Wow.. a full week without update! What have I gotten myself into? Well, here's why:

Haha! Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.. addictive. I started quite early in this whole Pottermania thing, well before the movie started to come out. I couldn't really pinpoint where did I first picked the book up and read it but I am sure MCKK was a likely candidate. It's amazing at that time reading the book considering its parallelism with life at The Malay College itself; Hogwarts got 4 houses, so does MCKK. Both school's houses are named after the school's 4 founder. Hogwarts Castle got all this secret hideouts and so does the Overfloor at MCKK. Both school dine at a hall with tables according to houses and both have high tables. See what I mean? The only thing truly different was that they can do magic and we don't.. and oh, they got girls too.

Anyway, yeah.. I'm a Potter fan. I admit it. I know not many guys would like to be publicly known as a Potter fan but hey, it's a good read nonetheless. Though I did pre-ordered the previous book, The Half-Blood Prince well before its launch, I didn't really feel the urge to do the same about the latest book. Why? Maybe I haven't read books for quiet sometime.. I lost touch. Anyway, I did went to buy it 4 days after all the hype on the newspaper at Kinokuniya KLCC which happens to be the only place I went to that still have the books in stock. It was initially priced RM 109.00 but they happen to have a 20% discount on the book with a purchase of any other item so I bought myself a Kilometrico pen that costs RM 0.80. The result, a RM 21.00 off the book and a new pen. Quite a bargain.

Concerning the price war between the bookstores and the hypermarkets, I personally side with the bookstores. I know that there's a lot of people bashing bookstores in the newspaper, calling them cowards and afraid of competition but one struck me most. There was this guy who lauded the hypermarket's decision to sell the book at a loss to 'encourage Malaysians to read'. Are you stupid? I believe you don't have an idea how hypermarkets make money. Has it ever occurred to you to think why suddenly the markets are selling Harry Potter books and only Harry Potter books? They don't actually make much money from the sell of the books. What they are after is you because when people come to hypermarkets to get those books, they would most probably purchase something else along with that book too. A housewife taking her kids to get the books would surely take the opportunity to buy some household items too.. you know what I'm saying? More visitors equals more sale. Simple.

Now, imagine the impact on a bookstore that relies solely on books for profit. Since the place that usually sells sugar and spice suddenly selling Harry Potter books for a cheaper price, imagine what would happen to the bookstores. Should they start selling canned food and detergents to compete? Imagine what'll happen to car dealers if suddenly char kuey teow stalls all over the country starts to sell cars for a lower price. Haha.. a stupid metaphor, I know. Still.. I really think people should not really make a big deal out of it. You have to choices, choose.

It kept me wondering how many of those people who complain on the newspapers really do read Harry Potter books if not any book at all. Why? Because if they read it and love it as much as I do, price is nothing. It's worth it.
Posted on Friday, July 27, 2007 | 6 comments

YouTube and Its Effect On Traditional Broadcasters

Here's the report I wrote for my Information Age module, as promised. Enjoy reading it and I appreciate your comments. Thanks.

The Information Age heralds a myriad of new technologies aimed at improving human’s life and one of the most important would probably be the Internet. The Internet boom during the late 90s created many small companies that provide services on the Internet which have since become multimillion dollar corporations, providing services more and better than ever.

During the early 2000s, a new type of services began to appear on the Internet. Dubbed as Web 2.0, the aim of this evolution or perhaps revolution is to let the users of the Internet to not just observe the Internet, but also be involved in it interactively. Steven Johnson (2007) of Time Magazine said that, “if Web 1.0 was organized around pages, Web 2.0 is organized around people.” He also coined that Web 2.0 relied on ‘amateurs’, people like you and me who developed the urge to be involved with the Internet. How these ‘amateurs’ came to be would probably require a different set of research but it is definitely caused by several changes in lifestyle often attributed to the shift from one generation to another. It is often considered that if Web 2.0 were to be introduced before the rise of these ‘amateurs’ or perhaps to a different generation, it would have not be as successful as it is today. Among the inventions of Web 2.0 are social networking sites such as MySpace, Friendster and Facebook that changed how people especially teenagers and young adults interact with each other. Nevertheless, one web service managed to stand above the rest amidst the hundreds of other Web 2.0 sites: YouTube.

YouTube allows user to upload videos and short clips to be stored and displayed at their website. The videos that are stored in their database are readily accessible by anyone who has access to the Internet. It is based on the on demand basis where all viewers need to do is click on the video they wish to view and it will be streamed to their computers. Though it is not the first to follow this concept, it is arguably the most successful.

A major factor that makes YouTube possible is the introduction and wide adoption of broadband Internet as opposed to the older and much slower technology, dial-up. Broadband Internet is capable of high-speed data transfer according to what the user opted for. It allows large files such as video to be transferred at a much faster rate therefore making sharing and streaming large files practical. The development of new video codec such as H.264 and Flash Video are contributing factors where it makes videos smaller in size while still retaining an acceptable quality thus improving both transfer speed and user experience.

The videos on YouTube covers a lot of aspects ranging from jokes and comedies to religion and politics though it definitely started with videos on the lighter side of life. As its popularity grows, the number of people who uses it also rise and more variety of videos are uploaded into their server John Cloud (2007) of Time Magazine wrote that, “users upload 65,000 new videos to the site every day. A year ago, they watched 10 million videos a day; now they watch 100 million,” the numbers alone shows us how huge YouTube really is. Initially, the growth of YouTube can be traced directly from the success and popularity of MySpace since the user of MySpace usually link videos from YouTube to their MySpace profile or embedding the video in comments given to their peers as what Hitwise, an Internet research firm concluded. Its creates a new market of user created content that is regarded as being serious amidst the media climate of the world today where the global media market is dominated by seven multinational corporations which, though only three are fully American firms, are all based in the United States (McChesney, R. 2001), which is regarded by many as oligopolistic, (Bagdakian, B.H. 2000). Due to its rise in popularity, Google bought YouTube in 2005 though Google already owned its own video distribution network, Google Video. Looking back in time, Google is not the first online corporation to have purchased a video provider. In 1999, Yahoo bought broadcast.com for a monumental sum of $5.7 billion, which was supposed to slingshot Yahoo pass its competitors in the video distribution (Cloud, J., 2007). The project eventually failed to take off and now 8 years later, broadcast.com no longer exist.

The $1.65 billion purchase by Google shook traditional broadcasters and TV executives who previously dismissed YouTube as a ‘flash in the pan’ of Internet popularity. They suddenly decided that YouTube is a competition and thus need to be taken on (Siklos, R., Carter, B., 2006). YouTube, which is featured as one of the contributing factors for Time Magazine to announce ‘You’ as the person of the year in their Person of the Year issue in January 2007 can also be seen as a pressure for existing broadcast network to acknowledge their need to compete with it. Along with the advent of the Internet, distribution models also need to adapt to the change in audience’s choice of programming. According to Jean-Briac Perrette (2007), senior vice president of New Media at NBC Universal Cable, "The traditional model of making your money in the back end on a show is at risk," referring to the traditional model of how broadcaster make money which is through creation of high quality content and the sale of advertisement space between the show. Jeremy Kaplan (2006) of PCMag.com believes that if there is nothing done to change the model, the broadcasting world would eventually split into two parts; broadcasters and their television set and the public with the Internet and YouTube. Albert Cheng (2006), executive vice president of Digital Media at Disney-ABC Television Group argued that the trend on how public consume the media is changing and the audience are preferring on-demand content like what YouTube is offering rather than the traditional programmed content. He added, "Once you change the distribution model, you can only increase consumption. And great shows will definitely reap the benefits of all these distribution opportunities”.

Apart from the change of audience viewing trend, the sheer size of Google, YouTube’s parent organization, and other factors are also contributing to the issue. YouTube is now regarded as a new avenue of income where no traditional broadcasters have managed to bank in yet. They also argued that it is the other way around: YouTube is banking on their content. It led to Viacom suing YouTube $ 1 billion in copyright infringement in March 2007 after stating that 160,000 unauthorized clips of its programming has been circulated in YouTube that had been viewed more than 1.5 billion times (Reuters, 2007). Many people are condemning Viacom’s decision as more than just a lawsuit. Robins J. (2007), a writer for online news site, Broadcasting and Cable called the lawsuit as, “giving the middle finger to the hundreds of millions of consumers who want their media and entertainment available anywhere possible with interactivity and ease”. Nevertheless, according to Hitwise, an Internet research firm, the traffic of YouTube increased 14% since the lawsuit was filed (Helft, M. 2007).

Lawsuits aside, most media organizations agree that they need to explore new sources of broadcasting. Since most method of distribution on the Internet are not profiting for content owner, some giant media organization such as NBC Universe, News Corporation, Viacom and perhaps CBS are looking forward to create a new platform dedicated to distribute their content on the Internet. On the other hand, music companies Warner Music, SonyBMG and Universal Group along with media conglomerate CBS are currently working on license agreements with YouTube to feature their content. They argued that by working with YouTube, they have access to YouTube’s benefits such as wide audience, on-demand media access and integration with Google’s advertising technologies such as AdSense and AdWords. According to the corporation’s internal research, 10% of income came from ‘established’ content rather than user submitted content thus meaning that more profit can be achieved through advertising alongside established contents (Siklos, R. Carter, B. 2006). Nevertheless, there are also researches done by Hitwise, a Internet research firm concluded that YouTube’s growth are mainly attributed to user-generated content while premium content act as supporting factors (Tancer, B. 2007).

While giant media conglomerates are still fighting over whether to go with or against YouTube, smaller and independent labels are already forming partnership with YouTube. According to Helft M. (2007) at The New York Times, these companies consisted of companies that either sees value in contributing to YouTube and those experimenting with the new method in content distribution. Some already realized that it is profitable to join forces with YouTube as people-centered content that is low budget and homemade is very profitable even though it is not comparatively popular as production content (Bennett, 2000). Allan Weiner (2007) an analyst at Gartner said that, “Smaller guys want mass distribution and are willing to face the risk of copyright infringement for access to this huge audience,” Nevertheless, among the companies involved are also several big names in the business and entertainment world. In March 2007, National Basketball Association of America (NBA) signed an agreement to create a channel on YouTube that contained NBA authorized short clips as well as allowing the public to upload their own best moves. A day later, Wind-up Record, an independent label formerly of Creed fame made a deal with YouTube to stream music videos by the label and allowing users to incorporate their audio tracks in the user’s own videos. YouTube is also having partners from bigger corporations. They are to announce partnership with BBC, which under a multiyear agreement would create two entertainment channels under YouTube and one news channel. According to people involved in the agreement, BBC intended to use Google AdSense to include advertisements on two of the three channels (Helft, M. 2007).

While YouTube is flourishing, the join effort by NBC Universe, News Corporation, Viacom and CBS are still on papers since before they can take on YouTube, they have a lot of issues that yet to be settled between the conglomerates. According to the New York Times article by Richard Siklos and Bill Carter (2007), News Corporation’s Fox Network currently owns MySpace and sees this as a chance to tie the new concept with MySpace. Nevertheless, Viacom would disapprove any ties with MySpace since it competes with MTV Online, owned by Viacom. CBS is also the oddball of the group since it started their own private negotiations with YouTube and is seen as more eager to partner with the online network. Another thing is that the conglomerates are still discussing whether should or should not their new project take the role as an online agent for licensing their content to other distributors such as Yahoo, MSN Live and YouTube itself.


From what we see today, it is almost certain that the issue is far from resolution. Media conglomerates are definitely afraid of losing their grasp of the exciting new world of new media which, if prosper could signal the start of the end of the cultural colonization of private owners as described by Schiller (1976) as “providing basis for social power”. For those embracing YouTube, it is seen as the end of the Cultural Imperialism with media content that is predominantly American and western (Held, D. 1999). Nevertheless, the seeds of cooperation between traditional broadcasters and the new media are beginning to flower and it is only a matter of time before both parties can put aside their differences and stand on common ground. From here, the only way to go is up. For the public, the media consumers, new media is perhaps a blessing since finally an entity managed to become a threat to the mainstream media thus forcing them to take actions and revise their practices to fit the current world climate and social trend. In the battle between traditional broadcasters and YouTube, the audience emerges triumphant.


Bagdakian, B. H. (2000). The Media Monopoly. Boston: Beacon Press

Becker, A., Grossman, B., Higgins, M. J. & Romano, A. (2006). How The Google-YouTube Deal Shakes Up TV. Broadcasting and Cable Online. Retrieved March 25, 2007 from http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6381202.html

Bennett, W. Lance (2000). Globalization, Media Market Deregulation, and the Future of Public Information. Retrieved March 30, 2007 from http://depts.washington.edu/bennett/Media_Markets.htm

Bogatin D. (2007). Google’s YouTube: Who Are The Broadcasters?. ZDNet Blog. Retrieved March 30, 2007 from http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets/?p=905

Brennen, D. (2007). YouTube and Broadcasting: Threat or Opportunity? Asia-Pacific Broadcast Union Copyright Seminar. Tokyo: Audio-Visual Copyright Society.

Garfield, B. (2006). YouTube vs. BoobTube. Wired Magazine Issue 14.12

Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D. & Perraton, J. (1999). Global Transformations. Cambridge: Polity Press

Helft, M. (2007). Google Courts Small YouTube Deals, and Very Soon, A Larger One. The New York Times. Retrieved April 2, 2007 from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/02/technology/02google.html

Kaplan, J. A. (2006). YouTube Vs. ThemTube. PCMag.com. Retrieved April 2, 2007 from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2060905,00.asp

Kelley, R. (2006). YouTube vs. BoobTube. CNN Money.com. Retrieved March 24, 2007 from http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/09/news/companies/nbc_video/index.htm

Li, K. & Gershberg, M. (2007). Viacom in $1 bln copyright suit vs. Google, YouTube. Reuters. Retrieved April 2, 2007 from http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSWEN535120070313

McAdams, D. D. (2007). NAB 2007: The Year of the YouTube Effect. NAB Daily News Online. Retrieved April 2, 2007 from http://nabdaily.imaspub.com/pages/s.0007/t.4899.html

McChesney, R. (2001). Global Media, Neoliberalism & Imperialism. In International Socialist Review, Aug/Sep 2001. United States: International Socialist Organisation

Náim, M. (2007). The YouTube Effect. Foreign Policy. Retrieved March 30, 2007 from www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3676

Robins, J. M. (2007). Viacom Vs. Future. Broadcasting and Cable Online. Retrieved April 3, 2007 from http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6425998.html

Schiller, H. I. (1976). Communication and Cultural Domination, New York. United States: International Arts and Science Press

Siklos, R. & Carter, D. (2006). Old Model Versus a Speedster. New York Times. Retrieved April 2, 2007 from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/technology/18youtube.html

Viacom will sue YouTube for $1 bn (2007). BBC News Online. Retrieved April 4, 2007 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6446193.stm

Weber, T. (2007). BBC Strikes YouTUbe-Google Deal. BBC News Online. Retrieved April 4, 2007 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6411017.stm

YouTube rattles broadcasters (2007) News24.com. Retrieved April 20, 2007 from http://www.news24.com/News24/Technology/News/0,9294,2-13-1443_2093312,00.html


Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 | 6 comments


Well, what can I say.. I've been very lazy this last few days so I haven't updated anything. Hurmm..

Anyway, College will reopen next week! I can't wait.. at least then I have a lot of things to do. I've already got my previous semester result and I honestly tried to restrain myself from posting anything about it since, well.. I'm not particularly proud of it. Nevertheless, I did do a posting on my previous previous result during Foundation so I guess it's only fair to write about this one too.

Now, where did I put that envelope.. Oh, here it is. Okay.. let's see.
FTV111: History of Screen Language - C (2.33)
JRN111: Intro to Print - B (3.33)
MCI111: Information Age - B (3.33)
MCI101: Research and Presentation 1 - B (3.33)
MPW2133: Malaysian Studies - A- (4.00)
Now, that's not really impressive innit? That figures why my GPA is merely a mediocre 3.24, well below the previous semester's 3.50. Now, last semester I asked some people at the Management on wether they would add my degree grades to that from my Foundation. They said no since both are basically different courses. But according to my result slip my CGPA is 3.45. Am I missing something here or did they count my Foundation's result together with this one? I'm clueless.

Truth be told, I'm totally devastated by this result and though I'm quite disappointed at my result, I can't seem to pinpoint where my mistakes are. I knew I tried very hard and I have no problem with any lecturers that I know of. So why this?

Honestly, I do have doubt about FTV since the whole context of the course is subjective but I was really really aiming for an A for Journalism and Information Age. I love them both! I love them eventhough they both require me to write very very long reports. In fact, I am really sure I did a very good analytical essay for Information Age, I'm going to post it here later after this post. I spent nights reading through business report on that essay and I analyzed a huge pile of newspaper to see how real journalists write for my Journalism news articles. How could I deserve a B for all that hard work?

Well, I've posted queries to some of my lecturers concerning my result and what I should do to for remedial and one, my Journalism lecturer Mr. Razlan replied:
actly u r consdrd gud.. b man. hghest in clas is b+.. but to me u r a gud stdnt.. u shld take up jrnlsm
Well, that's heartwarming.. Still, why wasn't I'm the one who got a B+? Well Hadi, I guess you can't always get what you want. C'est la vie. I guess this is what Degree is. I should stop living in my Foundation bubble.. Burst it. Pop.

So folks, thanks for listening. Give me a chance to shine and I'll blind the world. A week left till College reopens.. man, I'm really going to shine. Amin.
Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 | 4 comments


Let's spare a minute and let us pray for the victims of the Nuri crash and their families. Al-Fatihah..
Posted on Tuesday, July 17, 2007 | 2 comments

The iMac is back!

On the other hand, while a machine went missing in the jungle, another was brought back to life. Yup, the iMac lives! Yeeha.. I went to the Curve Apple Store a day before I went to Bukit Tinggi and voila, it was ready by the time I got home. Here's a short story of the iMac (Warning, everything below this line is geekery).

Since I was replacing the analog board in that thing, I thought it would be nice to replace the aging stock 13GB hard disk with a slightly newer 20GB hard disk so I told them to do that too along with taking out a stuck CD inside the slot. It's actually very simple to do all that; I was just not confident with the analog board since it sits under the monitor. Did you know that the current from the monitor is enough to stop the heart? Now you know. So now that all the scary part is done for me, all I got to do is pop in the OS install disk and I should be fine right?.. Nope.

I opted to go with the older, more outdated Mac OS 9 since I don't have enough RAM for Mac OS X. Not only that, I need to use OS 9 anyway to install the updates that'll enable the Mac to boot OS X. So then I pop in the Mac OS 9 install CD into the slot and waited for it to load.. and waited and waited and waited. What the? Guess what, the CD stuck again! Haha.. That's a major problem actually since not only it's stuck inside, the drive won't even read the CD leaving me to conclude that the drive is dead. Oh bugger. I have a computer with an empty hard disk and a dead CD drive. How the hell am I going to install anything?

Here's where oldies stuff came into handy. I pried open the case and replaced the new 20GB hard disk with the old one since it's installed with Mac OS 9 already which wasn't too hard a thing to do. Hurm.. Maybe the next time I want to upgrade this thing I should do it myself and save some cash. My trip inside the Mac also revealed more defect on this 8 year old machine. The speaker diaphragm (the piece of papery like thing on the speaker) has decayed on both sides, probably due to fungus. What? No sound too?! What more could go wrong?

Well, for the time being none.. and i would be very happy if it stays that way. The old hard disk boots up just fine and I've been doing some spring cleaning, trashing out old stuffs and installing some of my files. I can still hear songs, provided I plug in an earphone. I have yet figure out how to connect this baby to the Internet.. should be working on that soon. So, where do I go from here? Next, I think I would go and grab RAM sticks.. this old computer uses an old one, should get it cheap at those second hand shops at Low Yat and only then will I try to install Mac OS X. As for the speakers and optical drive, both have to wait since I am very broke right now. Tisk..

I guess there are a lot more hobbies out there that is as fun yet costs less than this but I guess this is my little oasis. The satisfaction is.. well, satisfactory.I should be doing more of this.. Haha!
Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 | 0 comments

Hills, Helicopters and ...

Well, Bukit Tinggi wasn't so bad. It's a nice retreat from the hectic city life nonetheless. The family and I stayed at the Meranti Apartments overlooking a lush green valley.. a breathtaking sight indeed.

Anyway, it so happen that a TUDM Nuri helicopter went missing around Genting Sempah so from my room I can see and hear the thundering sound of the search and rescue helicopter looking for signs of the ill-fated Nuri. Let's pray for the best to the victims.. Looking back through Malaysian aviation history, the Nuri chopper is synonymous with crashes which is no surprise considering the fact that the US-made Sikorsky S-61A-4 Nuri is already servicing the Malaysian Air Force for 3 decades. Talk about old..

Nevertheless, I noticed something while I was watching the news coverage on the missing aircraft. Instead of calling the chopper a Nuri, they suddenly decided to call it a Sikorsky S-61. Well, of course technically both terms point to the same machine so why is this such a big issue? Easy, most Malaysian know what a Nuri is; an old, old chopper prone to problems but not all know that a Nuri is a Sikorsky S-61 thus giving the impression that it's not a Nuri that went missing, instead another type of chopper. Put that all together and you'll probably be saved from the whole Nuri controversy again. Simple PR.


Posted on Monday, July 16, 2007 | 0 comments

What I did this week

Hi, my name is Hadi and I haven't posted anything for quite a while. Sorry. So.. What have I been up to all this while?

First, I finally secured my MARA loan after a 6 months wait. Lama kan? Well, I filled out the application form that I got from Limkokwing on February and I dunno.. somehow it took them several months to get the form from Cyberjaya to Medan MARA. From there, the process of getting my application approved was quite swift to my suprise and I got a reply from a Encik Najib a week later asking me to come to Medan MARA to collect the agreement form. It's not all bed of roses but at the end of it all I end up with a new CIMB Bank account (just because MARA doesn't deal with Maybank), quite a comprehensive knowledge of how the lifts work in Medan MARA and a good how-to when dealing with anything government.. and oh, a financial aid. Thank you MARA.

Remember the old iMac I told you guys about? A few days ago my new analog board shipment arrived from Georgia, USA. I got it from eBay and it costs me RM 250 for the board and another RM 150 for shipping. Expensive? Well.. compare that to the price quoted by the Apple Store (RM 2000), it's a bargain. It's my first purchase of anything from the Internet and I must say that it's not as scary as it first seemed. The iMac is now at the Curve Apple Store, awaiting repair and I do hope it works.. please!

Anyway, last week my sister came back from Moscow and Mak, Abah and I were there to pick her up. It's been a year since I last saw her so I admit that I sure am happy seeing my sister again though she insisted that I've gained weight. Now, where did she get that idea? Haha.. So since most of us are at home now (Arif, where are you?) Mak decided to take the family on a trip to Bukit Tinggi. I honestly have no idea what's up there but I guess there's ought to be a lot of things I can photograph up there now that I got my camera back from Neet. Yeeha!

So, what more can I say? Have a nice weekend people. Go out more and see things. I'll be back soon with a good story and some nice photos.. hopefully.
Posted on Saturday, July 14, 2007 | 0 comments

Let's green the Earth by doing gigs!

I was reading about the Live Earth concert held simultaneously 24 hours in some of the biggest cities around the world yesterday. While the concept is the same as the 1985 Live Aid concert as well as the recent Live 8 in 2005, Live Earth was the brainchild of former future President of the USA, Al Gore who is now famous for his environmental causes especially concerning global warming.

Malaysia itself wouldn't want to be left out of the rain so yesterday we held the SuriaFM Green Every Day Concert 2007 at the National Stadium in Bukit Jalil. While not as big as Live Earth, the concert wasn't too shabby with performances from local artistes as well as those from Singapore and Indonesia.

Considering the state of the environment these days, I praise the noble effort of the organizers though I find it ironic how people organize concerts to raise awareness about energy conservation. Why? Well first and foremost, the concert to raise awareness about energy conservation itself uses a lot of energy. Those electric guitars and amps aren't going to ring itself is it? Not to mention those stage lights they use.. Then imagine the energy used by people who traveled to the stadium. Add all that up and you'll end up with a huge waste of energy. Oh, and I was just talking about the concert in Malaysia, never mind the Live Earth. Here's what I read from the UK Daily Mail:
A Daily Mail investigation has revealed that far from saving the planet, the extravaganza will generate a huge fuel bill, acres of garbage, thousands of tonnes of carbon emissions, and a mileage total equal to the movement of an army.

The most conservative assessment of the flights being taken by its superstars is that they are flying an extraordinary 222,623.63 miles between them to get to the various concerts - nearly nine times the circumference of the world. The true environmental cost, as they transport their technicians, dancers and support staff, is likely to be far higher.

The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists' and spectators' travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specialises in such calculations.

Throw in the television audience and it comes to a staggering 74,500 tonnes. In comparison, the average Briton produces ten tonnes in a year.

The concert will also generate some 1,025 tonnes of waste at the concert stadiums - much of which will go directly into landfill sites.
See what I mean? Still, a noble cause nonetheless. Hurm...

Well, as they say.. Save the rainforest; eat a vegetarian.


Posted on Sunday, July 08, 2007 | 2 comments

Sorry, we don't have your size

I've been thinking hard of what I want to post to this blog. It's not that I've been doing nothing, no.. I've been doing a whole lot of things but at the end of the day, I see nothing worth writing about them. Writer's block? Not again.. Huhu

Anyway, yesterday I went to KLIA with Mak and Abah to pickup Kakak Hanan. She's currently having her summer break from her university in Moscow. It's nice seeing her back again after a year though her first comment about me is about how fat I am.. Ah, the usual.

Talking about fat reminds me about Aieza's posting I just read from her blog.
There is one thing I hate about living in Malaysia – all of the shops think that all women come in one size (I’m going to leave men out of this since they have baggy jeans). I don’t know if they (the ones who sell clothes) are unaware or just being ignorant. I seriously feel that they could make more money by selling clothes for ‘everyone’…not just for the skinny ones.
Well Aieza, guys went through that a lot too though you rarely hear about them. I wonder why. Hurm...

Anyway, a few weeks back Neet and I went shopping for jeans at Levi's and asked them wether they have a size 38 for 512 or 501. If you didn't know, sizes above 36 are only available in 512 and 501 cutting. Sadly though, not many shops took the trouble to order these 'plus sizes' into their inventory and the Levi's I went to is one of them.. Ho humm. Nevermind, there's always other shops innit?

Next Neet suggested me to go to TopMan since his brother bought a nice pair of jeans there. Well, I've been to TopMan a few times and I don't really think they have anything my size but what the hell.. I went to the jeans aisle and flipped through a few, looking at the sizes.. 30, 32, 29, 32, 30... when the shop guy came to me and asked..
TopMan man: Yes, can I help you?

Me: Yeah, do you have a size 38?

TopMan man: Oh, I'm sorry sir but our biggest is size 36.

Me: Oh, okay then. Thanks..

TopMan man: Oh wait, we do have one size 38. They must've shipped it here by mistake.
Okay, now that pissed me off. If he said that size 36 is their biggest, it's okay.. I understand. But from what I he told me I came to understand that TopMan does have bigger sizes than what them people are selling. The problem is that they don't bother ordering them so much that you are amazed when I size 38 was shipped to them by mistake. What the hell is wrong for them to have bigger sizes? Jatuh standard is it? Sheesh..

I'm never going to TopMan again, even if I wake us tomorrow with half of my weight magically missing. Bigots.
Posted on Thursday, July 05, 2007 | 3 comments

Catatan Seorang Fakir di Bumi Benar

Andainya meja 4 segi ini tidak tahu
Maafkan dia
Dia juga sama seperti kita
Di atas segala kesilapan
Teknikal yang sengaja diadakan
Mata ini
Membaca dan membaca
Sebenarnya berkaca dan berkaca
Tinta menulis dan menulis
Sebetulnya, menggores dan menggores
Atas nasihat ramai, dia melangkah pulang
Sebenarnya dihalau pulang
Pena, pensel, pembaris
Terlantar kaku dalam keranda hijau
Gangguan sementara diatasi
Sebetulnya... sengaja diadakan
Supaya tidak mampu diatasi...
Dewa dewa buku
Sebenarnya otak otak kaku
Buku buku berat
Sebenarnya ilmu ilmu hebat
Betul betul sebenarnya...
Benar benar sebetulnya...
Aman sebenarnya

written by Kai, taken from The Malay College Magazine 1998

Labels: ,

Posted on Tuesday, July 03, 2007 | 3 comments

My Photo
Location: Klang Valley, Malaysia

Rebel, sweetheart.

Me Elsewhere

  • Flickr
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email