A chicken apparently came close to being fined US$54 for jaywalking in California. Says the BBC:
“Linc and Helena Moore had been fined on 26 March after their chicken wandered onto a road in the small rural mining town of Johannesburg in Kern county.”
Lucky for the Moore’s the case was thrown out:
“The fine was dismissed after a lawyer for the bird’s owners argued that the fowl was domesticated and could not be classified as livestock.”
Under California livestock laws (#16902) – A person that owns or controls the possession of any livestock shall not willfully or negligently permit any of the livestock to stray upon, [or end up on] a public highway.
- which of course makes sense. Afterall, farmers should be responsible for looking after their livestock; and chicken are no exception. So the next time you see a chicken crossing the road, don’t bother asking it why – just call the cops.
On the 8:30 ABC Asia Pacific news tonight : a Chinese couple who face deportation for a failed asylum application. The couple reportedly cited the 1989 pro-democracy demonstrations in Beijing as their reasons for eligibility. What’s intriguing about this story is that the couple are from Hong Kong.
Some details were available through the ABC News Website, but strangely the article makes no mention of the couples origin. What amazes me is that this couple ever thought that they could get asylum in the first place on the grounds of persecution at home, when ever since the Tiannanmen Square “incident” thousands have demonstrated annually right on the streets of Hong Kong. This is one heck of a way (ultimately unsuccessful, I might add) to gain citizenship of another country! They achieved partial success – Mr & Mrs. Lo’s kids were granted Australian citizenship; but now the parents must go home.
Whether it was part of the deliberate plot to get the kids citizenship I don’t know – I failed to get further details. But it is clear that the concept of “thinking outside the box”, so proudly practiced by Hong Kong people, is often taken too far! If it’s any consolation – for all that has eroded in freedoms and liberties in Hong Kong recently, it’s still nice to see the city declared by some as ’safe to demonstrate in without fear of persecution’.
If only the Lo’s had burnt a flag before their departure!
General |
Posted by Terence
May
28
2005
Today’s SCMP had an article regarding the proposed HongKong-Zhuhai (香港～珠海) bridge, and how transport minister Sarah Liao pledges not to allow a repeat of the recent Easter Harbour Tunnel fiasco. What caught my eye was totally unrelated to this – but the article did mention right at the end that: “Hong Kong and Zhuhai also have different train systems, adding to the complexity of a train route.” [Hence they decided against a railway line].
I didn’t think Hong Kong and Zhuhai had incompatible train systems – so I looked it up and found this interesting page.
The SCMP is half right – the MTR system runs off the same gauge as the London Underground (1432mm), which makes sense since it was built by the British in the 1970’s and probably modeled on the tube. The KCR however does run on standard gauge (1435mm) and is hence compatible with the mainland railway system. What I didn’t realise was the MTR & KCR had a 3mm variation, as indeed does the tube vs. the mainline railways.
There are of course genuine reasons for choosing narrow vs. broad gauge railways – narrow tends to be cheaper to build and saves space but is less stable than broad gauge. It’s nice to see more of the world adopting a standard, as shown in this list, but it appears we’re still far away from a truly integrated railway system.
Why is 1435mm standard? Contrary to the urban myth about the backside of two horses, Discover Live Steam believes they have the true answer. 5ft (1524mm) however, is generally regarded as the minimum optimal gauge – so is this another example of the world adopting a less technically-sound solution for standardisation’s sake, perhaps?
General |
Posted by Terence
May
23
2005
Here’s something you don’t see every day : elephants on the rampage in the midst of a busy city. Whilst this news is now one month old, the restaurant in Seoul so unexpectedly terrorised by three of the five-toed pachyderms has now, apparently, just re-opened.
In addition to getting a free facelift, courtesy of insurance payout, the owner has renamed her restaurant to the unbelievably imaginative Restaurant Where Elephants Have Been. It has apparently taken a turn for the better though: the owner now offers elephant themed dishes and business has gone up.
From the BBC:
It now has a sign featuring three elephants and offers an “elephant set” – seven vegetable dishes and a hot soup, “since elephants like to eat vegetables”, she said.
What they should offer is barbecue elephant – with the meat so fresh it literally walks through the door, i’d be happy to pay a premium for that!
Those who missed George Galloway’s statement to the US Senate about allegations he received money from Saddam through the oil-for-food programme can view the full hearing video, streamed by the BBC. Or read the full transcript.
I wouldn’t vote for him, and I didn’t join his party. But nonetheless, his oratory skills have shown once again and made a complete fool of the US senate – more specifically, senator Norm Coleman. Whilst i’m in no position to side with either party, it is clear that Coleman should have better prepared his allegations and found more substantiated evidence. As it stands, Coleman looks nothing short of amateur in his proceedings and only shows that some US politicians would still stand by US pride and patriotism over rational well grounded decision making.
Update:
I don’t aim to form a personal opinion of Galloway nor start a debate here – but Harry does print a copy of the statement released by the Charity Commission regarding Galloway’s statement on his excellent blog. Much of his posts in the surrounding week also contain interesting comments against Galloway.
The Socialist Worker on the other hand has an interesting article on how they forged the case against Galloway.
Tuesday’s Technology Post in the SCMP highlighted the problem faced by many Hong Kong people these days : mobile spam.
Recorded sales messages – delivered at high speed through annoyingly high-pitched monologues – are now a mainstay of using a mobile phone in Hong Kong.
Answered in Hong Kong, these unsolicited calls may be little more than a rude interruption. Answering overseas, however, involves expensive roaming charges.
My last roaming bill from three days in Singapore/Malaysia was some $1600 – part of that thanks to sales calls I received during my trip. Telephone spam is becoming an increasing problem in Hong Kong, in a city that lacks legislation banning such cold calling to mobile telephones (many countries have laws against this). I easily receive at least four spam calls a week to my cell phone – usually a combination of both automated and human calls. Unfortunately, most have their caller ID’s blocked – now leaving me weary about answering unidentified calls. One such call was from Wharf Telecom (no caller ID) – they were advertising a service to “unblock all caller ID’s”. Oh the irony! But they don’t win my custom ; congratulations, they’ve now made my blacklist.
Sadly, most people in Hong Kong lack education of the fundamental moral principals of privacy and would fail to see the ethical problems of employing such tactics in the workplace. Education is definitely the key – business owners need to be convinced that there are better ways of marketing their products, and that treating your customers well is the prelude to a good long term relationship. Unfortunately, some Hong Kongers still have the “earn more now ; who cares if we see them again” mentality.
It’s good that the government is finalising an anti-spam bill – albeit not to be tabulated to Legco till 2006. Although it currently excludes voice spamming, this will hopefully be included in the legislation too. Nonetheless, such legislation has been long awaited – all I can hope is that punishments are severe. Nine years would satisfy me… per word.
Further to my previous post on trash culture, The Sun has a nice image of what they believe future street sweepers may look like. Personally I think the shoes are too shiny – and why is the guy given a brush?
I am reminded of the brilliant Monty Python sketch in which a cleaner was being interviewed about his job:
“I clean out public lavatories!” – he proclaimed.
“I see… is there a promotion involved?”
“Oh YEAH… In 5 years they gimme a BRUSH!”
And for the record no, I don’t usually read the sun. I was looking for toilet paper but then realised I couldn’t use the monitor to wipe my backside.
I’ve come across an interesting website on UK yob culture. Oh it makes me so proud to be British at times!! Or half at least.
It never ceases to amaze me how the UK has turned into a nation of rowdy roughnecks. Perhaps growing up bored on an island with hideous weather has led to the country’s ultimate demise – but hey, nobody ever refers to Greenland as a country full of trash! Seriously… going out for a drink or two to socialise can be fun. But doing it every day? For most people, drinking is a consequence of socialisation. For Brits – drinking is the socialisation; you do it to get pissed. I’ve never known such a pointless existence…
If ever a Brit grumbles to you about how poor they are, or how snobby you are (“ooh… rich kid buying smoked salmon for lunch”), then just kindly point out that if they reduced their alcohol intake by 50% they could probably even afford caviar. But they won’t have any of it – try it!
To drink and get pissed is to eat and have shelter, it’s a need not a want! Yes, that’s right folks, the rest of us citizens of the world are missing out and should apply to the UNDP for aid – since we’re evidently lacking in basics.
On another note, I think making young offenders wear uniform is a great idea. In fact, they should bring back the ball and chain too. Ahh yes… those were the good days…