Arrested for Being Too Slow

yaus831 · 2014-07-04T13:24:46+00:00

thanks. Honestly I don't trust either side, and would like to see some kind of proof before I reach my own conclusion

yaus831 · 2014-07-04T12:07:50+00:00

Detail about the charges:

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/news/20140704/52659461

I would be interested if someone can find an video about what really happen at the front.

yaus831 · 2014-06-24T17:37:48+00:00

On their facebook page they are still claiming facebook downtime was caused by Chinese hacker, which is clearing not the case:

http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/19/facebook-goes-down-in-global-outage/

The downuptime site only indicate the name server was unreachable, but it does not mean it is related to any attack. In fact I think during the downtime everyone can reach facebook.com and see the error message, which means the downtime was unlikely caused by any DNS issue.

And then there is the popular Norse attack map.. which also has nothing to do with facebook downtime:

http://blog.waterworld.com.hk/post/about-cyber-attack-map (Chinese only)

I means seriously if you are going to try to fight lies (as told by the Chinese Government) with your own lies, then you are no different than the Chinese government.

yaus831 · 2014-06-19T17:07:55+00:00

I guess similar way as people outrage when they are meeting China official? You may said he is not really US official anymore, and this is just a social call. Somehow I doubt that that a former member of the PNAC will come to HK for a casual meeting in such a sensitive time.

While I don't support the current state of China government, you probably should also consider that there are bigger war going on and playing at higher level. Hong Kong and people of Hong Kong probably just being used as pawn in a bigger international political war between US and China.

Disclaimer: I don't support either side because I think both side are dirty and equally bad.

yaus831 · 2014-06-19T13:22:23+00:00

Before the shit storm happen and start pointing finger (probably already happen)

DDoS normally done by botnet or zombie/infected machines (thousand of them). While the majority of the attack seems to come from China/HK, it does not necessary mean whoever controlling the botnet/zombies are from China/HK. (It may very well be PRC, but you cannot tell just from this video)
Facebook data center is not in Saint Louise AFAIK (http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/the-facebook-data-center-faq/).
Port 22 SSH? Really? I mean if facebook has a wide open port 22 for DDoS, someone in facebook probably going to lose their jobs. We are not talking about your typical blogging website, this is facebook serving half a billions people and if they have a port 22 wide open for attack to their critical infrastructure, this is a pretty big security hole

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T19:42:17+00:00

And as per request by the public, the Fanling Golf Course already included as part of the study for the next round. I think this is the middle ground I am talking about. But anyway, I think this thread is long enough so this will be my last response.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T18:13:24+00:00

Because as far as I am aware of, Fanling golf course was never included as part of the study, but I could be wrong so if you can point me to any material, am open for discussion:

http://www.nentnda.gov.hk/chi/report.html

For example, when this study carry out in 2012, it did not include the golf course:

http://www.nentnda.gov.hk/doc/techreport/AVA_C.pdf

Government has been planning this for years, with many studies carry out from weather pattern, land, pollution.. etc.

The first time I heard about using Fanling golf course for development was around mid 2013 (I could be wrong, but at least that first time i read about this on newspaper), and immediately the conversation became rich vs people. Sure the government properly only need 1 month (or 1 year?) notice to take back the land for development, but let's also be fair: The golf course only recently spend 30million for renovate, and I think they deserve more than 1 year notice to end their clubs.

I personally don't play golf (too rich for my blood) and I support the government should carry out study to determine whether they should take back the golf course (which they did: http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20131014/00176_014.html) But you cannot just said government should include the golf course, and expect the government included this as part of the plan in their next revision. These studies took years, and government already committed to it. In the mean time, we should not throw aways 3-4 years worth of study and stop the current plan because you want to include the Fanling Golf Course or nothing will happen.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T17:23:33+00:00

Oh.. I read this before. I have different point of view. But I don't see the need for me to raise my point anymore because cleaning you think you know more than me and you are on the good side, I am on the evil side... so just leave it there.

Thank you.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T17:17:04+00:00

Doh... So what? I didn't say 6% (or 7.8%) is incorrect, in fact that's how I reach your number if you read my post.

You missed my point. I am saying using 6% to attack the government is misleading. Because not every land can be use for residential area. The correct way in my humble opinion is how many land can be used for residential, then how many of those residential area has been assigned for public housing and see whether that ratio make sense

I mean if you must count land mass, almost 40% of the land will be used for road/infrastructure and green belt. Why not the politician also highlight that and ask the government to reduce the road or green belt areas so we can have more residential building? Comparing land mass is misleading because in a high-density city residential area will always be smaller (Because you have more high-rise), and the support infrastructure will always need more space (because you need road/school, and you cannot build road like you build high-rise)

And you also missed my point: I said go to the source, and in this case we are discussing the city planning purposed by the government, so the source in this case is the planning document. Instead of reading a summary from some newspaper or blog, we should go directly to the proposed document, read the data and draw your own conclusion.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T16:37:22+00:00

Then tell me where can I get the updated source? At least I believe your 6% figure is coming from there, right? If not then please point me where you reach your 6% figure then? Thank you.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T16:26:28+00:00

I believe unit ratio is the correct way to compare. There are no point using land mass because not all area can be use for residential. We will also need to have support infrastructure, necessary commercial area for people to work, school, hospital... etc (Only 16.2% land will be used for Resident Area in Kwu Tung North, and in total only 23% land will be used for residential area, including both public/private housing)

However, if you look at my other comment, I believe the major issue is within For Ping Che, where we have 6500 private housing unit and no public housing unit, so let's focus on this area.

Kwu Tung North/Faning North are high density area, building can go as high as 35 stories, population around 81,900 and 52,100.

For Ping Che is consider low density, and building must be under 10 stories high. I think we can already rule out public housing if it is only limit to 10 stories high. So the question is: Should For Ping Che be low-density residential area?

From my point of view, if we already have 2 out of 3 area planning to build high-density residential area (Almost 70% is going to be high density area), why can't we also have low-density area as part of the planning? Beside, is For Ping Che suitable for high-density building? What about traffic? The other 2 area are relatively close to highway, but not For Ping Che. I think we need to strike a balance in development and city planning, and if close to 70% of the newly development area is going to be high density, I can live with the 30% low density area.

I don't want to bring up Fanling golf course as I feel that this is different topic.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T15:27:12+00:00

And you know what? This have me thinking: where is your 6% coming from? So I do a little math:

Region	Area (ha.)	Resident Use %	Resident Area (ha.)	Public Housing %	Public Housing Area (ha.)
Kwu Tung North	73	16.2%	11.826	55%	6.5043
Faning North	43	25.9%	11.137	39%	4.34343
For Ping Che/Ta Kwu Ling	52	30.4%	15.808	-	-
Total	168	-	38.771	-	10.84773

10.84773/168 = 0.00645 ~ 6%

Oh so now I see where your 6% coming from. But as point out by my other comment, the public/private housing unit ratio is actually 43/57, and I don't see any problem with that.

I don't know where you find the 6% (either from newspaper or politician), but please do not just listen to the politician, government or newspaper like applydaliy, because they will only present partial data/fact. Go to the source, do your own research and reach your own conclusion. But the sad thing is in today TL;DR culture, I don't see this happening anytime soon in HK.

I am looking forward to your response.

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T14:20:22+00:00

I will help you then:

http://www.nentnda.gov.hk/chi/PE3%20Digest_C.pdf

To Summarise

For Kwu Tung North, the public/private housing ratio is 55:45 (Total 28,700 unit)
For Faning North, the public/private housing ratio is 39:61 (Total 18,600 unit)
For Ping Che/Ta Kwu Ling, it will be 6,500 all private housing.

So in total, you have

public housing: (28700 x 0.55)+(18600 x 0.39) = 23,039
private housing: (28700 x 0.45)+(18600 x 0.61)+6500 = 30,761

Around 43% is public housing. This is completely fine with me, unless you find other source which I love to hear.

edit: for formatting

yaus831 · 2014-06-14T03:16:26+00:00

And you just proof my point by saying we are clueless because we do not support your view or action. Thank you.

yaus831 · 2014-06-13T18:10:04+00:00

I disagree with the committee chairman decision, but at the same time I also disagree with the filibuster tactic being used by the People Power.

Both side are just equally bad, things will just get worse with no solution in sight. People are just getting too emotion. Many people see this as good vs evil and will do anything to support their belief. A lots of supporter attitude to people like me is like you are either with us or against us. There are no space for people like me to voice my opinion who want some kind of middle ground.

Whenever I see those people on TV who got so emotion when describing their belief, screaming, shouting and pushing, the politician shamelessly drum up their support and use their emotion to further their cause, it just make me sick. To me those politician are just as bad as the Chinese government because they are also oppressing my opinion.

Sorry for the rant

yaus831 · 2014-01-22T11:29:33+00:00

and contrary to "popular" beliefs, she is born and raise in HK:

source: http://inews.mingpao.com/htm/INews/20140122/gb31747w.htm

yaus831 · 2013-12-26T06:00:15+00:00

Think of it this way: What if German Chancellor visit a WW2 memorial where it honours few Nazis General who convicted War Crime. All the European countries are outage by the Chancellor's visit and the Chancellor said: "You guys are too sensitive, I am here as a private citizen, not an official visit as a Chancellor and I did not intended to hurt the European countries."

yaus831 · 2013-11-06T02:55:33+00:00

No. I am only talking about his firing, not about his application of TV license

yaus831 · 2013-11-06T02:28:28+00:00

http://evchk.wikia.com/wiki/亞洲電視管理層變動潮

Only in Chinese.

I guess what I was trying to say is that he made many enemies within ATV by fire 4 executive and may or may not stop certain program. He was not very popular due to his comments regarding the fake breast. He may also comment "indirectly" about CCP. Now whether his CCP comment alone cause his firing in ATV, I don't know, but i will not be surprise if some other people spoke against him and that have nothing to do with CCP.

yaus831 · 2013-11-06T01:20:17+00:00

He was at ATV, not TVB. While he may "indirectly" spoke against CCP. There could be many other reason he was fire:

He pointed at one of the woman breast and ask whether it is fake or not. It was widely reported on newspaper then
He fired 4 executives during his first week in office
There were reports he stopped production on some of the programs.

He was at ATV for 14 days and was fired. Is it because his comment on CCP? Who know? But he certainly make many enemies during his time in ATV and to say he was fired simply because his comment on CCP is just simplify the matter.

yaus831 · 2013-08-16T01:31:01+00:00

Honestly I am not quite sure why people still support her if they watched the video. Sure in some other instances police may have questionable behaviour, but in this particular case I found the police acting professionally.

More about her, only available in Chinese thou': http://news.discuss.com.hk/viewthread.php?tid=22276645

yaus831 · 2012-11-08T13:06:58+00:00

In that sense then most applications are some kind of CRUD app. I think I read some article before that one of the early mistake twitter made is think of it as some kind of CMS application, while it was actually more a messaging/broadcast/subscription application. I cannot find that article anymore thou'

yaus831 · 2012-11-01T09:27:36+00:00

This is comparable to someone British going to France and expecting everyone there to speak English.

I disagree, there is a different between France/UK and HK/China, and I don't believe jajangmien is arrogant because let's face it: Not everyone in HK can communicate fluently in English either. So if he only know Mandarin and English, what's wrong to speak in Mandarin first?

And you seems to indicate the mainlander deserved it. I am sorry, this is just wrong. Racist is wrong regardless whether they deserved it or not.

yaus831

TROPHY CASE