Just got a text "Malaysia braces for threatened cyber attack on govt website by internet vigilante group Anonymous - REUTERS". Read the star front-page on the purported security threat by Anonymous.
To me, this threat by Anonymous represents a bigger shift in geo-politics. No longer is the world subject to formal laws, but to actions by International vigilantes who, by all account, remain above and beyond the reach of the law. "Cyber-nation" has no rules, no set demographics, no population but instead exist like a collective consciousness of Internet users. It will be a growing threat, which I believe will one day bring down an entire government. The problem is, the basic premise of such organizations is its anonymity making it susceptible to infiltration by foreign elements.
Who can say for certain that there are no foreign government operatives infiltrating the Anonymous rank, and even to the point of leading its leaderless brethren, to perform attacks and hacktivism supposedly for Internet freedom but with an underlying political intention? Who can say for certain that criminals are not masquerading as Anonymous members? Recently Sony's gaming site was hacked and millions of credit card and personal details were exposed. The hack was attributed to Anonymous, but as Anonymous could include anyone, could criminals have access to our accounts?
And now Anonymous is threatening a sovereign government, Malaysia, for its decision to request ISPs to ban bittorrent and file-sharing websites. This is not the first time they've done so. Australia was marked last year because of its decision to start filtering child pornography sites.
Malaysians quickly supports the Anonymous cause because (1) they want their free music (2) it's against the Malaysian government.
My thought on this is simple:
1. Do you believe downloads of music and movies and TV shows for free are illegal? If you don't, then you're an idiot and there's no point in going any further (surprisingly quite a number of people actually think that downloading music and such is legal. Guess KRU's cartoon on piracy failed)
2. Knowing that it's illegal, do you still do it? Yes, I do. We all do. It's part of life. Been downloading since the days of Napster. What other illegal things that you know is illegal but you still do? Let me give you a simple example - speeding. We all have breached the statutory speed limit, some more than others. We all know if we get caught that we have no excuse. It's illegal, and we must be punished.
But we still speed don't we? We just become a bit more aware of where the cops normally do their roadblocks. We monitor #kltu on twitter. We install those sensors that can detect police speed-guns.Or we just speed knowing that the probability of getting caught every time is less than the probability of me hooking up with Giselle Bunchen.
3. So accepting that downloads are illegal, why is it a problem if the police or enforcers or the government take steps to prevent an illegal act? Wouldn't they NOT be doing their jobs if they don't take action?
4. Yes, it'll hurt us for a bit. It'll hurt me and my attempt to build an all-time greatest hits compilation. But we will move on and survive. Every time they put up roadblocks, we find another road to use, don't we?
5. It's more dangerous that we accept foreign intervention on our sovereignty. It's even more dangerous when we cannot identify who these people are.
I know this is an unpopular post, but popularity often masked ineptness. I've learned that on twitter. Plenty of idiots with thousands of followers make me believe that the world is really going down the shit hole. LOL
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Sunday, June 5, 2011
I Will Not Neglect You Any More Baybeh...
Oh blog,I have been neglecting you. Yes, we have been together for quite some time, although it still feels like only yesterday I opened up my heart to you. It was sad to leave Undergrounduate, but I knew I had to move on with you.
Problem is, 38 dates after more than two years is a sad sign of our relationship. Yes,I realized thst I don't feel like going out with you if nobody notices how great we are as a couple. I admit I feel a pang of sadness when nobody talks about us.
Yes, I have cheated on you. Remember Facebook? Yeap, we went out a few times but it doesn't feel the same. When I tag people on my dates with her, it feels like I'm forcing friends to watch me make love. So I turned to Twitter. I have to admit Twitter fits the box of what I'm looking for in a relationship right now.
It is simple, uncomplicated, and above all, quick. I know we had some quickies before but being limited to 140 steps kinda forces me to be very much straight to the point,and she accepts that willingly.
But its very simplicity, single-mindedness approach to dating means I miss out on my favorite part of consummation - foreplay and the cuddle afterwards. You see with you, blog, I could take my time, building up the excitement to an inevitable climax and later enjoy a literary equivalent of a stick of ciggy while you purr lovingly in my arms. Sometimes the journey with you, blog, is better than the destination.
And so please forgive me, my dear, for I have neglected you for so long. I promise to go out with you at least once every few days. But I have promised you this before, haven't I?
Problem is, 38 dates after more than two years is a sad sign of our relationship. Yes,I realized thst I don't feel like going out with you if nobody notices how great we are as a couple. I admit I feel a pang of sadness when nobody talks about us.
Yes, I have cheated on you. Remember Facebook? Yeap, we went out a few times but it doesn't feel the same. When I tag people on my dates with her, it feels like I'm forcing friends to watch me make love. So I turned to Twitter. I have to admit Twitter fits the box of what I'm looking for in a relationship right now.
It is simple, uncomplicated, and above all, quick. I know we had some quickies before but being limited to 140 steps kinda forces me to be very much straight to the point,and she accepts that willingly.
But its very simplicity, single-mindedness approach to dating means I miss out on my favorite part of consummation - foreplay and the cuddle afterwards. You see with you, blog, I could take my time, building up the excitement to an inevitable climax and later enjoy a literary equivalent of a stick of ciggy while you purr lovingly in my arms. Sometimes the journey with you, blog, is better than the destination.
And so please forgive me, my dear, for I have neglected you for so long. I promise to go out with you at least once every few days. But I have promised you this before, haven't I?
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Anwar's Sex Video
Anwar's Sex Video is now one of the top trending topics, and as such, I shall leave my readers (or what's left of it) with the following thoughts:
1. Any political strategist would have calculated the damage done by the release of the video not only on the alleged perpetrator but also the "alleged" mastermind (UMNO). On the balance of it, any intelligent strategist (which I believe is behind this wave of good feeling for Najib) must have known the reverse backlash would be far severe than the damage to Anwar. As such, who approved of this strategic blunder? Or is it a strategic decision? Or is it what it is - a sex video?
2. I find it insulting to be told by others (especially elitist-type) that this is gutter politics and it shouldn't matter. A sex video of a person, who is alleged to be a Member of Parliament, and potential Prime Minister, is a national concern just as we make a big hype about Rosmah music videos or Hishamuddin's holding a beer picture. If true, it is an illegal act, done perhaps with cover-up involving abuse of power, influence and money. Isn't that a matter that SHOULD be investigated? Just because such abuse comes out in the form of a sex video does not make it any less corrupted than overseas holidays and secret contracts. We cannot just sweep this matter under the carpet because it's dirty.
3. Why aren't there more elaborate set-ups on other PR leaders? Why is Anwar constantly and mercilessly "attacked"? It's quite obvious from the recent PKR election (Azmin saga) that even DSAI is now viewed not so favorably by many PKR members. So why Anwar? It's either (a) personal vendetta by UMNO (b) some stupid strategist thinks that Anwar is still the biggest key (c) Anwar is the easiest target amongst all . If you think the answer is (c), consider why you answer as such.
1. Any political strategist would have calculated the damage done by the release of the video not only on the alleged perpetrator but also the "alleged" mastermind (UMNO). On the balance of it, any intelligent strategist (which I believe is behind this wave of good feeling for Najib) must have known the reverse backlash would be far severe than the damage to Anwar. As such, who approved of this strategic blunder? Or is it a strategic decision? Or is it what it is - a sex video?
2. I find it insulting to be told by others (especially elitist-type) that this is gutter politics and it shouldn't matter. A sex video of a person, who is alleged to be a Member of Parliament, and potential Prime Minister, is a national concern just as we make a big hype about Rosmah music videos or Hishamuddin's holding a beer picture. If true, it is an illegal act, done perhaps with cover-up involving abuse of power, influence and money. Isn't that a matter that SHOULD be investigated? Just because such abuse comes out in the form of a sex video does not make it any less corrupted than overseas holidays and secret contracts. We cannot just sweep this matter under the carpet because it's dirty.
3. Why aren't there more elaborate set-ups on other PR leaders? Why is Anwar constantly and mercilessly "attacked"? It's quite obvious from the recent PKR election (Azmin saga) that even DSAI is now viewed not so favorably by many PKR members. So why Anwar? It's either (a) personal vendetta by UMNO (b) some stupid strategist thinks that Anwar is still the biggest key (c) Anwar is the easiest target amongst all . If you think the answer is (c), consider why you answer as such.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
I should write more..
And read less.
For others...many others, it should be the other way round.
I don't like sleeping alone, especially since there are no good shows on TV at this hour.
Goodnite
For others...many others, it should be the other way round.
I don't like sleeping alone, especially since there are no good shows on TV at this hour.
Goodnite
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Men Are Luckier...
Recently I had a hair cut, and as per usual, I read whatever magazines they provide. I came across a picture of Heidi Klum, one of the most beautiful women in the world, and her husband, Seal. Now, I am all for the "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" concept, but conventionally speaking, Seal is not the most attractive man around. It got me to realize many more instances of beautiful women being with not good-looking men. Like Adriana Karembeu, married to ex-Dutch football star Christian Karembeu (Google that), or Kate Hudson being with Muse frontman Matt Bellamy. You see more of these instances if you just find ugly male celebrities knocking up fine models (Noah Gallagher's ex is the delightful Patsy Kensit, and now he's with ex-All Saints member, Nicole Appleton).
Now, understandably, you'd say,"Of course dude, these guys are famous and loaded. No wonder girls flock to them". If that is true, why don't I see Oprah Winfrey shagging some hot young (but not yet famous) rapper? Why don't I see Martha Stewart with, say, the muscular dude from 98 Degrees? And it still doesn't account for the countless instances I see pretty girls going out with ugly guys at our local shopping malls. The funny thing is, guys are usually the first to notice the gap when presented with this Beauty & the Beast situation.
I think, quite simply, guys treat being beautiful as an integral part to finding someone attractive while girls treat beauty (or looking-good) as just part of the bigger picture of attractiveness. Take a sample of 10 guys and 10 girls, show the guys a picture of a cute but seriously overweight girl, and then the girls a picture of a cute but seriously overweight guy. I'm willing to bet that none of the guys would say they'd date that girl, but a segment of the girls would date him with the accompanying comment "Oh, he's cute like a bear". I have NEVER had a guy friend say the same thing when talking about a heavy girl.
When I talk about the show Entourage, I find it amazing that some girls find Turtle cute. You'd seldom here guys talking about Betty Suarez (from Ugly Betty) in the same way.
Girls are into ugly guys for many reasons. Sometimes these guys are "cool" - like having an afro, wearing small t-shirts and skinny jeans, and driving an original Mini. Seriously, if you're ugly, and you want to attract girls, just look "cool". It works.
Sometimes these guys are "macho" - you can look like a freaking murderer, but some girls find this extremely attractive. Which is why actors like Javier Bardem can get Penelope Cruz. Sometimes these guys are "nice-looking" - the kind of dude they see as being the perfect husband, even though he's got pimples and wear thick-rimmed glasses (which is now the in-thing, if you noticed). Sometimes these guys are "talented" - cue musicians especially rock band members. I cannot fathom till today how Awie got Erra Fazira back then, but what can I say.
The conclusion is, if you're a guy, there are many ways for you to be attractive. If you're a girl, unfortunately, there is not much you can do from the mould God has given you.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
You Can But I Can't?
This is just a short entry based on the following question: If liberals expect conservatives to allow them the freedom to practice their religion in whatever form they want, then shouldn't the same freedom be accorded to conservatives?
I am far from a conservative (seriously, I'm not), but I do wonder whether the liberals agenda is not merely limited to promoting freedom of religion, but actually to prevent the practice of a conservative form of religion? (I can't comment much for other religion in other countries. Here, it's quite clear that I'm referring to Islam in Malaysia). And from my observation, it seems like the liberals have slowly labeled even the most basic observance of Islam as being conservative.
Take for example the wearing of a hijab. Some liberals immediately label these ladies as conservatives. I always thought conservatives means more strict obedience, and if wearing a hijab is actually a BASIC MUST, how can it be considered an act of conservatism? It's like saying a cop is a conservative cop for not taking bribes. Cops are NOT supposed to take bribes, so calling someone who is just actually doing what he's supposed to do a conservative (or straight) is illogical.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that in Islam, a true believer must not only accept that Islam is a way of life and practice its tenets diligently, but also take on the responsibility to promote the Islamic way of life and prevent any acts not in accordance to Islamic principles. This is the base point, and as such, I cannot find fault with anyone who advises me on what is actually something I should already be well-aware and doing.
I mean, if someone comes to me and starts telling me I should be more disciplined when it comes to prayers, I shouldn't snap and be angry. He's not being a conservative or a fundamentalist. He's actually just doing what all good Muslims are supposed to do. Sometimes I forget that. And though I may choose to ignore him, I cannot, with any clear conscience, ostracize him for telling me the truth.
I am in agreement that what we do is between us and God. But we must not be extreme enough to automatically reject any form of advice from those who are in a better position to think about these issues than us. At worst, we should just smile and say thank you. If you're really open-minded, then you should be open-minded enough to accept that there are some people out there who believe in things differently. If you're really open-minded, then you must accept that there will be close-minded people out there. If not, you're no worse than the close-minded folks you are so quick to criticize.
I am far from a conservative (seriously, I'm not), but I do wonder whether the liberals agenda is not merely limited to promoting freedom of religion, but actually to prevent the practice of a conservative form of religion? (I can't comment much for other religion in other countries. Here, it's quite clear that I'm referring to Islam in Malaysia). And from my observation, it seems like the liberals have slowly labeled even the most basic observance of Islam as being conservative.
Take for example the wearing of a hijab. Some liberals immediately label these ladies as conservatives. I always thought conservatives means more strict obedience, and if wearing a hijab is actually a BASIC MUST, how can it be considered an act of conservatism? It's like saying a cop is a conservative cop for not taking bribes. Cops are NOT supposed to take bribes, so calling someone who is just actually doing what he's supposed to do a conservative (or straight) is illogical.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that in Islam, a true believer must not only accept that Islam is a way of life and practice its tenets diligently, but also take on the responsibility to promote the Islamic way of life and prevent any acts not in accordance to Islamic principles. This is the base point, and as such, I cannot find fault with anyone who advises me on what is actually something I should already be well-aware and doing.
I mean, if someone comes to me and starts telling me I should be more disciplined when it comes to prayers, I shouldn't snap and be angry. He's not being a conservative or a fundamentalist. He's actually just doing what all good Muslims are supposed to do. Sometimes I forget that. And though I may choose to ignore him, I cannot, with any clear conscience, ostracize him for telling me the truth.
I am in agreement that what we do is between us and God. But we must not be extreme enough to automatically reject any form of advice from those who are in a better position to think about these issues than us. At worst, we should just smile and say thank you. If you're really open-minded, then you should be open-minded enough to accept that there are some people out there who believe in things differently. If you're really open-minded, then you must accept that there will be close-minded people out there. If not, you're no worse than the close-minded folks you are so quick to criticize.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Oh Fasha, Please Reply My Tweet...Not
Sorry & Thank You
I apologize for the long absence from this blog. I'm sure by now readers are quite used to (1) the once a month sporadic blog posts (2) me apologizing for the once a month blog posts.
Then again, I can't be sure because I don't think I've got enough regular readers to get used to anything I do on this blog. Bah. So if this is your first time, I'd like to say...GET A LIFE.
Overwhelmed With Twitter
I did promise last year that I'd blog again more regularly. Unfortunately, at the same time, I installed the Twitter app on my BlackBerry. Lo and behold, Twitter has overtaken blogging or even FB status as my No.1 venting outlet. When you let go of steam (ie. Tweet) every time you take a break, or shit in the toilet, you kinda lose the momentum to come up with well-formed arguments, relying instead on short 140-characters barbs to voice my thoughts on everything and anything. Guess I'm as good at keeping my promises as the next politician.
I'm only following around 50 people, yet I feel overwhelmed reading their tweets. It could occupy your entire hour if you're not careful and prone to clicking on all the interesting links your friends RT. If you don't know what RT is, it's Rukun Tetangga. Yes, my friends are mostly part of them. That's why they seldom get robbed. Because their neighborhood's RT. Go figure.
My final comment on Twitter is this: Why is there a need to follow everyone and everything if your close friends are already busy RT interesting things from these other people? And yes, my Twitter account is protected (by RT, for the dimwits) but if my friends are reading this, feel free to request (@jimiecheng). Yeap. I don't approve all. You can ask my wife.
Celebrities & Twitter
While on the subject of Twitter, I can't help but note that a lot of Malaysian celebrities are into Twitter faster than they were with Facebook Page/Fans. It's amazing to see the number of followers (yes, Twitter is a cult) they garner. Lisa Surihani (@lisasurihani) has about 80,000 fans. Fasha Sandha (@fashasandha1) has about 64k.
But funny things happen when celebrities get into arguments with their followers on Twitter, like Fasha Sandha and recently Ifa Raziah. I don't follow either of them but I do read some entertainment sites so it comes as a surprise that some of our artists are dumb enough to forget that people follow them BECAUSE they're celebrities. Celebrities live by a different code. I'm sorry but that's reality. If you can't accept it, then tough luck. If you can be proud and RT when people praise you, then you sure as hell should be ready when people diss you online.
The End of Facebook?
Far from me to be a sage and predict that, but the reality is that social network has changed a lot in the past few years. Every time one company gets too big, it'll be shot down into pieces. Just ask Friendster and MySpace (Apparently MySpace still has a lot of leftover Malaysians wanting to hook up for easy sex or lesbian company).
My point is that society has no affinity to an Internet brand to engender loyalty. Simply because the social network is fluid, and constantly rising/falling based on society's (hence the name social network) somewhat irrational pattern of behavior couple with technological advances that could make one mode of networking instantly outdated. The only pure dot-com brand that has truly survived since I FIRST started surfing is Yahoo, and even they have seen their dominance totally shattered by Google.
And now Google is being slowly overtaken by Facebook as the default page on people's browser. This see-saw battle for Internet dominance will continue into the near future. Which is why it amazes me that Facebook can be valued at USD 40 billion - for another Internet company that depends ON ADVERTISING for the bulk of its revenue! Anyway, I know things will go belly-up when Mark Zuckerberg is valued more than Steve Jobs (a guy who actually produces something to sell).
I apologize for the long absence from this blog. I'm sure by now readers are quite used to (1) the once a month sporadic blog posts (2) me apologizing for the once a month blog posts.
Then again, I can't be sure because I don't think I've got enough regular readers to get used to anything I do on this blog. Bah. So if this is your first time, I'd like to say...GET A LIFE.
Overwhelmed With Twitter
I did promise last year that I'd blog again more regularly. Unfortunately, at the same time, I installed the Twitter app on my BlackBerry. Lo and behold, Twitter has overtaken blogging or even FB status as my No.1 venting outlet. When you let go of steam (ie. Tweet) every time you take a break, or shit in the toilet, you kinda lose the momentum to come up with well-formed arguments, relying instead on short 140-characters barbs to voice my thoughts on everything and anything. Guess I'm as good at keeping my promises as the next politician.
I'm only following around 50 people, yet I feel overwhelmed reading their tweets. It could occupy your entire hour if you're not careful and prone to clicking on all the interesting links your friends RT. If you don't know what RT is, it's Rukun Tetangga. Yes, my friends are mostly part of them. That's why they seldom get robbed. Because their neighborhood's RT. Go figure.
My final comment on Twitter is this: Why is there a need to follow everyone and everything if your close friends are already busy RT interesting things from these other people? And yes, my Twitter account is protected (by RT, for the dimwits) but if my friends are reading this, feel free to request (@jimiecheng). Yeap. I don't approve all. You can ask my wife.
Celebrities & Twitter
While on the subject of Twitter, I can't help but note that a lot of Malaysian celebrities are into Twitter faster than they were with Facebook Page/Fans. It's amazing to see the number of followers (yes, Twitter is a cult) they garner. Lisa Surihani (@lisasurihani) has about 80,000 fans. Fasha Sandha (@fashasandha1) has about 64k.
But funny things happen when celebrities get into arguments with their followers on Twitter, like Fasha Sandha and recently Ifa Raziah. I don't follow either of them but I do read some entertainment sites so it comes as a surprise that some of our artists are dumb enough to forget that people follow them BECAUSE they're celebrities. Celebrities live by a different code. I'm sorry but that's reality. If you can't accept it, then tough luck. If you can be proud and RT when people praise you, then you sure as hell should be ready when people diss you online.
The End of Facebook?
Far from me to be a sage and predict that, but the reality is that social network has changed a lot in the past few years. Every time one company gets too big, it'll be shot down into pieces. Just ask Friendster and MySpace (Apparently MySpace still has a lot of leftover Malaysians wanting to hook up for easy sex or lesbian company).
My point is that society has no affinity to an Internet brand to engender loyalty. Simply because the social network is fluid, and constantly rising/falling based on society's (hence the name social network) somewhat irrational pattern of behavior couple with technological advances that could make one mode of networking instantly outdated. The only pure dot-com brand that has truly survived since I FIRST started surfing is Yahoo, and even they have seen their dominance totally shattered by Google.
And now Google is being slowly overtaken by Facebook as the default page on people's browser. This see-saw battle for Internet dominance will continue into the near future. Which is why it amazes me that Facebook can be valued at USD 40 billion - for another Internet company that depends ON ADVERTISING for the bulk of its revenue! Anyway, I know things will go belly-up when Mark Zuckerberg is valued more than Steve Jobs (a guy who actually produces something to sell).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)