As a so called de-facto independent country, Taiwan’s politics has become the most prominent issue domestically and regionally. Nobody knows whether it is because of the democratization of Taiwan since the 1980s or it is simply based on the peculiar China-Taiwan Relations.

The Recent visit of Dalai Lama was supposed to focus on something essentially religious and charitable. Nevertheless, due to his troubled relations with China and the resentment of Beijing, his visit to Taiwan has been largely politicized. Not only did Beijing protest against the decision of Taipei to accept Dalai Lama, but also within Taiwan, different political parties have been struggling over whether it is appropriate to greet Dalai Lama with the respect of a Nobel Prize Winner and a great leader regardless of the political concerns.

Another more critical issue that has been bothering the Taiwan is the ex-president Chen Shui-Bian. His sentence has become the number.1 issue of the Taiwan for over half a year.

It has gradually transformed from a legal case into another crucial partisan battle field, just like many other issues.

Speaking of the ex-president Chen-Shui Bian, his mis-handling of the China-Taiwan relations and Taiwan-US relations around 2004 has been widely received as a disaster regarding Taiwan international space. However, if we look into what he has endeavored to do during his first term, it is not unfair to argue that actually his efforts was still evident in terms of reconciling with the mainland China. Even though personally I am not supportive of Chen, it is still necessary to reexamine what he has done at that time. Initially, although Beijing’s position on Democratic Progressive Party (DDP) and Chen’s pro-independence background remained adamant, during the first term of the Chen administration, both Taipei and Beijing did send some positive signals in terms of public statements (CRS 2006). Both sides aimed at maximizing their gain and profits, though different and hard to meet the ends, by riding on a relatively amicable cross-Strait relation. On the Taiwanese side, for example, “it launched what it called the “three mini-links“ –for the first time permitting direct transport, commerce, and postal exchanges between two outlying Taiwan islands and the south of China” On the Chinese side, it also attempted to work with the new administration regardless of its political ideology. In 2002, “PRC Vice-Premier Qian Qichen described pro-independence advocates in the DPP as only an ‘extremely small number’ in the Party, and he invited DPP members to visit the mainland under a ‘suitable status’ — a change in the PRC’s policy of not meeting with DPP members”.

In that sense, instead of saying it is all Chen’s fault, the fundamental nature of Taiwan’s existence has limited his potential to achieve his own goals, i.e. everything seems political in today’s Taiwan.

Ryan’s bookmarked link on delicious.com, from ReadWriteWeb,” Study finds social media is actually social.”The article summarizes that online participation and mobile phone usage leads to people having larger and more diverse core discussion networks, proven by a new study from Pew Internet and American Life Project.

When the finding shows that technology does not lead to social isolation, the reality becomes most online users are perfectly well-adjusted by the technology and the convenience. However, from my standpoint, the success of social media is based on not only the influence of connecting people but also the fact that definition of being social has changed.

Where people’s social activities take place? Without the presence of computer and the Internet, people talked face-to-face, that is the way people being social. However, nowadays, social media came out and has been getting more and more involved in our lives, people get used to talking on social media. Facebook, Twitter and any other types of communication tools that people are engaging is now what being called SOCIAL really happens.

I just a little doubt that those who surf the web and use their mobile phones may actually be more social and better connected to the world at large than those who do not. I could not help but think whether this is a kind of technology dependency? Without technology, can people say they are still social?

Our distance shortens because all of us are taking the advantage that technology and social media bring to us, so we can say we are social when we all jump on the trend, follow it and never go back. I have to admit that I am not a heavy user of social media, talking to friends and family on facebook. I just cannot imagine how it will be if all of our social tools are left nothing but social media. In-person contact means much more to me.

So, my point of view is that, social media is actually social, unemotionally. And social media cannot be always social without the basis of interpersonal communication. After all, we are man-made creature, tangible and solid. Not a social creature behind a facebook account on the Internet.

In response to GloryMarpr’s blog about Google, I probably share the same feeling regarding the convenience of different Google’s application and how they may have changed our thinking and life.

What I like the most is Google Map. If you are someone who prefers walking and taking public transportation, Google map could serve as the most useful tool for you. For example, if you are not sure about whether one place is metro-accessible, you can simply search the address through Google map and find out whether there is a metro station nearby or not.

Meanwhile, using Google map, you can also check out the surroundings of the place you will be visiting through the satellite function of Google map. For example, if you are not sure of whether there is a shortcut to an interesting restaurant and you have never been there, take a look at the Google map and zoom in. Maybe you will find out the easiest way from the parking lot to get there.

For those who are more comfortable with driving vehicles, Google map will also be highly helpful. Not only can you check out the driving route to get there in time, but also find out whether there would be some traffic on your way there. Google map has already established a function of figuring out traffic based on your direction.

We can expect Google map to grow along with the GPS system and iPhone . Actually iPhone and GPS have been using Google map as their basis to develop their service. Meanwhile, Google map has also been able to suggest nearby shopping, dinning and other recreational services integrated with the mapping function. In that sense, Google map has the potential to become a strong electronic entertainment and life guide.

One of the other things that I feel in common is about the Google Talk. Many people are enjoying Google more than any other chatting software (like MSN or chatting function of certain social media (like facebook chatting). First, some people argue that Google talk allows you to chat with someone you are more familiar with. Different from facebook, you can easily block someone without deleting their email addresses. Second, Google talk is integrated with Gmail (another magnificent invention of Google) to link the chatting with emails. More importantly, as compared with facebook chatting, Google chatting keeps the record of your online conversation. This has proven as one of the most important factors of measuring whether certain chatting software is good or not.

Google has so many good applications. Google map, Google earth, Google talk, Google trend and so on so forth. The next step for Google might be concentrating on how to make them more applicable and more multi-functional.

This man is truly amazing! How come his hands haven’t cramped?

Are you doing the same thing? clapping your hands right now?

Many people enjoy watching old movies and that’s why we have such channels as AMC and TCM in our television. Aside from those all time favorite movies featured John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, Paul Newman or Gary Grant, different people can always find a series of  classic hits through those channels that they particularly desired for and missed purchasing from DVD store.

On a weekday afternoon when I grew tired of reading and churning out papers, like always, I turned on my television and switched to AMC. The movie “ The Sound of Music“ was on air. It is a Hollywood Musical with Julie Andrews playing as the all time favorite Sister Maria. The Sound of Music is a simple 1965 film about a woman who leaves an Austrian convent to become a governess to a Naval officer widower and his seven children.

Even until today, there are uncountable fans around the world who have been continuing falling in love with this old movie no matter when they are born and when they watch it for the first time. There is even some sort of gathering activity in the move theatre whereby people watch the Sound of Music together and sing every soundtrack along with the characters because most of the songs are just amazingly popular, meaningful, and melodious.

In addition to the well-known “Do Re Mi” and “Edelweiss” that have already been imprinted on many people music mind, I have found another piece of soundtrack particularly interesting. It is called “My Favorite Things.” It is the song Sister Maria tries to sing to comfort the kids before bed time. Those favorite things sung by Maria are just so normal and trivial. Nevertheless, that song indicated Maria’s passion for life but yet her passion is always reflected upon simple meaningful joy in every detail of her life. People are able to appreciate her optimism and deep love for wonderful things in life thoroughly by this song. The song has also carried out a sense of austerity and simplicity that many aspects of modern life are missing. (Some said it is also Michael Jackson’s favorite song?)

My Favorite Things by Julie Andrews

The lyrics are as followed:

Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens
Bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens
Brown paper packages tied up with strings
These are a few of my favorite things

Cream colored ponies and crisp apple streudels
Doorbells and sleigh bells and schnitzel with noodles
Wild geese that fly with the moon on their wings
These are a few of my favorite things

Girls in white dresses with blue satin sashes
Snowflakes that stay on my nose and eyelashes
Silver white winters that melt into springs
These are a few of my favorite things

When the dog bites
When the bee stings
When I’m feeling sad
I simply remember my favorite things
And then I don’t feel so bad

Talking about the Obamania, everybody would think of President Barack Obama. The 2008 election has made him the name of the world 2008. However, increasingly people have shown another sort of obsession and maniac over the first lay, i.e. Michelle Obama. With more foreign visits finished and pending for the President, more media highlight is expected to fall on the one who is always standing beside the president.

One day I was listening to CBS’ 60 Minutes interviewing Mr. President. Considering how he showed his perfection again in giving speeches on the health care reform and Afghanistan for the past few months, I have become more interested in listening to his speeches.

I searched his speeches on Youtube but interestingly what I finally clicked on is Michelle’s speech at the National Democratic Convention. It’s literally a masterpiece of speech, no exaggeration.

Touching, sincere, thoughtful and inspirational. She is definitely not good looking, but nobody can ever doubt about her greatness, nor could people challenge the fact that Michelle has made her husband a better man, or that Barack Obama could never make it to the president without her, in other words.

I knew the stories even before listening to the speech, particularly the part about how Barack failed seven times dating her out, as she was his job mentor at the beginning.

After I listened to her telling her life stories, I was literally impressed to death. Although she did not live a miserable low-class life as a child, she worked hard all the same, paving her way to Princeton and Harvard Law School. She is indeed Obama’s best partner and company.

With just a bit reading over the wikipedia, I pictured a woman who is serious, mentally tough, articulate, thoughtful, capable, idealistic about public service, and sympathetic towards those who need help. Yes, Michelle, to a large extent, is better than her husband. If she was a man to run a campaign against B.Obama, she would blow him off easily. Trust me, as remarkable as that.

Mr. President, you were right, “You want a persistent president.” Keep the good work then. You were right on another point, “Michelle, you are unbelievable!”

PS: As far as Zodiac is concerned, Michelle Obama is a perfect Capricorn woman. She took care of the little Leo (Barrack Obama) quite well. Hmmm….how to say, always a successful woman behind every single successful man? A good wife is half job done? …hm?

Both are damn right, anyway!

American Football is a highly competitive sport. Millions of Americans, men and women, have learned to play the sport since their childhood. Aside from a professional league NFL, college football is also widely accepted as a national spotlight in the field of sports.

My interest in this sport started from watching ESPN live College Football games and other related shows. Filled with physical confrontation and intense hits, American football is easy to leave the image of a violent game to the audience who just begin to appreciate the game. However, once you research a bit deeper into the game with more basic knowledge of every single play and try to understand the game from inside out, it is actually an intoxicating sport that you can hardly resist.

Other than the offense and defense lines that basically simulate ancient war formations, the spirit of Football focuses on how to unleash your fear and nervousness by sacrificing for a team and making every play worthwhile. Every single yard on the field involves a battle, both physical and mental. Athletes learn to cooperate together as a team and play cohesively their own roles following the coach’s strategy and discipline.

It is thus more than a game with a gigantic stadium, huge number of audience, wild cheerleading teams, and beast-like athletes. Rather, the sport has become a tradition, a necessary part of American culture, and to some extent a faith of the whole nation.

The best example that reflects this notion is college football. Among NCAA football, there are different conferences and divisions that college players participate in. I have watched many college football games in some conference including Big 10, SEC, and ACC.

Among all the college football players I have observed, Tim Tebow, the quarterback from University of Florida, is probably the most impressive and most admirable young athlete. He was born in Philippines when his parents served as missionaries there. Such a family background has consolidated his faith in Christianity.

Another major part of Tebow that makes him different from other athletes is that he was homeschooled all through his childhood for the reason of instilling deep beliefs in God.

As the most famous college football player and the 2007 Heisman trophy winner, Tebow has naturally become a role model surrounded with media scrutiny and people’s profound curiosity. Nevertheless, such a highlight never makes him lose his faith, humbleness, and characters. He almost went back to Philippines every year in summer to teach young kids, support local families, and fulfill his missionary work.

Tebow not only has every skill necessary for a successful quarterback on the field, but also maintains incredible leadership to lead his team, i.e. the Florida Gator, to the two national Championship titles for the past three years. Again this year, he will be standing behind the Florida offense line against the Alabama Crimson Tide this weekend for the SEC championship title. As a senior who is about to graduate from college and is likely to be drafted to the NFL, people are counting down to watch his last few shows on the stage of college football.

Don’t go away, Tebow, see how wonderful you are.

However, as a user who also shares Facebook and Twitter account, I have been examining the effect of social media and which part exactly in political life Facebook and Twitter have changed.

One of the key factors that people have pointed out regarding his campaign center on how he managed to raise so much fund.  Social media platform is an excellent way of raising fund from individuals. Individuals’ fund, as compared to the GOPs financial resources which mostly come from huge enterprises and rich families, has essentially become a necessary part of Obama’s campaign fund.

One of the most prominent functions of social media is about bringing people together and collecting their strengths (including money) to endorse the campaign. That is, the power of collaboration. What is the best way at current times to raise money from individual supporters? Television and Radio may be a good way with ads distribution donation hotline or website. Fewer and Fewer would use newspaper as a major source. Considering the fact that the easiest way to donate money nowadays is electronic transfer rather than sending personal checks or cash, social media has become a highly effective platform of raising fund in terms of integrating itself with the online banking transfer. Simply typing your debit card or credit card number, or writing an e-check to support Barack Obama, your money could become part of the driving force that will eventually lead Obama to the White house.

Such a rationale works the same concerning the incoming 2012 election. What really matters in the American election fall on two key words: people and money. People are not only voters, but also the potential links that could bring other voters all along. Through social media, the power will exponentially grow. Remember Metcalfe’s Law? Money come from people’s wallets but it could also become another tool to draw more people and in consequence more money together to be a strong momentum to support a political candidate. In that sense, social media has every reason to become a major campaign target no less than Television based on its unique ability to help candidates effectively engage in people’s conversations and bring people and money together.

As far as the 2008 victory for Obama  is concerned, however, it is unfair to claim that his win is all because of his advantage in social media. As a terrific speech deliverer, a perfectly leadership type, and a charismatic African American, Obama enjoys too many particular characters that other candidates can hardly compete with. Nevertheless, without his emphasis on the social media to support his campaign, his win could not have been so successful, not to mention clinching the president seat. Thus for 2012, Obama may need to again utilize this vital tool to run for a second term and not surprisingly, other candidates will probably follow the same path. By that time, following the same progress of various social media sites, we can probably witness more interesting a battle on social media and both awesome and lame examples of how political campaigns depend on social media as a new edge. The winner in 2012 will appreciate social media and the loser(s) might blame for the lack of experience in manipulating social media.

Many professors consider Wikipedia an unreliable source of information in terms of academic writing. Based on my experience editing the Wikipedia, I have come to realize that it is based on a series of procedures in editing Wikipedia instead of simply jamming information up onto the page. Editing Wikipedia pages feels like playing around easy computer language. You have a series of simple orders to follow or you can click on the buttons embedded in the editing page. Pictures, texts, hyperlinks, audios and videos, it is a little similar to producing a webpage.

To some extent, it is easier than I thought to edit a Wikipedia page based on the easy-to-use editing function. On the other hand, it is also harder because of the reviewing process contributors may have to go through.

Many people have questioned the credibility of Wikipedia. For that reason, I have paid particular attention to the reviewing process of Wikipedia, i.e. how people review the validity of information of a Wikipedia page. It used to be based on a peer-review process. My understanding of the fundamental difference between Wikipedia writing and other encyclopedia editing is that Wikipedia articles are peer-reviewed after publication while academic articles are reviewed before publication.

However, since this August, the Wikipedia Foundation has announced that the English-Language site would start to flag all proposed edits to currently locked pages of live individuals. Contributors chasing the unique immediacy of Wikipedia editing might need to get used to waiting for editor approval.

This process has fundamentally changed and will continue changing the nature of using Wikipedia. More people (like me) will find it tricky to use Wikipedia based on the new reviewing process. However, it is fair to argue that such a review process has also made Wikipedia more open and freer because the previous method of vandalism prevention was to lock articles, barring them completely to users not registered for a certain amount of time.

Such a mechanism is not helpful for what the Wikipedia is attempting to do. This new method allows high-risk articles to be protected without instituting a universal ban. Shifting from the universal ban to a review process, Wikipedia is opened further, and that is the main effect, and that is their intent.

When it comes to user-generated website like Wikipedia, I have to admit that this website has fundamentally changed the way people can gain knowledge about the world by sharing the power of collaboration.  The notion of “wisdom of crowds” is brought up that draws masses to the Internet, and meanwhile it can contribute collective knowledge that outperforms even that of experts. However, with the feature that anyone can edit it, what the problem of Wikipedia becomes whether people are looking for “the wisdom of the crowd” or “the wisdom of a few experts.” The trust of either Wikipedia or expert-led encyclopedia depends on how the sources are provided by them. Consensus-based process of Wikipedia might result in inaccuracy based on the invisible agreement. However, Chances are that even experts might lie about what they know.

To be honest, most experts are a part of the various crowds as well. For certain things, letting the crowds make decisions works very well, and for others, getting the insight and collective viewpoint of people with more expertise makes sense. I think the best way that Wikipedia could be better set-up to better provide accuracy is to form a community, a small group of people who can look at a situation and think it through, based on their experiences. This community might be experts or not to offer their insightful knowledge and wisdom. It’s about getting valuable opinions of those who have lots of diverse perspectives and being able to see the interactions among those different perspectives to help the users understand what has impacted them in their lives.

No encyclopedia is perfect, and we will never reach an agreement on all Wikipedia articles. Neither will the experts. Sometimes just standpoints differ. Since the nature of Wikipedia is its open source content, just leave Wikipedia free for anyone to contribute their knowledge. Be sure of using Wikipedia with caution. While an invaluable first port of call, those using Wikipedia would be well advised to confirm their facts elsewhere.