science for the good of mankind.

However, I am more inclined to say that science will be a menace to mankind in the near future if it is abused.

It is possible to annihilate the whole world if you have the money to buy science. Any tycoon could purchase an atomic bomb and order a launch to any part of the world. Science can also be used to create weapons of mass destruction like bio-chemistry weapons. It can also be used to control the whole human race too as which any country or group that has the weapon and antidote can demand for a huge amount of return or rule make the whole world comply to their demands.

There have been many authors that predict what the world would be like in the near further. For example, in the book Brave New World, there was a dystopian portrayal of the scientific future. Science was used to overwrite human thinking, restrain their emotions and change the human way of life. We can see that in brave new world, science has become the master instead of the servant which is the direct opposite of the current situation. So do we want that?

Science is a menace to society because since there has been so much advancements in science, the human race have started to “slack”. During the industrial revolution, there were very little advancements in science and humans worked hard for change. However now, with such advance technology, major scientific breakthroughs are not emerging as frequently.

Furthermore, science has lessened humans’ ability to communicate properly. Gadgets like handphones and computers give humans an alternative to communication. This kind of communication causes people to not be able to communicate face to face.

Science has also made humans overly dependent on technology, causing humans to heavily rely on it. This is not a good sign as humans were once able to live without technology in the past. If technology fails one day, the human race will go down too.

However, I believe that the majority of the earth’s population will want science to be used for the greater good of mankind. There have been many scientists that use science to treat humans. For example, many new antibiotics have been created to fight against common ailments and that patients did not have to go through grueling surgeries like in the past.

All in all, science has become a menace to mankind at this particular point of time as it inhibits human’s development, poses a major threat to mankind and could potentially take charge of the life of humans.

Pornography

A stereotype way of looking at “pornography” would be that it has negative influence on the people that watch it and that it is extremely derogatory on women. Many schools tell their students to steer clear of pornographic material as it is very explicit and could be detrimental to their mental health and development. Many religions also tell their followers to avoid pornography at all costs. Many people condemn it and say that it insults and degrade women heavily and that women are portrayed as “slaves” for men in pornographic material. It also gives people the wrong idea that sex with anyone is okay. Pornography also trivializes rape. On top of that, they also state that it is “morally objectionable”. They degrade a person’s mind, giving them evil thoughts.

On the other hand, pornography is not entirely bad or negative. Most of the time, it is because of the stigma attached pornography that has caused many people to shun it. Furthermore, some people see it as a form of art. You can see many examples of porn art in many famous museums. A famous quote, “Pornography is human imagination in tense theatrical action” shows that artistic features of pornography. In addition, it also serves as a good replacement for people who are not able to enjoy sex because of a specific reason.

Now, I would like to touch on two issues: 1. The nature of pornography. 2. Reasons to why we should or should not exercise any form of censorship in this area.

The orthodox way of looking at pornographic material would be that it is extremely destructive. The destruction unleashed by pornographic material is mostly on males. When they are addicted to pornography, they become very callous with women, engage in many perverse things and have a mind which is twisted and filled with evil thoughts. Many people who commit rape usually start from watching pornographic material. Pornography is also extremely addictive, which can be compared to the addiction to heroin. People who are heavily addicted to pornography have altered thoughts which can cause him to do foolish actions to satisfy his sexual desires. This again emphasizes the adverse effects pornography has on society. In Christianity, God has disapproved of anything defiling or degrading in marriage.

Pornography can also be seen as a weapon of mass destruction. If everyone in society gets addicted to porn, they society would be bound to break down. Another major factor why pornography is extremely destructive is that it massively degrades women. Many websites online have stated how pornography degrades women. Pornography can be seen as the subjugation of women. A definition of pornography on the web was that women are presented dehumanized as sexual objects, things or commodities. Many definitions of pornography show how women are shown as “sexual objects”.

Due to the destructive nature of pornography, we have every good reason why we should exercise some form of censorship on it. Many of the reasons why we should censor pornography are given above. They main reasons are because it breaks down society (increases crime rate and breaks down marriages), adversely changes human behaviour (gives people the wrong idea about sex) and ultimately degrades women.

However, there are two sides to a coin as there are two ways to view pornography. Another way to interpret pornography is that it boosts the sexuality of women. We still cannot deny that pornography enhances the sexuality of women. Furthermore, pornography serves as another form of art. Last but not least, for those people who are not able to enjoy sex, pornography will prove to be a very good substitution. Hence, we should not exercise heavy censorship on pornography. We should exercise just enough censorship so that we can have a very brief contact with it; know about its positive and negative sides and how we should go about dealing with it.

President’s Star Charity Show- is there a need for artistes to perform stunts to milk the public’s compassion for more generous donations?

Charity shows have been all the buzz a few years ago. You can hear people on the streets talking about the stunts someone performed during the show. You may also hear some asking other people how much have they donated. On the other hand, many people also criticise charity shows saying that all these stunts were unnecessary and an ultimate waste of time.

Personally, I think that these stunts are just gimmicks to “compel” people into donating. The stunts give people the wrong mindset. They let people think that “in order to donate, I must see someone in peril or doing something dangerous” or “when I see someone doing something dangerous, I must donate more”. Why put someone to risk just to ask for a “fatter” donation? I think that for those that really have the heart to donate, they will donate with or without the stunts. They will even donate without the shows. I think that compassion should come from the bottom of someone’s heart and that the amount one donates does not matter. A right mindset should be instilled in the people. The people should know that we should not hesitate to help others who are in need regardless of any return. We should help them because we feel that we really want to help not because we feel compelled because of the stunts.

Furthermore, there are overhead expenses to run the show due to advertising, stage setup, on air fees and so on. On top of that, a large amount of money is needed to invite extremely famous overseas celebrities over just to appear in the show. All these will add up to a sizable amount of money and it is a total waste of resources. The organiser can put this large amount of money to better use by handing out the money to more needy people. On top of that, instead of having artiste pull of stunts, why not call them to engage with the poor and needy which is more meaningful?

Next, I think that instead of having artiste performing stunts, there should be more focus on the charity organisation’s transparency. After the recent embezzlement cases including the CEO of Ren Ci Charity and the former NKF head, many people have second thoughts about donating money to charity shows. What the people really need to see is the operations of these organisations. They also need to see exactly where their money goes to. When there is no transparency and people suspect that something is amiss, they would rather hand money to any random beggar on the street instead of dumping their money into a bottomless pit. Furthermore, we can see many students holding tin cans at public places like MRT and orchard road. This will cause us to ask ourselves: “we have donated so much yet there is still a shortage of funds. Is there something wrong?”

I think that the charity organisation should show people who they tie up with and how the cash that the public donated is used. They must also account for who is directly benefitting from it. These way people are more likely to donate as they know that their money would not be embezzled by anybody. Until full transparency can be achieved, everybody can’t help but have this burning question at their back of their head: “Where does my money really go to?”
In conclusion, I think that the charity should focus more on clearing the many doubts of the mass public first instead of trying to achieve more and more dangerous stunts, so as turn gain more donations. Compassion is also something that is self-initiated and should not be milked.