iphoting's Sink

Having read the news today, I was shocked to see a blatant article on the drastic raise of electricity tariffs overnight. Moreover, the article was phrased in such a way so as to put the blame squarely on the works of the markets. The timing however was not unexpected as articles on electricity conservation were published some days ago. It was the magnitude that did it.

Apparently, according to the article, the “Energy Market Authority” approved this raise. This certainly raises my eyebrows because this reflects succinctly which side this “regulatory authority” stands on. The next shock lies in their justification and their seemingly well prepared “charts and figures”.

In the first place, natural gas is used to generate electricity, not crude oil. Secondly, the price of oil has been falling for a few weeks and this raise in tariffs when the spot prices are low are hardly justifiable.

I’m wondering if this is a business decision gone sour and as a quick-fix to their bottom lines, costs are passed onto the customers.

“In a market where oil prices are relentlessly moving up, by pegging to three-month forward fuel price, we have been better off by and large,” said EMA chief executive Khoo Chin Hean, referring to how oil prices have surged over the last year.

So, the magic question is, “who pegged the prices?” And if they did as a form of “hedging”, it certainly failed and are paying for the risks involved; why punish the consumers for NOT making the decision?

As a regulator, the EMA has the cheek to tell consumers to “cope” by “using less air-conditioning, switching off lights and opening refrigerator doors less often”. It sounds exactly like a certain Member of Parliament telling members of the public on choosing cheaper groceries and foods. What has happened to saying NO to price increases?

Really, it makes me wonder what regulators and regulatory frameworks are for. From the MAS to EMA to the PTC, all of them are tasked to ‘regulate’ their various markets, but on whose side do they stand on? In truly uniquely Singapore, it’s anyone’s but the consumers.

Case-in-point, given the latest melt down of the following, “DBS High Notes 5, Lehman Minibonds and Merrill Lynch Jubilee Series 3 LinkEarner Notes”, the position of the MAS hasn’t exactly been regulatory in nature. It’s more like an arbitrator, trying to cast aside as much work and blame as possible, in total contrast to HKMA. HKMA went straight to meet with the investors and subsequently launch investigations into mis-selling, NOT hammer out a deal with banks so as to allow them to appoint “independent parties”. Appointing independent parties to report to the banks would allow their legal teams to plan defences from any possible malpractices, defeating the purpose of complaints in the first place.

Speaking of the PTC, I’ve seen more posters deterring commuters from under-paying fares than any form of service level improvements. Apparently, even with the installation of the EZ-Link system “to curb fare evaders”, the PTC still had to spend so much effort to deal with fare evaders, rather than the appalling standards of the public transportation system. Apparently, the profitability of the “public” transportation companies comes before service levels.

Anyway, in another year or so, I can’t wait to get out of this place. Maybe coming back just to cast my vote in the general elections.

This is probably what Apple meant when they say high-technology:-

It’s a flight simulator on the iPod Touch / iPhone. Review available here.

At 6.2 mb, this is a perfect demonstration of the true capabilities the Apple device is capable of.

Playing with my iPod Touch today, it suddenly occurred to me that this device is actually a multiple more powerful than my Tungsten | T Palm-powered device. This device has 8GB compared to 32MB in my palm; a screen 1.5 times bigger and brighter; and with two times the battery life and almost equal functionality. The only thing the palm device could do better is that it has bluetooth hardware. Everything else, including pricing, this Apple device triumphs; even 802.11g wireless.

Price-wise, the Apple device is half that of my previous Palm-device, at S$388. I bought my Tungsten | T 5 years back for roughly S$700.

Software-wise, given the recent release of the Singapore Bus Guide for the Apple device, this handly iPod is possibly on-par with the Palm at the height of its success.

Little did I expect, it is Apple, Inc. that surpasses Palm, Inc. with an equally easy-to-use device at half the price and double the technology.

Historically speaking, looking at the past decisions of Palm and Apple through their respective valleys of deaths, Apple has taken the route not travelled while Palm has taken the route most recommended by commentators, Dvorak and the likes. It’s an extremely rare and compatible foil between the two companies.

Commentators have suggested, when Apple was on the verge of collapse, some of the following:-

• License its OS to other hardware makers
• Copy Microsoft’s Windows strategies
• Compete directly against Microsoft in IT markets
• Split into hardware and software companies
• Buy Be, Inc. for its BeOS
• Adopt the Linux kernel
• License Windows from Microsoft

Those advice is what Apple has not taken but wholly adopted by Palm.

Look at the difference now: The Egregious Incompetence of Palm.

In other news, the iPhone is sold totally unlocked and contract-less at Apple Store Hong Kong, online, at ~S$1000 for the 8GB edition.

This is what you get if you expect the government to help its citizens solve basic problems:-

Lately, I’ve just started playing this game called Sudoku and found it quite interesting. As usual, the first thing that comes to my mind when I have a rough idea of how a game works is to code an algorithm to solve the puzzle using a computer.

There are a few approaches to this problem I can think of so far. The easiest and slowest of all is the brute-force iteration method. Just sub in a number, check if it contradicts any rules, and move to the next box, with a whole decision making tree of what to do upon alternative situations.

The second approach is by elimination. Fill up all the blanks with all possible but legal numbers. Through the checking of rules in a circular method from the centre, alternatives will be eliminated and most puzzles can be solved.

The third approach, the hardest and most interesting, is by inspection. By “visually” inspecting how set numbers are placed in a gird, reference to the rules of the game, some solutions are obvious and can be easily solved. The greatest challenge is to let a linear piece of code “read” the grids and say, “this looks like the only possible solution here”.

I shall think a little more about the data representation schema before starting work.

Python sounds like a rather good language to use...

Thus far, I’ve walked past a few ERP gantries by foot and have never failed to notice the charges flashed on the LED screen directly above the gantries. After having seen a few gantries, I’m confident to say that the rate they charge is inversely proportionate to the perceived speed of the given vehicle class, not efficiency in human transport.

To illustrate this point clearer, I shall use some numbers (the list below is non-exhaustive):-

Motorcycles: $1

Cars: $2

Buses: $4

Trucks: $4

If you are thinking along the lines like I did, you’ll be asking why are buses charged more than cars when buses in actual fact transport more people per vehicle than compared to cars, reducing the number of cars having to be on the road at that time should all the people in the bus at that moment be driving.

That form of pricing shows how short-sighted the ERP system is.

What I believe the pricing for ERP should be is as follows:-

Motorcycles: $2

Cars: $4

Trucks: $4

Buses: $1

The pricing should be inversely proportionate to the amount of people per vehicle it is licensed to transport, not surface area nor speed.

After all, the point of car pooling is to increase the efficiency and scale of vehicular transport. This simple principle should also be applied to the ERP-protected areas. Otherwise, it’s just a scam to earn more money while exacerbating the problem (to cash-in further in the future).