Categories
Science & technology Society

[2140] Of dude, where’s my diskette drive?

The dawn of the 21st century disappoints the part of me growing up reading works of science fiction. Here we are living in a much too glorified new century and there are still no flying cars crisscrossing the sky, no aliens from outer space walking our streets and no human bases across the solar system. We did send a roti canai to space but many things remain out of this world. Underneath this childish disappointment is another part of me who is impressed at humanity’s pace of technological progress.

The thought came to me last October when I was frantically downloading every single file I had stored on Geocities. Yahoo! shut Geocities down later that month after more than ten years of existence.

There was a time when the internet was effectively Geocities. Almost everything imaginable was available on Geocities alone. Cheats for Diablo? Latest news on Star Wars? History of the Malay Peninsula?

If the internet was the successor of the Great Library of Alexandria, then Geocities was its precious scrolls. This was back in the mid to the late 1990s. It was a time when surfing speed was incredibly slow that made today’s speed as served by TMNet god sent. It was a time when modems make noise much to the delight of a geeky kid.

It was on Geocities where I learned the hypertext markup language in effort to prove to my friends that I could do it too. With my mastery of HTML, I created my first website.

Updating it was a tough act. If I wanted to change certain details of the website, I had to go back to my text editor application and change it there. It was a big hassle but it was fun. The introduction of WYSIWYG kept me sane for some time.

The emergence of content management system as well as wide access to cheaper storage and greater bandwidth probably ended Geocities. Frustrated as the amount of time I needed to spend to update my website on Geocities, I became an early adopter of Blogger.

The generosity of my alma mater in Ann Arbor with respect to storage further reduced my need of Geocities. Since migrating to Blogger and ultimately WordPress several years later, never once I returned to Geocities, until last October. It was time to say the final goodbye. This is my requiem for it, and for everything that is beautifully obsolete.

My experience with Geocities and the internet by no mean affected me alone. Back in the late 1990s, the latest unsanctioned information was directly available only to the political fringe.

A decade later, the introduction of content management system that makes the proliferation of blogs possible democratised the internet. It is probably not too demanding to assert that this evolution brought political evolution — some would say revolution — in Malaysia. It took years, but it happened.

The return to Geocities was a walk down memory lane for me. Old photos stashed there brought me back to a more innocent age. A folder contained photos taken in Chicago. Another in New York. Another still contained countless of other places. These pictures were scanned from actual hardcopy photographs. Yes, there was a time when film was a crucial component of a camera. The film needed to be processed first before one could enjoy one’s effort. That typically took a week. Not anymore. All those processing are done with a snap of a finger. At a far, better a resolution too. Never mind all those snazzy features a digital SLR has.

I saved all of my life’s work, including my scanned photographs, in 3½-inch diskettes around the same period. One day after spending a summer away from classes, I found my spirit renewed. I was yet again prepared to take up relentless challenges thrown by a cruel Michigan. Before that however, I just needed to transfer some of my files on that 3½-inch diskette to a computer in a laboratory on campus. Amid 50-odd computers, not one of them had a diskette driver on them.

The same situation was true over all computer laboratories on campus. In its place was a weird thing called USB drive. Life was just too hard.

Just less than four months earlier, I would happily hop from computer to computer with my diskettes. On that particular day when I found out about the end of diskette drive, a child of the information revolution felt obsolete.

The world suddenly leapt by me, catching me off-guard. I adapted — I had too — but that taste of obsoleteness still lingers with me, forever a reminder that nothing lasts forever. The only thing one can do is to prepare oneself for the eventuality.

These continuous creative destructions ensure that. It also says that it is likely that tomorrow is going to be a better day. I am willing to bet on that because all these small changes, and more, have more than compensates my childish disappointment. Under its belt is a reputation enough to earn confidence from a mere mortal.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on December 17 2009.

Categories
Humor Photography

[2139] Of fish inside… duh!

Oh, sardines!

Some right reserved.

I wonder what is inside. A nuclear device? A grey goo? A really small man?

Some right reserved.

It contains fish! Hooray!

Categories
Photography

[2138] Of it is Metatron!

Up north at the end of Glebe Point Road is a park and Rozelle Bay sits in front of it. From there, one gets a full view of the sleek Anzac Bridge with its two concrete towers. Just slightly farther towards the sea, the undoubtedly more famous Harbour Bridge crosses the Sydney Harbour.

Some right reserved.

This picture looks west and clearly, taken at dusk.

I really like how the clouds hid the sun. It somehow reminds me of Metatron in Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy. Something ominous lurks behind the clouds.

I did some processing here to saturate the color. I typically frown at those that do some processing because I feel it a kind of cheating, especially so if they do not disclose that fact. Most of the times, processed pictures would become better but what I object about it is that without disclosure of processing, it deceives others. And then there is also something called over-processing.

But I just could not resist playing with the colors here. So, I guess that makes me a hypocrite.

In the spirit of full transparency that the Malaysian government notoriously lacks, here is the original photograph, taken purely based on, if I may say so, my non-existence photography skills.

Some right reserved.

The sky was much brighter in reality. I set my shutter speed quite fast to capture the cloud pattern. Much slower speed would have turned the picture whitish. I also tweaked my camera’s white balance so that, as an auto setting would always do I think, the photograph would not appear bluish.

And oh, it is time for me to get a new lens.

Categories
Economics Environment

[2137] Of 40% cut in carbon intensity may not be something to shout about

Bernama wrongfully reported that the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Najib Razak, put up a conditional offer to cut 40% of Malaysia’s 2005 carbon emissions by 2020.[1] The same goes with the New Straits Times, except it did it more badly by not directly quoting the Prime Minister.[2] This is sloppy reporting. The truth is that it is a conditional cut of 40% to Malaysia’s carbon emissions intensity in terms of GDP within the base and time frame mentioned. Regardless of the inaccuracy, is the cut impressive?

The size of the cut seems big but cutting carbon emissions intensity is a lot easier than cutting outright carbon emissions; a cut in emissions is more expensive than a cut in carbon intensity. Achieving 5% cut as demanded by Kyoto is a lot harder than 5% cut in carbon intensity. The difference is clearer when one takes note that emissions itself can increase even under a situation of decreasing carbon intensity.

A demostration is in order. The most convenient way of showing this is by using intensity per capita as a unit rather than per GDP. In order words, this refers to emissions per person.

Assume that the emissions per person is 2 and there are a total of 10 persons in a neighborhood. The total emissions is therefore 20.

Assume further than emissions per person improves to 1.5 and total population increase to 15. Total emissions gets worse: it is now 22.5.

A cut in emissions will address total emissions. A cut in carbon intensity does not guarantee that.

A concrete example is the United Kingdom. According to the National Environmental Technology Centre of the UK, total emissions fell slightly between 1990 and 2005. Carbon intensity? It fell more or less by 40%. [3]

Hence, the act of stressing the difference is not a matter of splitting hair.

Carbon intensity has the tendency to decrease over time due to application of technology. The typical criticism directed at any commitment at reducing carbon intensity is that even without such commitment, carbon intensity will decrease anyway. This is especially true for developing countries where there is a lot of space for technological improvement through by merely copying.

Given this, the Prime Minister’s conditional offer is not something to shout about. China also made an offer to cut carbon intensity and it has been rightly criticized for trumpeting an unremarkable target and then demanding moral authority at the negotiation table in Copenhagen during the 15th Conference of the Parties that ended recently.

(Despite this tendency, Malaysia’s carbon intensity between 1990 and 2004 increased. I suspect a Kuznets curve.[4] The ratio may increase up to a certain level before decreasing. Malaysia after all was industrializing during the 1990s and now, Malaysia is largely done with industrialization.)

It should only be seen as a brilliant diplomatic maneuver and not a big effort at cutting emissions. It is brilliant not just because that the commitment is very likely to be achieved anyway and thus, making the offerers look good, it is brilliant because it makes demand for aid — and making the exercise cheaper than it would — even when the cut in carbon intensity is very likely to be achieved without any binding commitment.

This is not to dismiss the importance of cut in carbon intensity. I myself believe that technology is the answer to climate change but it is important to get the right message across while the Malaysian mass media failed the public miserably.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — COPENHAGEN, Dec 17 (Bernama) — Malaysia has agreed to reduce its carbon dioxide emission to 40 per cent by the year 2020 compared to the 2005 levels subject to assistance from developed countries.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the cut was conditional on receiving the transfer of technology and adequate financing from the developed world.

“I would like to announce here in Copenhagen that Malaysia is adopting an indicator of a voluntary reduction of up to 40 per cent in terms of emissions intensity of GDP (gross domestic product) by the year 2020 compared to 2005 levels,” he said in his speech at the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009 here, on Thursday,

United Nations data shows Malaysia’s carbon emissions in 2006 stood at 187 million tonnes or 7.2 tonnes from each Malaysian. [Malaysia Announces Conditional 40 Per Cent Cut In Emissions. Bernama. December 17 2009]

[2] — PM Najib says Malaysia is committed to do its best in combatting climate change.

MALAYSIA will voluntarily slash by up to 40 per cent her carbon emission by 2020 compared with 2005 levels.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who made this commitment yesterday, said the cut was part of Malaysia’s contribution to global efforts to combat climate change. [40 per cent reduction of carbon emission by 2020. Mimi Syed Yusof. New Straits Times. December 18 2009]

[2] — COPENHAGEN: A roadmap towards realising the 40% reduction of carbon emission per capita from the 2005 level by 2020 will be presented to the Cabinet soon. [40 per cent reduction of carbon emission by 2020. Mimi Syed Yusof. New Straits Times. December 18 2009]

[3] — [Page 18 and 19. Carbon dioxide emissions and energy consumption in the UK. The National Environmental Technology Centre]

[4] — See Kuznets Curve at Wikipedia. Accessed on December 25 2009.

Categories
Economics

[2136] Of import quota policy is irrelevant to the objective of low stable prices

On December 7 in the Parliament, based on the Hansard, Deputy Minister for International Trade and Industry Jacob Dungau Sagan was asked whether the government intends to abolish a policy that grants exclusive permits for imports to limited entities and effectively, the granting of monopoly power to several companies over certain commodities such as sugar and rice. He effectively said no and went on to defend the policy.[1] I find the defense problematic.

He began his defense of the policy by stating it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that prices of such commodities, and specifically sugar, remain at affordable levels while promoting the sugar industry in Malaysia. According to him further, due to the fact that prices in Malaysia are lower than prices in neighboring countries, there is possibility that producers will not import sugar when prices in the international market are higher than local ones.

Approved permit policy however is an very suboptimal solution to the problem. His answer is similarly so.

Firstly, prices are lower because of price control. Remove the control and prices will go higher. If the local prices without price control mechanism is higher than international prices, then there will be no problem of flow. In fact, the approved permit restricts flow into the local market. If it is the other case, then while there might be problem with flow, the policy of approved permits does not address the problem. This brings us to the second issue I want to raise.

Second, import quota is useless when international prices are higher than local prices sans free trade. It is a redundant policy. Why is it redundant? The rationale is the same as having a minimum wage that is lower than all other wages paid by the market. Higher international prices compared to local price however does introduce the issue of flow. There is a way to address that concern and this is why I make the third point.

Third, the existing subsidy system alone is more than capable of ensuring that there is no large major outflow of sugar under the price control mechanism. How? Just pay (really, subsidize) the importers to bring in the sugar.

I wish to veer off course for a moment or two here. Do note that this does not mean that I support a subsidy system. Rather, it is only a demonstration of positive economics. It is not an exercise at proposing the best policy but merely an effort at proposing a better policy. The best policy remains one that returns to the principle of free market.

Returning to the issue at hand, another unsatisfying point the Deputy Minister made in defending approved permits policy for sugar involves price fluctuation. Again, the subsidy system already in place is able to confront that. There is an existing system in place: the previously used fuel subsidy regime.

Really, the import quota policy is redundant in addressing fluctuating prices. Quota itself does not lessen fluctuation of prices. Any considerable fluctuation in the international price of sugar will translate into fluctuation of local prices regardless of permits, unless a country is a complete natural autarky, which Malaysia is not. What it does is merely to increase average local unsubsidized prices. It does not decrease variance around the local average. In other words, quota just makes prices fluctuating at the same magnitude at higher levels.

The relevant policy should be only price control and subsidy to producers and importers. Two tools alone are sufficient to achieve both objectives of affordable and low prices.

I want to harp on this point again, just in case if it had not driven the point home. While it is important to understand that these two policies suffer grave weaknesses — two examples are smuggling and shortage; also opportunity cost — when juxtaposed alongside free market environment, import quota in no way addresses those weaknesses. Therefore, import quota is really an irrelevant policy, if the objective is low stable prices.

The real reason for import quota is to protect domestic producers. The Deputy Minister did mention this as a reason and he should mention only this as the reason without stating that the policy is there to ensure that prices are affordable and to ensure the availability of sugar. The import quota raises price of sugar, with or without subsidy, much to the benefit of importers and producers of sugar.

It is worth highlighting that there are only four sugar factories in Malaysia owned only two entities. These entities also monopolize the quota. Never mind that these two entities are closely linked.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — See page 18 the Hansard dated December 7 2009.