Assignment 3

Summary:

Out of all the published research works, probably between a quarter and a third of all the research papers go uncited, while a large proportion is cited only by their own authors or by one or two others. This is partly a result of the imperative for researchers to publish in order to continue to secure funding and employment, and the accompanying incentive to salami-slice research results so as to secure the maximum number of publications from any given piece of work. However, this is the bane of a scientist’s existence as there are too many papers but too little time to finish reading through all. This situation is however only getting worst due to the rise of author-pays open-access publishing which has the benefit of allowing anyone to read the research in question without paying the publisher, but also has the disadvantage of giving publishers a strong commercial incentive to issue as much content as possible.

Reader’s Response:

Yes, I agree that it is a good idea to get funders and employers to encourage scientists to publish less, but significant, research papers. As cited from the article, the rate of growth of cited scientific publications has risen from less than 1% before the middle of the 18th century to 2-3% in the first half of the 20th century, and 8-9% today. That last figure is equivalent to a greater than doubling of scientific output every decade. With too many research papers being published, but there is limited time for people to be able to read through all the research papers and filter out the important and significant ones. The purpose of scientist publishing so many research papers is to secure maximum publication. By publishing lesser work, but just the significant ones, it will help save the time people takes to read through all the research papers, enabling them to be able to spend more time to analyse each and every research paper published.

Assignment 2: When governemnts attack - Online (Lucia and Yuling 4C)

Summary

The article discusses how widespread cybercrimes are and its ability to manifest in harmless and subtle ways, which causes the unknowing user to openly invite spyware and bugs. It also highlights the potential lethality of a single computer virus, being able to wreck havoc to banking networks, causing online services to fail. Beyond the digital complications, it creates hardware and monetary issues by rendering infected hardware unusable. The author closes by reinstating the importance of personal discretion and user awareness; users should not underestimate their chances of being a cybercrime victim and exercise caution when dealing with passwords and emails.

Reader Response

Online security should be of paramount importance to users at all levels, from the individual to the major institution. In this day and age, a lot of important information, e.g. passwords, confidential files, reports, is processed, transmitted, received in a binary form, it is all the more crucial that we recognize what is at stake, what we could potentially lose to hackers, and take action to protect this medium at which information flows.For individuals, online security is important, mostly as a p rotection of one’s privacy and confidential files. The advent of social media websites has made sharing one’s life experiences a lot more convenient, and at the same time it dangles the bait of personal information to potential hackers. The past few years have been marked by a number of “lows” in social media history, like Facebook stalkers gleaning off personal particulars from user accounts, user Skype chat being leaked to other terminals, Facebook accounts being hacked into and used to post obscene and controversial content. This shows that we are not as protected as we thought, only a password separates all our private data from the hungry hacker, and the ways hackers can abuse, manipulate what they sift out seem inexhaustible. For the typical user of the internet, he has an online bank account, social media account, email. He has a lot at stake here, there is very little that separates him from cases such as identity theft and bank account fraud. As such, individual online security is all the more needed in such an age where nearly everything goes through the net. 

For corporations and governments, online security means more than protecting ones privacy, it is about keeping sensitive information and protecting daily online operations. Businesses and government have too made the quantum leap into using technology and the digital world to run their operations. Banks have their own online transaction system; shops have their own buying platform, and governments store info in databases rather than on paper. Compared to the individual, the magnitude of what is at stake is a lot higher. Think WikiLeaks, when Julian Assange leaked diplomatic cables online, it sparked a backlash of public defamation on the government. Think “Messiah” (Singapore hacking organisation), that disrupted multiple local government pages, and posted nasty and harsh remarks under the name of Singapore government. From the above, we can tell that online security is not just important; it is a necessity, to protect us from all the potential infinite repercussions.

Assignment 1: Human Rights Council (Lucia and Yuling)

Title: Assignment 1: ‘Mind your own business’, North Korea says of U.N. demand for justice
Summary of Article
A vote has been passed by the U.N. Human Rights Council to demand justice for the crimes like systematic torture, starvation and killings in North Korea. North Korean Ambassador So Se Pyong criticized the records of other countries but did not answer the allegations. Human Rights activists who have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program welcomed the vote. Roseann Rife, of Amnesty International said that human rights must take center stage at the U.N. Security Council when it considers peace and security in the Korean Peninsula. However, both Western and Asian powers admit that the chances of holding North Korea liable for their crimes against humanity are slim. North Korea will be referred to the International Criminal Court by the U.N. Security Council since the resolution was adopted with strong support.
In the article, human rights activists have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program. To what extent do you agree that they have the right to do this?
I strongly disagree that human rights activists have the right to do this. Firstly, these human rights activists are not from North Korea and lack a clear picture of the situation in North Korea. They are looking at the issue from a foreigner’s perspective and lack the insight and true understanding a citizen of North Korea has. What they deem as an act against humanity may not be what the North Korea defines as a crime against human rights. These human rights activists only gain information about North Korea from leaks, or from the media. Reports from the media might not be a true representation of the human rights situation in North Korea. Also, in North Korea, there is a Public Distribution System (PDS) that requires farmers in agricultural regions to hand over a portion of their production to the government. The government then reallocates the surplus to urban regions, which cannot grow their own foods. About 70% of the North Korean population, including the entire urban population, receives food through this government-run system. This shows that North Korea is already trying to improve the standard of living. In the world, human right issue is still a very prominent problem. In many countries, not everyone is entitled to equal human rights and acts against humanity are still largely carried out in most countries. I strongly agree with North Korea's words of 'Mind your own business'. Countries which have voted for the resolution that North Korea's security chiefs and possibly Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un himself should be tried for ordering systematic torture, starvation and killings, may not even have provided their people with total equal rights and is still allowing acts against humanity to take place in their countries.

Lucia (4C) assignment 4

Qn 1: Is the BNW model of sex without strings attached and no concern about procreation, an acceptable one for today’s world?

We believe that the BNW model of sex without strings attached and no concern about procreation is not an acceptable one for today’s society. In BNW, Fanny accuses Lenina by saying that, “It's such horribly bad form to go on and on like this with one man.” Also, Fanny says “And you know how strongly the D.H.C. objects to anything intense or long-drawn. Four months of Henry Foster, without having another man–why, he'd be furious if he knew …” This shows that the society in BNW gives no thought for any form of emotional attachment, to the point of criticizing it. It is clear that to them, sex is only to fulfill their desires and nothing more. However, in today’s world, commitment is still very much valued and adultery is still frowned upon. Relationships still has a significant hold in today’s society. The BNW model will not be morally right in today’s world as it goes against values that have been taught since young, like commitment, loyalty and responsibility. Sex without strings attached will only cause the next generation to lack responsibility. Today’s world will frown upon such a model. Thus, we feel that the BNW model of sex without strings attached and no concerns about procreation is unacceptable in today’s world.