PGPR

Made a discovery that will revolutionise my university experience. And that is, Prince George's Park Residences offers a relatively tranquil environment to lunch and rest in. This is very important because I cannot stand the crowds that seem to be everywhere, everytime. Time is the only restraining factor, but I reckon one hour is enough to travel, have a meal there, and soak in a bit of the peaceful ambience; for longer breaks one can nap in their virtually empty air-conditioned rooms.

This reminds me of my getaways in junior college, where even an half-hour break sufficiently warrants me to get out of school and eat at a nearby coffee shop. I especially love those mornings where I sit and have a brunch with some coffee at 9 or 10am while everyone else is at school enjoying themselves.

I love the CORS system that NUS uses to allocate modules to students, though there is a tiny flaw in the system. Hence the following email to them.

Hello CORS team,

I would like to highlight an issue that I think is not a very good feature of the CORS system. Currently, students receive no penalties when they place bid points on any modules. If I have 500 points left to spend after having bid for 4 modules, there is really no incentive to consider and place a reasonable bid for that last module. This is because there are no penalties for spending more bid points than is necessary to get the bid, even when demand exceeds supply: the system will simply return all excess bid points. Hence in this scenario I would rationally just dump 500 points on the module - there is little harm anyway. The only consideration I have to bear is that I may potentially lose all 500 points if the minimum bid goes that high, but as far as bidding points are concerned, there are no issues.

This is a problem because the lack of penalties leads to a situation in which a student's demand for the module is not accurately reflected. It is, instead, more a reflection of how many points a student has rather than a reflection of perceived value of the module. This effectively leads to a distortion of the market system that is the linchpin of the allocation process. If all students think the same way they would all dump X points on the last module, where X is all the points they have left in the account. This potentially leads to an inflation of bid points needed to secure the module, and the inflated price of the module will not be in line with the equilibrium price.

Furthermore, this feature does not encourage much thinking when placing bids, and simply provides a risk-free environment where risk is not in line with reward. This is not reflective of a real market system. In any case, it is probably true that in all areas of society and in all walks of life, risk comes with reward. I do not see why the CORS system, though it may be a simulated one, should be an exception in this regard.

Yours for the most part,
An undergraduate.

Hello!

It's kind of strange pretending that you do know someone when you can't recall who her or she is, so that you won't end up in the awkward situation of hurting the other party. I guess it's stranger if you end up in a conversation with such a person, and try to find out more about this stranger while trying to conceal the fact that you don't remember him. Two encounters where I don't recognise who said hi to me, and I know that there my past holds more content than my memories do.

Now in most cases it probably won't do too much damage to ask simply, who are you. However there may be some cases where the stranger has an obvious affection, or relationship, towards you, such that the person will be obviously hurt when he/she discovers that they don't feature equally in your life as you did in theirs. Here is a brief analysis of a sample conversation.

Stranger: Hey hi John long time no see!

John: Oh hi, how are you? - The objective is to find out what you can about the person, and the way to do this is to compel him to give as much detail of his life as
possible.

Stranger: Ah, good as always. And you? - The standard response usually is little more than a customary greeting which throws the question back to you. If lucky, however, he may say something like "Oh I quit my job last month, ol' Alzy got on my nerves too much," which drops a strong hint or two about where you know him from and the nature of your relationship.

John: Yea not too bad, I'm here to [XYZ]. What about you? - Telling a bit about your current circumstances and then throwing a question usually compels the other party to provide a more detailed answer instead of something vague such as "just passing here to town". You will want to be the director of the conversation, because if the other party becomes the director he may start saying things familiar to him but which you can't respond to with familiarity. Remember the objective.

Stranger: Oh, I'm here to [YZY]. - Because it is already established that you are the director of the conversation by virtue of asking the previous two questions, he is already on the back foot and not going to make any forward moves anytime soon. In other words, chances are he will just answer and wait for you to say something next.

At this point there are 3 possibilities.

A) You remember who the person is already, in which case don't jump up and down with joy in case he suspects something or think you're nuts, though there probably is a tendency to be suddenly buoyant with your discovery.

B) You can place a finger on where France is but not where Lyon is. In which case you go with what you have and either play along or try to narrow it down.

C) You still got no clue. Immediately disengage from the conversation by saying "Sorry, I got to go, we'll catch up another time ok." Consult your yearbooks when you reach home.

Unclear sky

The Beijing Olympics has its impressive moments and I've been enjoying it so far. However there are issues bubbling beneath the surface that have annoyed me and left a distaste in my heart. Instead of recounting them I recommend this entry from another blog.

Update

The table-tennis women team event semi-finals was really, really a firecracker of a match-up. I love the offensiveness of Li Jiawei and Wang Yuegu against the defensive pair Park Mi Young and Kim Kyung Ah. Li came really close to beating Kim in the singles match, Wang could have performed better than Dang Ye Seo (quite an attractive player by the way, both play-style and looks wise), but I think the heroine of the day is Feng Tianwei, who won both the opening and final match to ensure our progress to the finals. No one could have watched her match against Park Mi Young without an exclamation mark as each combined offensive prowess with well-placed shots and intense positional play.

Pleased Nastia won her gold in gymnastics, not pleased Yang Wei outshined the silver and bronze medallists.

I idolise offensive players/teams in most sports if not all; I believe we all do to some extent. Maybe it's got something to do with their recklessness, their risk-taking attitude that lies at the heart of an offensive. At the very least these players usually possess some level of showmanship for the audience.

On the other hand I admire quiet, steady players too, maybe because it is stylish in itself to stare back calmly, passively even, in the face of offensive pressure. We would like to think the best players are the ones who combine offensive moves with steady, tactical play. Well perhaps, but I feel there are some areas where one single show of brilliance is and should be enough to win the show, if not the game itself.

Anyway, hope Federer comes back soon. Don't really like Nadal.

I unknowingly signed up for two philosophy modules which are new courses, and the result of this is that one of my classes contain, by way of majority, year 3s and 4s despite it being of level-2000, and some of those year4s are actually honours students. I probably wouldn't have joined the class if I knew this, but now that I'm in it, I'd like to see how the senior students from various disciplines (some from the sciences as well) interact with each other.

I also went to MICA for an interview and met an Indian "astrologist" on the way back, more of those next month.

On the way home

The last time I gave money out of compassion was a few months ago when, late as late nights go, I was alone in a tunnel with a busker who was singing and strumming the guitar. I did not stop to listen, even though the music he was playing was unusually melancholic. Instead I reached for some coins and dropped them in his guitar case in one fluid motion. He said, "thank you young man" but I was already walking away from him.

Sometimes I wonder why I donate money to these people but not the old blind lady selling packs of tissue paper or the handicapped person out on a limb. Today on the way home I saw an old lady leaning desolately against the wall of the tunnel, her food items unsold in front of her. She wasn't even trying to sell, just leaning back and staring at nothing. I didn't give her any money.

Why? I don't really know. The rational side of me would say that giving her money may harm her more than it would help her. The shy side of me would say that ignorance is the best excuse. The harsh side of me would say that it's pointless to give her money - she didn't provide any service that I consumed. Is there a better answer I can give? I don't really know.

Out of the tunnel and on the void deck would be a cat that is always curled up on the ground. It's old and going to die soon. I always return home sadder than when I set off.

Viva La Vida (Or a lack of life)

I dislike the latest album by Coldplay. To me the songs lack energy, creativity and unity. They give me the feeling of being made by someone who put together a few lines, closed his eyes, and sang them with any tune that came to mind. 42 has two incongruous tunes in one track, as if the band ran out of ideas midway and didn't want admit they were lost in the wilderness of lackadaisicalness. Compare this with Yellow, a song flowing with verve, melody and just unadulterated goodness.

The first album was downtempo and loungish. Though not overflowing with emotion the songs had this coherence in them generally possessed very good tunes. Second album was heart-rending. Who doesn't feel anything when they listen to The Scientist and A Rush of Blood to the Head? Third album imbued the first's loungish feel with a space-feel while retaining some of the second album's mellow moments. The fourth is, sadly, the crown disappointment in the family, though I might just save it for times when I feel like not feeling anything at all.

Who put me in the (tap tap) magic position