Updates on International Commercial Arbitration writeups
I did some updates on my arbitration write-ups, adding a few more questions and answers to the FAQ and adding a links portion to the write-ups.
I passed my GCIA!
I passed! I now officially have a Graduate Certificate in International Arbitration and I qualify for direct admission as a Fellow of the Singapore Institute of Arbitrators (SIArb).
It was tight, I admit, but the pass is all that counts. But I didn’t do too badly on my Award-Writing Practicum honestly, I thought I’d fail with that. Instead I did worse in my Arbitration Law and Practice paper.
Hurray!
Ockham’s Razor
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Recently Choon Keat introduced me to David Heinemeier Hansson’s latest thoughts in developing software. His thoughts stem from his interests in HTTP resources and that of a CRUD-constrained approach in application development. Of course, it’s Rails, but there’s nothing stopping us from applying the same principles in Java or any other platforms.
So what is the CRUD-constrained approach in application development? In essence it is that in all that you design, it needs to be constrained as a CRUD operation on a an object (Create, Retrieve, Update, Delete). That sounds pretty limiting — only CRUD? What about all those fancy business logic that is the heart of the application? Nope. Everything must be in a CRUD. If you have some logic (verbs) that doesn’t belong to a CRUD then you need to have a new object, and operations on it needs to be … you got it, CRUD. Radical.
I was quite thunderstruck when Choon Keat first explained this to me because I saw the similiarity between this and what I have always believed in. Simplicity, modularity and maintainability. It’s easy enough to understand why this is simple. Modular? The design is object-oriented (can it be not object-oriented?) and operations on the object are ONLY CRUD. What else can it be but modular? Maintainable? Since everything is expected to be CRUD, it is VERY easily to maintain the code.
But does it work? I don’t know actually. But it is a very compelling philosophy that twists things around. To me it’s like being analog all your life and suddenly this newfangled thing called digital comes along. It’s all 1′s or 0′s. You’ll feel uncomfortable as hell — what?? only 1 and 0? How limiting! But there’s a LOT of 1s and 0s.
Gotta try this.
Ockham’s Razor
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Recently Choon Keat introduced me to David Heinemeier Hansson’s latest thoughts in developing software. His thoughts stem from his interests in HTTP resources and that of a CRUD-constrained approach in application development. Of course, it’s Rails, but there’s nothing stopping us from applying the same principles in Java or any other platforms.
So what is the CRUD-constrained approach in application development? In essence it is that in all that you design, it needs to be constrained as a CRUD operation on a an object (Create, Retrieve, Update, Delete). That sounds pretty limiting — only CRUD? What about all those fancy business logic that is the heart of the application? Nope. Everything must be in a CRUD. If you have some logic (verbs) that doesn’t belong to a CRUD then you need to have a new object, and operations on it needs to be … you got it, CRUD. Radical.
I was quite thunderstruck when Choon Keat first explained this to me because I saw the similiarity between this and what I have always believed in. Simplicity, modularity and maintainability. It’s easy enough to understand why this is simple. Modular? The design is object-oriented (can it be not object-oriented?) and operations on the object are ONLY CRUD. What else can it be but modular? Maintainable? Since everything is expected to be CRUD, it is VERY easily to maintain the code.
But does it work? I don’t know actually. But it is a very compelling philosophy that twists things around. To me it’s like being analog all your life and suddenly this newfangled thing called digital comes along. It’s all 1′s or 0′s. You’ll feel uncomfortable as hell — what?? only 1 and 0? How limiting! But there’s a LOT of 1s and 0s.
Gotta try this.
Italy wins World Cup!
Italy has won! It was a good game, not as I expected it to be. Both sides played well and well into extra time, but Italy was flawless with their penalties, too good for France. It was unfortunate that Zidane had to go off — it all seems pretty senseless to me why he did it. I suppose this will be analyzed to the death in the next few days and perhaps he will speak more on this in days to come but for now it’s great puzzle why he head-butted Materazzi the way he did.
I was supporting France all the way but Italy deserved this win for their professional way of handling the game. And to top it off with their domestic league problems. What an interesting World Cup it has been!
Another month before the Premiership starts again. Time to rest for football I suppose. Lots of catching up to do for other stuff.
leave a comment