Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Splitting headache want to grab my head and squeeze my eyes shut tight hoping for some peace. Then an avalanche of conversation of goodness sake I don't want to hear all those keep quiet go do something about it instead of constantly reassuring me that you will go do something about it. Action speaks louder than words go do something you said you will do instead of merely reiterating give you time you will change things. For goodness sake make the change right now.

You said you didn't want to affect my future you didn't want to spoilt my dream do you know how badly you are affecting me here and now and how much weight my performance _now_ will affect my future? Of course it didn't occur to you nothing ever does does it?

And I'm the most free to listen to you right now I'm just sitting here reading reading nonsense of course I'm free and I'm listening and I'm not there watching TV or playing games or trying to get a LIFE. I'm free and I'm just here reading wasting my time wasting my life reading. Of course. I'm free to listen to you. Everyday. Every hour. Every minute. Every second.

Up to your whims and fancies you know.

Drowning my sorrow tears chokes and sobs under the shower screaming to myself stop crying stop crying so that I can walk out and present a perfect countenance nothing happened nothing happened just showered a little longer than usual turning my skin to pulp trying to dry my eyes and wipe away tears. Tears? No those weren't tears, just water droplets from the burning shower condensing on my skin. Nothing nothing happened.

Of course I am selfish unkind inconsiderate the worst everything can ever be ever occurred to you how I am the only one who hasn't yet declared open war who hasn't yet shouted at you who hasn't yet shown any any hint of resentment. And I'm the only who's giving words of encouragement smiles listening to you advicing you and what do I get. Nothing.

Of course. I didn't expect anything. Perhaps some silence I could cherish alone so peace some quiet.

Oh go away.

Dammit.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Monday, October 29, 2007

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Excerpt from The Economist
October 27th 2007
Letters

Freedom through trade
SIR - If the majority of Burmese truly supported democracy, Myanmar would become a democratic state ("A chink in the armour", October 13th). No foreign country is imposing an authoritarian government on Myanmar. The military junta is able to stay in power because a significant percentage of the Burmese actually support the thugs. For that same reason authoritarian governments continue to rule China and Vietnam. Yet both of those countries also enjoy the invigorating effect of free trade with the West. Such trade has improved the economic lot of millions of Chinese and Vietnamese and, more importantly, has opened their societies to Western values. Both are far freer than when the West isolated them.
Sadly, the lessons of fere trade have been lost on overzealous but sincere idealists like Aung San Suu Kyi. Heeding their misguided call, the West has strangled Myanmar with an economic embargo, the only accomplishment of which has been to impoverish the Burmese economically and intellectually.

Dwight Sunada
Stanford, California.

Exactly what I was saying that day. Remember the econs discussion we had in study group? I ended up talking to (someone can't remember who) about why I think the root cause of the continued persistence of the military junta lies in the lack of resistance by the Burmese themselves.

True enough, the monks' resistance has led to many (the actual number is unknown) being beaten up, killed and hauled off without people knowing where they now are. However, could the military actually be able to hold its front if the _majority_ of the people were against them? Yes, I admit that there would be countless slaughters and perhaps unneccessary bloodshed if students, teachers and ordinary workmen took to the streets as well. The army is strong, yes, but what makes up the army? People. People who are obedient either because they are fearful, ignorant or because they believe.

Perhaps some wouldn't know the alternatives either. What is available to them. What can be better. And that the world around Myanmar is actually rooting for a democracy. True enough, most do not believe that the junta will dissolve quickly and quietly, a much proposed suggestion would be for a military and civilian co-operation. But back to the point, if this lack of support for democracy and having the majority of people willing (enough) to submit to the junta is the main reason for its continue existence, shouldn't we solve the problem by tackling its roots?

Mr Sunada is right, in saying that by opening up barriers to trade currently placed on Myanmar, there will be a greater chance of toppling the junta and liberating the Burmese. Firstly, trade sanctions do not directly harm the military institution in Myanmar. As he argued, by opening up to trade, people in China and Vietnam have benefited as a result. Placing trade embargoes on Myanmar hurt the poor because of the lack of opportunity for growth. Is it right then to punish the people for putting the wrong people in power (haha, they didn't even place the junta in power in the very first place.)?

Also, trade and globalisation have a potent effects in many ways. Globalisation, leading to increased trade also facilitate better technological transfer and communication networks. The flow of information and ideas could lead to more people knowing of better alternatives to the life they have, and more people knowing of the support given to them by foreign administrations. I personally believe that the increased openness will instigate change in a way better than any trade embargo can. Consider this, by placing such restrictions, won't the junta have a greater reason to hold on to power, because the 'outside world' is not supportive of its citizens?

I shall not here go into details of why embargoes will fail as well. Without co-operation and multilateral embargoes, the economic impact on Myanmar would not be severe. But the main conclusion here is that [wahhh makes me think of TSA :S], since restricting trade does not bring about tangible benefits, and promoting trade is a win-win situation, why not continue with 'trade-as-usual'? ASEAN has been criticised for doing nothing about their "problematic neighbour". I believe however that they have done the right thing. By maintaing normal relations with Myanmar, it would be easier to negotiate with the military junta. By continuing trade, we can ensure that the Burmese do not suffer unnecessarily. By promoting trade, we could in fact catalyse greater change in the political institutions of Burma.

[I tried writing an AQ on this but I failed. Horribly. Oh dear I'm like out of touch with writing AQs :S:S]

Disclaimer: Haha everytime I write something possibly sensitive I have the urge to put this, the whole issue about interact activists and stuff. I did not and do not have any meanings in the article other than in voicing my thought. I don't exactly know the situation well enough to comment I suppose. This is what I think based on my limited literature on the subject. Hehe. Forgive me for any factual mistakes I may have made! Or conceptual errors in my argument. Perhaps there are better arguments that I should hear of? Haha oh wait but who was I afraid would read this? Study hard everyone!

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Friday, October 26, 2007

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Quantum cryptography

Heisenberg's certainty principle

Oct 18th 2007
From The Economist

The Swiss are using quantum theory to make their election more secure

HANGING chads. Ballot stuffing. Gerrymandering. Such dirty tricks enfeeble democracy. But the security of the votes cast in Geneva during Switzerland's general election on October 21st is guaranteed. The authorities will use quantum cryptography—a way to transmit information that detects eavesdroppers and errors almost immediately—to ensure not only that votes are kept secret but also that they are all counted.

In quantum cryptography, as in most long-distance data transmission, the information is carried by photons, the particles which compose light and other sorts of electromagnetic radiation. These particular photons, however, are manipulated in a special way. The simplest example is when the sender (whom cryptographers usually call Alice) dispatches a stream of them to the receiver (who is known as Bob). These photons will have one of two modes. In the first, a photon is polarised either vertically or horizontally. In the second, it is polarised diagonally—plus or minus 45°. In the first mode, a photon polarised vertically represents a “0” and one polarised horizontally represents a “1”. Similarly, in the second mode polarisation at +45° represents “0” and at -45°, “1”.

Bob's receiver can be set to only one mode at a time, so if Alice sends him a vertically polarised photon and his equipment is in the first mode, then he will record a “0”. If his equipment is in the second mode, he will have an equal chance of recording a “0” or a “1”. After a short time, Alice tells Bob that the photon she sent should have been measured in mode one; she does not tell him what value it should have been. Bob now knows whether he made a correct measurement. If he did, he keeps the result and tells Alice that they have a match. If not, he junks it and tells Alice to do likewise—a process that takes a few millionths of a second.

It is at this point that Eve may show up. Eve is the name that cryptographers give to an eavesdropper. Should Eve intercept the transmission, the laws of quantum mechanics mean that she cannot read it without altering the photon in some way. By recording each photon, she actually destroys what she is measuring. She must therefore generate some new photons and send these to Bob, in the hope that he doesn't twig what is going on. But her equipment, too, must be set to one mode or the other, and she cannot be certain that the polarity of the photon she sends to Bob is correct.

This means that if Eve is involved, when Alice and Bob come to compare their data there will be many more mistakes than would otherwise be expected. Eve's presence will thus quickly be revealed and appropriate countermeasures can be taken. And the system works not only when there is an intelligent eavesdropper on the line, but also when data become corrupted accidentally.

For a truly secure system, the message will be encrypted in a way that requires a mathematical key to unlock it. In fact, both key and message can be transmitted this way: if the key is sent first, any interception will be detected and the key discarded. Only when the key has been safely transmitted need the message itself be sent.

This being Switzerland, it is unlikely that anyone will try a bit of electronic ballot-stuffing in this particular election, so it is the anti-accidental-corruption feature that is of most interest to Geneva's returning officers. And in truth, this is as much a piece of advertising as a real application. The firm behind the efforts, ID Quantique, is Swiss. The other two companies developing quantum cryptography for commercial use, MagiQ and BBN Technologies, are American. Employing quantum cryptography to transmit the vote from polling stations to central counting house is thus a bit of a publicity stunt.

Still, this will be the first time the technology has been deployed for real, so whether the system succeeds or fails will be of great importance to ID Quantique. Like the other two firms, it has its eyes on banks, insurance companies and other businesses that have to move a lot of sensitive data around. Whether the government of Florida will be interested is a different question.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Sunday, October 21, 2007

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Friday, October 19, 2007

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Monday, October 15, 2007

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Friday, October 12, 2007

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Monday, October 08, 2007

Sunday, October 07, 2007

Friday, October 05, 2007

Wednesday, October 03, 2007