Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio

I'm currently reading "Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio", which is a classical Chinese work ("Liao Zhai"), translated by the famed sinologist Herbert Giles.

Now, there are usually uppity people who refuse to read translated stories of any sort, with claims that the content is necessarily distorted, or that the original flavor is lost. I don't agree with such ideas, because a work is a work, however distinct it is from the source material. It's acceptable as a form of entertainment.

I really like "Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio", for a few reasons. First is the distant familiarity of the material, which has been presented in various refracted forms in movies (A Chinese Ghost Story, Painted Skin). It's certainly interesting to see how the original tales and ideas have been fleshed out, or more often, dramatized. The second reason is that the stories, in themselves, quite entertaining tales- in fact they are more akin to Chinese fairy tales.

"Strange Tales" is also quite an intriguing study, for two meta-reasons. The first is that the stories, being written in the 18th century, necessarily provides a look into Chinese society of that time. In fact, several customs and behaviors unique to that time are described within the book, which contributes much color to the stories. 

The second reason is the prevalence of footnotes, provided by the translator Herbert Giles, in the text. These footnotes give an explanation of Chinese behaviors or customs, in a Westerner's context. Sometimes these footnotes are quite quaint in nature, such as one where he commented on a named Chinese dish as being especially tasty. At other times the footnotes describe a decidedly Orientalist interpretation of traditional Chinese customs, which I (ironically) read with a sort of Occidentalist delight ("I find it amusing that this Englishman finds this Chinese tradition amusing!").

I have yet to finish the book, but I'm enjoying it very much now.

Time-Differentiated Public Transport Fares

The frequency of public transport during non-peak hours is typically lower than that during peak hours. This can result in extremely poor service quality during non-peak hours, with long waits for buses or trains.

It is possible to increase the frequency of public transport for off-peak hours, but that typically requires additional resources. This could mean a general rise in public transport fares. However, I am wondering if a time-differentiated fare structure would be a superior option. Such a fare structure would charge different fares, dependent on the time of boarding/arrival.

A first thought is to increase off-peak transport charges, to pay for the additional services deployed. This helps to make off-peak transport less of a loss-making venture, or even marginally profitable. However, increasing charges on non-peak rides would change public transport usage patterns, as some riders may instead seek to leave earlier or later to use the cheaper peak-hour transport. This increases  the peak-hour burden, and simultaneously decreases the ridership (and profitability) of off-peak public transport. Therefore it is not a good option to charge more for off-peak fares.

The reverse fare structure seems to be a better idea. Charging more for peak-hour fares reshapes transport-usage patterns in a beneficial way, reducing the rush-hour load and increasing the ridership for off-peak transport. Furthermore, the additional charges ought to go a far way in subsidizing buses or trains running during less-profitable hours.

Evidence for Hub and Spoke Model of Public Transit

It seems to me that during rush hours, more passengers alight from the front entrance of the bus rather than from the rear entrance. This could mean one of several things:

1)That passengers who board earlier take longer trips.

2) That passengers who board later drop earlier.

Taken together, there is some evidence that people use buses for one of two modes, trunk or short trips. It is correspondingly less efficient if a service caters to both types of passengers; much of the vehicle capacity is taken by trunk passengers, whereas the frequent alighting and boarding reduces the overall speed of the route.

NUS Notebook Tender Scheme

It was once that prices for notebooks under the NUS Notebook tender scheme were attractive. This is no longer the case.

I was dumbfounded to find the prices for NUS notebooks to start at $1.4k. These prices would be reasonable perhaps only a few years back, but not today. It is possible, and in fact not difficult, to purchase a decent notebook for slightly more the half the price. You're not even getting crap at $800; you'll easily get a 2nd generation i5 processor, and if you're astute, a discrete graphics card more than capable for graphics, video, and games.

But I digress. Perhaps it is indeed possible to purchase a low-cost laptop outside. We might argue that the NUS laptops are much higher spec, which accounts for their comparatively higher cost. However, after doing some comparisons, I find that in general, it is possible to purchase similar or superior spec laptops at lower prices outside. The price differentials generally work out to be on the order of $100 ~ $200. These figures were obtained by comparing the prices listed on the NUS website and flyers from the recently concluded COMEX.

It now appears that in terms of price, the NUS notebooks are not attractive, nor even competitive. Perhaps the only saving grace comes in terms of the software packages bundled; all NUS models come with Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative Suite. Only if one does indeed need these software packages, and factors in these at their full selling price, does the NUS option become competetive. However, I am very much doubtful.

There are several points that I find distasteful about the entire affair. The notebook prices are uniformly high, and in my opinion cannot possibly be optimally suited for the needs of every student. Not every student needs, or wants, a superior laptop in the course of his studies. Not every student uses Adobe Creative, or even possibly Microsoft Office. The main factor of choice appears to be neglected in the equation. I fear that students have been made to tolerate paying for unwanted features that are merely the result of some administrator's list of 'necessary features'.

FPTP and Information Loss

I hesitate to draw the conclusion that the majority of Singaporeans do not want TT as their president. This is akin to holding a contest amongst friends for the most-loved person and concluding that the losers are hated. 

The information provided by a FPTP vote is binary in nature. Each vote only tells us who a candidate most prefers, and nothing else. Perhaps he approves of all or some of the other candidates, just slightly less. Perhaps he disapproves of everyone, but he hates his choice the least. But such important information is destroyed and irrecoverable with a FPTP system.

My preference is for approval or Condorcet voting.

Entry Barriers and the Singapore Presidential Election

The spoiler effect may well have been the cause of Dr. Tony Tan's victory in the recent 2011 Singapore Presidential Election. I do not wish to comment much on this, apart from making the point that First-Past-The-Post voting systems have several disadvantages as compared to other more complex preferential voting schemes.

What I do find interesting is this: It is known that there are very high entry barriers to running in the Singapore Presidential Elections; these entry barriers manifest themselves first in the high standards required to obtain a Certificate of Eligibility, and second in the hefty election deposit. High entry barriers act to deter and perhaps to impede alternative candidates from participating in the elections. Yet from this election it appears that allowing more candidates to participate actually improves the chances of victory for the establishment candidate.

Lowering the entry barriers allows more candidates to participate in the elections, and increases the fragmentation and splitting of votes (though tactical voting will limit the effect, but I despise the very idea of tactical voting). However, at the risk of adopting a binary view of the political system, I speculate that the establishment may be assumed to be sufficiently disciplined to put forth only one candidate, and hence is less susceptible to split vote effects. 

Therefore, I wonder if the governing party would be more advantaged if there were actually no entry barriers erected in place.

Idiot Spam

A bunch of idiots spammed my mailbox. Basicially these morons replied to all, when all was the entire student cohort. Below is the correspondence, their names are replaced to preserve their anonymity.

---------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

I am not sure why I got this mail. I guess there was a mistake in the mailing address from the sender.

regards,

AAAAAA

---------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

Sorry, but guess I received the mail by mistake as well.

Regards,

BBBBBB

---------------------------------------------------------

Please do not reply to all when u respond! This is for all those who at gonna potentially respond that "this mail is not meant for me"

;)

---------------------------------------------------------

Hi CCCCCC!

So you mean I shouldn't hit reply-to-all when I wish to reply to the original sender?

That was really informative! =D

I'll be sure to send that to the original sender.

Best Regards,

CCCCCC

---------------------------------------------------------

Can we stop replying all? Thank you very much!

Sent from my iPhone