::Homework Crapbox:: (2017)
-
My my, they really have a love-hate relationship, don't they?
AllSingaporeStuff : "Mothership.sg caught posting fake news again! Don't trust them!"
https://www.allsingaporestuff.com/article/mothershipsg-gets-caught-posting-fake-news-about-malaysian-police-adMothership.sg : "AllSingaporeStuff caught posting fake news again! Don't trust them!"
http://mothership.sg/?s=all+singapore+stuff -
"Kungfu Fighter, Hidden Sugar" is so professionally done, it's almost un-Singaporean like, considering past government agencies' video efforts. Of course, the answer is that the government ministry responsible simply paid a lot of money to outsource the production to a professional video making company (which may not even be local), and which (as part of the contract agreement) remains unidentified (although the company which made the video would certainly list this video as part of the company's resume portfolio).
"Kungfu Fighter, Hidden Sugar"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TmNCt1N9_4Updated to add : The Straits Times stated that the company commissioned to make the video, is Tribal Worldwide, which is headquartered in New York (USA), but has a Singapore subsidiary : Tribal Worldwide Singapore / DDB Group Singapore / Tribal DDB Singapore, which indeed created the "Kungfu Fighter, Hidden Sugar" video. Check out more of their videos / advertisements / projects in the links I CSI'ed out below.
-
[Singapore] - Father of primary school girl barges into class, confronts the primary school boy whom his daughter said was bullying her, slapped him on the face (which caused the boy to urinate in his pants in front of the entire class), then lectured the class that they "should not behave like gangsters", while the shocked teacher watched.
-
[Singapore] - Bad review of service at KTP hospital
https://www.allsingaporestuff.com/article/khoo-teck-puat-hospital-sister-not-family-get-out-ae-room
-
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188752-chinas-supersonic-submarine-which-could-go-from-shanghai-to-san-francisco-in-100-minutes-creeps-ever-closer-to-reality
As you may already know, it’s a lot harder for an object to move quickly through water than air. This is mostly due to increased drag. Without getting into the complexities of fluid dynamics, water is simply much thicker and more viscous than air — and as a result it requires a lot more energy for an object to push through it. You can experience the increased drag of water yourself next time you’re in a swimming pool: Raise your hand above your head, and then let it fall into the water.
Anyway, much like a small-engined car is ultimately limited by its ability to cut through wind resistance (drag), a submarine or torpedo needs insane amounts of power to achieve high velocity through water. This is why, even in 2014, most submarines and torpedoes can’t go much faster than 40 knots (~46 mph). Higher speeds are possible, but it requires so much power that it’s not really feasible (torpedoes only have so much fuel).
How a normal torpedo works, vs. a supercavitation torpedo
Enter supercavitation, a technique devised by the Soviets in 1960 with the explicit purpose of creating high-speed torpedoes. Supercavitation gets around the drag of water by creating a bubble of gas for the object to travel through. The USSR’s research resulted in the Shkval torpedo, which uses a special nose cone to create the supercavitation envelope, allowing it to travel through the water at speeds of up to 200 knots (~230 mph, 370 kph) — much, much faster than the standard torpedoes fielded by the US.
-
Tillerson promised to send China a “clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed.�
Chinese also said earlier in January that the US is asking for “large-scale war� if it seriously intends to block China’s access to the islands.
-
[YouTube] - Things Bilingual People Do
-
[YouTube] - Are You Asian Enough?
-
[2 Broke Girls] - Max Moments: Season 1 (Part 1)
-
For the record, I strongly condemn hypocrisy and all hypocrites! ;Þ
(you'll see what I did there after reading the article below #meta-joke)https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/opinion/sunday/the-real-problem-with-hypocrisy.html?_r=0
-
I've observed and analyzed over a hundred professional street magicians or illusionists on video, and for most of the performances, could figure out how the trick was done. As with most street magicians or illusionists, some of Yif's tricks (eg. the long bread stick) are done using video editing and accomplices, but when he does a live performance (eg. the 2016 CNY performance below), that's when Yif shows he's clearly a cut above the rest, including all famous ang moh magicians including Criss Angel, David Blaine, Mat Franco, Darcy Oake, Cosentino, etc (who are already the best of the best in the industry). Watch the video below, and see if you can figure out how he does his mind-blowing tricks.
Yif Miracle New Year 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQi-znA5kHQ -
Chickens *can* indeed fly (exactly how well, depends on the subspecies). Pigs, on the other hand...
-
S’poreans reunite lost baby Kallang otter with its family
-
-
[Singapore] - Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, even if it's a lesbo woman lawyer with a master's degree in human rights.
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/jail-fine-for-lawyer-who-abused-ex-girlfriend-032437388.html
-
On March 23, 1994, a medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus and concluded that he died from a gunshot wound of the head caused by a shotgun. Investigation to that point had revealed that the decedent had jumped from the top of a ten-story building with the intent to commit suicide. (He left a note indicating his despondency.) As he passed the 9th floor on the way down, his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast through a window, killing him instantly. Neither the shooter nor the decedent was aware that a safety net had been erected at the 8th floor level to protect some window washers, and that the decedent would most likely not have been able to complete his intent to commit suicide because of this.
Ordinarily, a person who starts into motion the events with a suicide intent is ultimately deemed (legally speaking) to have committed suicide if he successfully dies, even if the exact mechanism of his death might not be what he had originally intended. That he was shot on the way to certain death nine stories below probably would not change his mode of death from suicide to homicide, *but* the fact that his suicide intent would not have been achieved under this particular circumstance (ie. because a safety net had been erected below, unknown to the suicidal jumper) caused the medical examiner to feel that he indeed had a case of homicide on his hands.
Further investigation led to the discovery that the room on the 9th floor from whence the shotgun blast emanated was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. He was threatening her with the shotgun because of an interspousal spat and became so upset that he could not hold the shotgun straight. Therefore, when he pulled the trigger, he completely missed his wife, and the pellets went through the window, striking the decedent.
When one intends to kill subject A but kills subject B in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject B. The old man was confronted with this conclusion, but both he and his wife were adamant in stating that neither knew that the shotgun was loaded. It was the longtime habit of the old man to threaten his wife with an unloaded shotgun. He had no intent to murder her; therefore, the killing of the decedent appeared then to be accident. That is, the gun had been accidentally loaded.
But further investigation turned up a witness that their son was seen loading the shotgun approximately six weeks prior to the fatal accident. That investigation showed that the mother (the old lady) had cut off her son's financial support, and her son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that the father would shoot his mother. The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.
Now comes the exquisite twist. Further investigation revealed that the son, Ronald Opus himself, had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to get his mother murdered. This led him to jump off the ten-story building on March 23, only to be killed by a shotgun blast through a 9th story window.
The medical examiner finally closed the case as a suicide.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxfA9SloVAU
The first person featured in the video, is this girl Akiane Kramarik and her exquisite artistic talent (her parents make over $100k per month from the sale of her artworks).
The 2nd guy featured, Ben the UK memory champ, managed to defeat his China opponent on an episode of The Brain of China, fyi.
At 31:51, a Singaporean boy is featured (whose parents had a public spat with NUS over their refusal to accept his primary school son as an undergrad). Ainan's structural formula at 37:00 contains a couple of errors, but hey, how many primary school kids even know what's a structural formula?
-
"On the Trail of the Golden Owl" is a 1993 treasure hunt consisting of 11 riddles that leads to real buried treasure (a Golden Owl statuette), but the riddles still have not yet been fully solved to this day. The man who created the treasure hunt died in 2009. The following are partial examples of some of the riddles.
WHEN AL-MAR ALLIES TO PRAENESTE FIBULA, DARKNESS SHINE
THERE IS NO WORSE BLIND PEOPLE THAN THE ONE THAT DOES NOT WANT TO SEE
FROM THE SKY COMES THE LIGHT
EARTH OPENS
WHEN ALL IS REVEALED
IT'S THE RIGHT WAY IF THE ARROW TARGETS THE HEARTOn the Trail of the Golden Owl
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Trail_of_the_Golden_Owl -
Challenge yourself to solve the famous triangle puzzle *without* googling out the answer.
Below the four parts have been reorganized. The four partitions are exactly the same in both arrangements. Why is there a hole?
-
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg posted a status update slamming President Donald Trump’s decision to sign executive orders on immigration.
This is a personal matter for Zuckerberg. He noted that his great-grandparents came from Europe and that his wife Priscilla’s family were refugees from China and Vietnam.
-
The Hardest Logic Puzzle Ever is a logic puzzle by American philosopher and logician George Boolos and published in The Harvard Review of Philosophy in 1996.
Three gods A, B, and C are called, in no particular order, True, False, and Random. True always speaks truly, False always speaks falsely, but whether Random speaks truly or falsely is a completely random matter. Your task is to determine the identities of A, B, and C by asking three yes-no questions, which you must correctly come up with yourself ; each question must be put to exactly one god at a time. Each god knows the true nature of the other gods, and they understand English, but will answer all questions in their own language, in which the words for yes and no are da and ja, in some order. You do not know which word means which.
Boolos provides the following clarifications : a single god may be asked more than one question, questions are permitted to depend on the answers to earlier questions, and the nature of Random's response should be thought of as depending on the flip of a fair coin hidden in his brain: if the coin comes down heads, he speaks truly; if tails, falsely. Random's response of da or ja is random per question (ie. might not be consistently True or False throughout the 3 questions asked, which makes the puzzle slightly harder), and not per session (ie. will be consistently either True or False throughout the 3 questions asked, which makes the puzzle slightly easier).
Click here for the Solution (the 3 required correct questions you need to ask are in quotation marks).
-
A classic riddle, which I posted here on SgForums a few years ago. Challenge yourself to solve it before you google out the answer.
Three men in a cafe order a meal the total cost of which is $15. They each contribute $5. The waiter takes the money to the manager who recognizes the three as friends and asks the waiter to return $5 to the men.
The waiter decides that instead of going to the trouble of splitting the $5 between the three men, he simply gives them $1 each and pockets the remaining $2 for himself.
Now, each of the men effectively paid $4, the total paid is therefore $12. Add the $2 in the waiters pocket and this comes to $14.....where has the missing $1 gone from the original $15?
