Was so busy lately with assignment that barely had time to sleep (slept only at 2am last nite..sobx~!), not to say time to do other enriching activities such as reading newspapers... =(
It was only this morning that I thought I should give myself a break by reading some papers at least..this was when I started reading the some outdated (yesterday) news. Not too bad for someone who has no time to sleep lei. At least I still find time to read, better than nothing mahz.. =P
Came across a few topics that interest me:
The need to license music on blogs soon
In the news articles it writes that website owners could pay from $1,000 to $10,000 a year based on the number of songs. In fact, bloggers and personal website owners may soon be pressed to license the background music that they have on their online journals or websites.
Upon reading about this, I felt somewhat indignant. Just because the relevant authorities see the increasing number of people placing songs in their blogs they start to impose charges on the songs used. Is this some form of money-churning activity on their part again? I don't know much about how it works for a website but as far as I know songs being used in the blog is really for harmless purposes. Just as a popular blogger Mr Brown thinks that "For most of them, its mostly harmless fun. And more so, they've given the song free publicity."
This is what I thought too. In fact, most of this songs are just used to decorate the blog to make it less boring. So why the need to impose charges on them? And the most ridiculous part is despite them saying that a "reasonable" charge will be imposed, the estimate fees quoted by them is in the range of the thousands?! They seem to let the fact that apart from the working adults that have blogs and websites, there are also the students who barely have any form of income who have them too... (-_-")
Spare the rod and spoil the child?
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has announced initiatives to deal with problem parents and their unruly offspring. When he admitted that he has actually smacked his children (the older ones rather than the younger ones), it seems as if the author of the article and even the tv presenter was making way too much fuss out of it. In fact, Mr Blair himself seems somewhat embarrassed and was stammering with his response.
To me, I do believe in sparing the rod and that will spoil the child. Not as if I am encouraging domestic abuse. But knowing the way some kids behave, its only better that they are disciplined with the rod.
I am sure many have how terror some kids are. I remember not so long ago when I went to have my hair cut. There was this kid who just refuses to sit steal and allow his hair to be cut. He thinks that he is very cute when he runs around the whole salon trying to be all kinds of superhero - from suprman to spiderman. And the mum, who just all the time threatens to whack him with the magazine but never once really doing what she says. Haiz, the nuisance the kid made of himself and my long wait for my turn to come because of him just makes my blood boil. Almost wanted to scream at the boy to tell him to shut up and sit still. Grr..~!
But despite the beating, reasons have to be stated clearly to them for why they are beaten. if not they would just think that you are abusing your authority as a parent (Psst..I felt this way too when I was a kid. So I'd make sure I say the reasons next time). Hence, just because a parent whacks a kid, this does not mean that they are abusive. Most of the time its just an act out of a loving parents who wants more than anyone else for their own children to grow up useful.