national day photo!

Alternate Universe

Second life is emerging as a powerful new medium for social interactions of all sorts, from romance to making money. It may be the internet next big thing. 

• Second Life is a 3-D virtual world entirely built and owned by its Residents. Since opening to the public in 2003, it has grown explosively and today is inhabited by a total of 8,786,822 Residents from around the globe.

• The people who are coming to this online universe aren’t just socializing, however. They’re also doing business, collaborating on research, teaching courses, or even dating.

• A recent Dutch study found that 57 percent of Second Lifers spend more than 18 hours a week there, and 33 percent spend more than 30 hours a week. On a typical day, customers spend $1 million buying virtual clothes, cars, houses and other goods for their avatars, and total sales within this virtual economy are now growing at an annual rate of 10 percent.

• By 2011, four of every five people who use the Internet will actively participate in Second Life or some similar medium, according to Gartner Research, which recently did a study looking at the investment potential of virtual worlds. (This means 1.6 billion-out of a total 2 billion Internet users- will have found new lives online.)

• “It’s basically Tom Friedman’s flat world.” (In his book, The World is Flat, Thomas L. Friedman describes the unplanned cascade of technological and social shifts that effectively leveled the economic world)

• “It’s globalization of the virtual world.

 Advantages 

1. With its large, densely settled population, which allows for division of labor, and citizens universally armed with ownership rights and the tool to produce just about anything, Second life is in some way the ideal free market.

•  
  • Linden Lab’s “no control” policy allows for any income made inside Second Life to be cashed out through the company into U.S. dollars.( Linden Lab is the company that operates Second Life)
  • Linden Lab has also relinquished all intellectual-property rights to creations in its world, spurring entrepreneurship.

1. The multinational companies are using Second Life to

•  
  • Hold staff meetings where avatars representing employees can discuss ideas via instant message, email or Skype.
  • More than 45 multinational companies, including the likes of American Apparel, IBM, General Motors and Dell are beginning to use the medium for customer service, sales and marketing.
  • With face-to-face interaction on the decline in offices- where it’s easier to e-mail or videoconference than schedule a live meeting-and companies increasingly use the Web for everything from distribution to customer service, a virtual world offers the potential to form relationships that are far more personal than online forms or e-mail.

     

1. Educational and research tool,

•  
  • More than 250 universities, including Harvard and MIT, now operate distance-learning programs in Second Life.

1. It empowers people. (social freedom)

•  
  • Newcomers agree to a list of several do’s and don’ts, but within the communities they form, Residents can impose their own codes of conduct.
  • The power of Second Life lies in its utility for the gamut of human activities. It’s a potent medium for socializing- it provides people with a way to express, explore, and experiment with identity, venture their frustrations, reveal alter ego.
  • “Brigadoon,” for instance, is a Second Life island inhabited by a group of adults who suffer from Asperger’s syndrome, a form of autism characterized by awkward, eccentric and obsessive behavior. In Second life, these patients are learning to interact in ways that would be terrifying for them in real life.

 However, 

• Not everyone is convinced that Second Life is a good thing.
• Some critics are uneasy with the idea of people’s getting more and more of their social activity online because virtual worlds don’t have the nuance of face-to-face interaction.
• It all depends, of course, on whether you see Second Life’s taking the place of ordinary social interaction or supplementing it, or as just another kind of diversion.

  

• All in all, whether you think it’s a pale imitation of reality or a vivid world of the mind, it’s captivating the globe.

 publisher: pear

ODA: official development assistanceExample to show how aid doesn’t seem to be of much help to those in need:“[A tragedy of the world’s poor has been that] the West spent $2.3 trillion on foreign aid over the last five decades and still had not managed to get twelve-cent medicines to children to prevent half of all malaria deaths. The West spent $2.3 trillion and still had not managed to get four-dollar bed nets to poor families. The West spent $2.3 trillion and still had not managed to get three dollars to each new mother to prevent five million child deaths.

… It is heart-breaking that global society has evolved a highly efficient way to get entertainment to rich adults and children, while it can’t get twelve-cent medicing to dying poor children.”

—    William Easterly, The White Man’s Burden; Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest have Done So Much Ill and so Little Good, (Penguin Press, 2006), p. 4 

  Development assistance is often of dubious quality. In many cases,

1. Aid is primarily designed to serve the strategic and economic interests of the donor countries;

·        Many only provide aid to countries that may be of some benefit to them eg:

1.  
   1. The US has directed aid to regions where it has concerns related to its national security, e.g. Middle East, and in Cold War times in particular, Central America and the Caribbean;
   2. Sweden has targeted aid to “progressive societies”;
   3. France has sought to promote maintenance or preserve and spread of French culture, language, and influence, especially in West Africa, while disproportionately giving aid to those that have extensive commercial ties with France;
   4. Japan has also heavily skewed aid towards those in East Asia with extensive commercial ties together with conditions of Japanese purchases;

• Aid systems based on the interests of donors instead of the needs of recipients’ make development assistance inefficient;

 

1. Aid Money Often Tied to Various Restrictive Conditions: aid tied with conditions cut the value of aid to recipient countries by some 25-40 percent, because it obliges them to purchase uncompetitively priced imports from the richer nations.

 

1. Too little aid reaches countries that most desperately need it

• Poorest countries were not necessarily recipients of most aid. For example, “excluding debt relief for Nigeria, aid to sub-Saharan Africa increased by only 2%”

 

1. Or [aid is primarily designed] to benefit powerful domestic interest groups

 

1. Phantom aid:

 

·        Estimate that $37 billion—roughly half of global aid—is “phantom aid”, that is, it is not genuinely available to poor countries to fight poverty.

·        Real aid only made up 53% of the official assistance

 

1. It is undeniable that there has been poor governance, corruption and mismanagement in Africa.

 

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp

 

Example qns:

1)      “Take from the rich and give to the poor.” Is this the solution to poverty?

2)      Is food aid the best solution to hunger?

3)      “Foreign aid is the best way to solve a country’s poverty” Discuss.

class photo

cant upload ar..guess the connection too slow..will try other means thou..mayb photobucket? think we had one last year right? what’s username and password ar?

China’s Me Generation!?

original posted on Time Magazine 26th july,2007

Points in the Passage:

• There are roughly 300 million adults in China under age 30, a demographic cohort that serves as a bridge between the closed, xenophobic China of the Mao years and the globalized economic powerhouse that it is becoming.
• These people “belong to a generation for whom prosperity and personal freedom haven’t required democracy“
• “the Cultural Revolution, the opening to the West, the student protests in Tiananmen Square and their subsequent suppression.” according to the author, makes this generation feel powerless in politics- “There’s nothing we can do about politics,” says Chen. “So there’s no point in talking about it or getting involved.”
• It was pedicted that “that economic growth would eventually bring democracy to China”, but China’s Me generation seems to be happy in preserving the status quo-“They are proud of what China has accomplished, and very positive about the government,” says P.T. Black, who conducts extensive marketing research for a Shanghai-based company called Jigsaw International.
• Because of China’s one-child policy, instituted in 1978, this is the first generation in the world’s history in which a majority are single children, a group whose solipsistic tendencies have been further encouraged by a growing obsession with consumerism, the Internet and video games. They have known little (about the situation and politics in china before eg. the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution…) but peace and an ever increasing economic boom.

• China’s future will be defined by whether they realize that democracy can help China, too.

Thoughts:

• How true is passage in applying to modern China? Do people (or according to the author, “China’s Me generation”) really not care about the Politics in China? Do Americans care more about the Politics? How do people define politics? Is it true that Democracy can really “save” CHINA or is it what the Media (especially the western) trying to make people think so?

Evaluation:

For those who can read chinese, I would recommend you to read these following passages which are all about the “China’s Me Generation”.

One passage is the declare of one of the people who was interviwed by the journalist of the Time Magazine as she is not happy with what the journalist said in this passage and she thinks that the author, Simon Elegant, twisted her words without her permission. http://www.sohoxiaobao.com/chinese/bbs/blog_view.php?id=701593

And this passage is from one of her friends in talking about how foreign journalist usually think of when they interview people in china http://www.wangxiaofeng.net/index.php?p=1334

This passage is written by one of the linkmen in Phoenix TV, Hong Kong, as she talked to the author, Simon Elegant, about the motive and intension of writting this article “China’s Me Generation” http://blog.phoenixtv.com/html/32/674832-970716.html#xspace-itemform

Or you can view them using google translate by typing in the URL addresses above in the form.

Some relevant Questions:

1. Do people in your country (eg, Singapore) care about the Politics?
2. How far do you think young people nowadays are considering material possessions and physical comfort as more important than spiritual value?
3. Is globalisation necessarily a bad thing?

By Fangming