Comments on: TOC Report: PM Lee at NUS Ministerial Forum

By: tiredsingaporean

tiredsingaporean — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 10:23:26 +0000

Anythin new? NO. Ever wonder in every speech they made contains “words of fear” to the people of Singapore?

By: saintmoron

saintmoron — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 05:34:02 +0000

A diamond that needed added sparkles can’t be a good diamond; the radiance must come from within itself.

As a Singaporean run by the present Leadership, I absolutely agree with the Statement(Question), quote:”Will we drift away in the sea of globalization, falling behind, decaying and losing our soul?” Unquote. But it will have to read: We will drift away away in the sea of globalization, falling behind, decaying and losing our soul. Losing our souls has been an ongoing phenomenon in Singapore for some times and I contend that it was(is) not due to globalization but the erosion of values for the LOVE OF MONEY. The Leadership has incalculcated a national ethos of money love.

PM Lee Hsien Loong liked his predecessor Goh Chok Tong, has been spot on in the prognoses and readings of the situations and the near future developments. But their policies hardly produced the ideal results they envisaged, sometimes quite the opposite happened and that caused more problems to existing one. Could it be that along the way of implementations of policies, there were hijacks, oversights and other unforeseen obstacles?

The Answer to the Last Question PM Lee posed in this Article lies in the Question itself; I think.

By: Daily SG: 24 Sep 2007 « The Singapore Daily

Daily SG: 24 Sep 2007 « The Singapore Daily — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:42:59 +0000

[...] – Choo Zheng Xi, TOC: TOC Opinion: PM Lee at NUS: Where’s the substance? – Ng Sook Zhen, TOC: TOC Report: PM Lee at NUS Ministerial Forum – ringisei: Defining ASEAN civil society / Looking an Indon award in the mouth – Diary of a [...]

By: Onlooker

Onlooker — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:54:58 +0000

Chim leh To think they use a Game theory to explain thing Good for them :)
Nash is a genius who come up with several game theories featured in the film “a beautiful mind”
excerpt
‘Nash’ here refers to John Nash, the Nobel Prize-winning mathematician who in Nash (1950) did most to extend and generalize von Neumann & Morgenstern’s pioneering work.
Nash equilibrium (henceforth ‘NE’) applies (or fails to apply, as the case may be) to whole sets of strategies, one for each player in a game. A set of strategies is a NE just in case no player could improve her payoff, given the strategies of all other players in the game, by changing her strategy.This idea is related to the idea of strict dominance: no strategy could be a NE strategy if it is strictly dominated. Therefore, if iterative elimination of strictly dominated strategies takes us to a unique outcome, we know we have found the game’s unique NE. Now, almost all theorists agree that avoidance of strictly dominated strategies is a minimum requirement of rationality. This implies that if a game has an outcome that is a unique NE, as in the case of joint confession in the PD, that must be its unique solution. This is one of the most important respects in which the PD is an ‘easy’ (and atypical) game.
If he is a Singaporean, his abilities will most definitely be overlooked.
Because We have the conservative majority vote system in place.

By: Dr Lim

Dr Lim — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 06:36:45 +0000

Miss Tan Good Afternoon to you.

I happen to have an association with this fellow. If you like, I can broker a meeting.

Thank you for the link, I was beginning to think Nash Equilibrium had no practical use till of course now.

Have a very nice day. Meanwhile I remain your very sincerely.

By: Onlooker

Onlooker — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 05:15:37 +0000

Whats going on here last I saw on
Change News Afterward
There are not that much foreign “Talent Student” in Local Uni.
937 in all you know? and rejected a lot leh.
Better invoke the saftey feature CMV (conservative majority vote system now)

By: Tan Bee Lian

Tan Bee Lian — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 04:52:32 +0000

I think there is considerable merit to what the PM had to say regarding talent and ASEAN.

However, I do worry some what abt the implications. As I read in this recent article.

http://whatotherssay.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/why-even-mind-ye-own-business-blogging-has-to-eventually-lead-to-total-war-a-competitive-game-theory-analysis-part-i0/#comment-233

Sounds a bit dramatic, but the logic appears to be water tight. I will have to wait for part 2 to decide on whether it is conclusively worth looking into seriously.

I would be very grateful if someone could introduce me to this Darkness.

Many thanks TOC.

By: CelluloidReality

CelluloidReality — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 09:17:33 +0000

I was there yesterday, and frankly, I was quite disappointed that he did not even mention anything fresh or relevant besides the rhetoric in which he seems duty-bound to repeat time and time again.

Wither the ASEAN chairmanship, the Charter, and of all the questions that were fielded, not a single soul asked about the impact of ASEAN integration at all..

It wasn’t anything unexpected, just SOP as usual.

By: David

David — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 06:14:26 +0000

I’m sure at current state of Singapore, it should be changed to following:

Joker LEE:
“Your future is in our own hands, and it depends on who you vote in Singapore – moving forward (to go backwards), seizing opportunities (at making money at any cost) and avoiding questions and problems (like gay issue, accountability, rising cost, millions dollars PayAndPay scheme),” he said in his speech to the largely naive, innocent, blur -student audience.”