Mobile Application on Mindanao State University Essay Example for Free

Mobile Application on Mindanao State University Essay The proposed system entitled MSU Grade Module on Mobile using Android OS is a mobile version of the current Grade Module of Mindanao State University. This system enables the instructor to input grades and update INC grades at any location and at any time. Obtaining the Grade Module password is also done using mobile connection. Reasons: * With the convenience of an Android-powered mobile phone, the instructor does not need to physically go to the clerk to request for Grade Module password. * The Grade Module password is sent through email which is more secure than printed Grade Module stub. * The instructor does not need to be in their respective department or in the university to input and/or update grades. * The scarcity of available computers in the university is no longer a concern. * If the instructor is away for seminars, vacations, and other reasons, the instructor no longer needs to request favour from other instructors to input and/or update grades for them, thus the accountability of the grade resides only to the instructor in-charge and lessen bothering other instructors. * With this kind of application, an instructor can become invisible from students who keep following him/her because of various reasons. Possible Problem: * Not all instructors have an Android-powered mobile phone. * Not all instructors maintain an email address, especially those who are not technology-savvy. * Internet connection is not stable for instructors who want to input and/or update grades within the university. * The availability of online modules of the university is not stable.

handmaids tale Essay -- essays research papers

The central social hierarchy within the novel is the gender hierarchy, placing men in a position of extreme power. This is evident in every aspect of the book, as the entire Gilead society is male dominated. The Commander is at the top of the hierarchy and is involved with designing and establishing the current society taking control of a nation of women, and exploiting their power by controlling what is taught, what they can teach themselves and the words that they can use. Soon all of the women will become brainwashed, simply because it is made nearly impossible to defy the rules The Eye is the next highest up and are used as spies to keep the society the way it is and make sure no one consorts against it. Angel’s are next because they are men so they are higher then all women. Their job is to make sure they are all safe and basically the police force. Men are the only ones who may drive cars, own property, have bank accounts, work, or even read from the Bible or any other text. The next highest up is the commander’s wife. She has writes and privileges about all other women. Aunt’s are responsible for getting the handmaids ready for their society. They pound the ideas of the new culture into the handmaid’s head so that when they enter it seems normal. Handmaids are the next class, they are the only women who can reproduce they are forced to have children for upper class couples women are often compromised by a forced sexual nature, thereby allowing them to be blamed for problems of conception. Handmaids show which Commander owns them by adopting their Commanders’ names, such as Fred, and preceding them with â€Å"Of.† I.e. Offred is one of these unfortunate servants who are only right to exist depends on her ovaries productivity. She lives with her commander and his wife in a highly supervised centre. All female characters in the text are only mentioned in relationship to a male owner of some sort. We find out about how women are treated as walking wombs when the ‘Red Centre’ also known as the Rachel and Leah Centre. As the basis of the novel it is replicated many times throughout the book, it is found in the family reading before the monthly ceremonies, and in Rachel’s plea give me children, or e lse I die. This really puts emphasis on the threat to the Handmaids life. By failing to produce a child, they will be classed as Unwomen and sent to the Colonies to... ...they train the handmaids. You could tell them what you believed and hope for change. The commanders wife has privileges but a rough deal too because the commander still thinks of her as a woman and not an equal. As the wife I would try to put in his head that not al sex has to be for procreation. As a handmaid or lower options are almost none. You have to make friends and trusted allies to make a difference. There is strength in numbers, but it would be imperative that it remain secretive. But in the end I think its hopeless for them in the society they are in. I think The Handmaids Tale is a direct warning to modern society, Atwood underlines that all the points in her novel have occurred in the world previously, and if a half truth establishes itself, it could take place again.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It would be hard to know who to trust because of the eye. But I think that their society would not let any women be in a position of power over a man so women can be more trusted. The angels would not be able to be trusted because the young guys are to stead fast on their principals and can do irrational things. Your best bet would be to make friends with all the commanders.

Mongols Are Ruthless And Barbarians

In the 13 century a small tribe from the steppes of central Asia conquered much of the Middle East and Eastern Europe. The tribe was known as the Mongol warriors. The Mongols were ruthless and very barbaric. While the Mongols conquered many countries they didn’t care who they hurt. Even though they did benefit some of the areas that they conquered, they did too many bad things that over powered the good things. Their law was very confusing and at some parts it was unreasonable.They would torture survivors and they conquered more land than any of the greatest world conquest. As ruthless as the Mongols could be, to my surprise they were quite organized as a union. In documents 2 and 3 it talks about how the army should be organized and how they go out to war and fight. John of Plano Carpini wrote in document 2 that the Mongol organization was very precise and strict. For example 1 man was in charge of 10 men and 10 men were in charge of 100 men and if one member of the group fai ls or try’s to run away they would kill the whole group.This statement proves that the Mongols were all about war and rules. Document 3 talks about already being on the battle field. In the passage it says â€Å"chiefs or princes of the army do not take part in the fighting but take up their stand some distance away facing the enemy†. The Mongols were very smart people for example to make their fighting group look bigger and to give out a scary impression they would put figures of men and set them on horses.They would also send a group ahead to start the fight and when they enemy would get tired a new and fresh set of Mongol warriors would appear to continue the fight. Sometimes they would even take the fat of the people they killed and melt it then throw it on houses and wherever the fire falls on the fat it is almost inextinguishable that’s why they call it â€Å"Greek Fire† which proves just how ruthless and barbaric they truly were.John of Plano Carpi ni probably wrote both of these passages because he was the first European to visit the Mongols in their homeland and got to experience the ways of the Mongols first handedly in the point of view of a non-Mongol. In documents 1, 4 and 5 it talks about the amount of conquered land and the number of tragic deaths or just the death caused by the Mongols in general. Document 1 shows all the big invaders of history and how much they invaded in a chart and it shows that Genghis khan took the lead with 4,860,000 square miles, ahead of alexander the great, Adolf Hitler and Cyrus the great.It also shows a graph of the Mongol empire after the death of Genghis khan and the land was divided into 4 parts for his grandsons which helps us prove that he was all about proceeding his role and the bigger the amount of land he had the better which sounds really selfish and mean. The next document which is doc. 4 is a passage from Ata-Malik Juvaini who was a Persian chronicler who was in the employ of t he Mongol II-khan of Persia who served under the Mongols rule as the governor of Bagdad. The passage informs us about the invasion between the Mongols and the city of Nishapur, a city in Persia.It states that Nishapur had a good defense system with three thousand crossbows, three hundred mangonels, and a quantity of missiles and naphtha but that still wasn’t enough to defeat the attack of the Mongols which clearly shows how powerful they were. A time later after the attack there were walls covered in Mongols and they began to slay and plunder the people and even worse they drove out all the men, women, and children who survived out into the plains where killed them all and if that doesn’t prove that he was ruthless then I don’t know what will.The next evidence that Ata-Malik Juvaini provided for us is a chart of different places that were attacked and how much people died and or if there were no survivors. Juvaini wrote the passage because he got to see what was going on but what I would have liked more is a passage from a Mongol soldier’s point of view to see if some of the soldiers thought that what they were doing was a bit too extreme. In document 5 the Mongols were once again demonstrating another act of inhumane cruel behavior.It’s a scene from a Persian manuscript showing the Mongols soldiers shoot some of the survivors with arrows while they also buried the rest of the survivors upside down in the ground face first and to be honest it doesn’t sound so comfy. Even though historians like myself try everything in their power to set the record straight about the Mongols being ruthless barbarian there is always a group of people who dare to argue. They say that the Mongols benefited many of the places that the conquered like for example the Persian silk industry also benefited from the Mongol conquest by all the contacts that opened up with china.Another benefit is that Persian winemakers thrived under the Mongol co ntrol because the Mongols were such heavy drinkers (doc. 6) and the list from there goes on and on at least that what they say. They also say that the Mongols did demonstrate some act of kindness like the fact that the leader of the Mongol empire, Genghis’ khan, outlawed any acts that involved theft and adultery. Ibn Battuta said that if you lost something on your way expect it to be brought to you because the law against theft was that strict (doc.7).They also created or started up messaging systems. First they would send a man 25 miles to the posting station but in their language it was called yams. Once the man arrive, he packs the mail onto the horses and they take it from there. If they ever come across a lake or a river then the messenger’s must pass through with ferry boats that are kept by neighboring cities (doc 8). The thing that sold the Mongols good act to many people was the fact that the Mongols was tolerant of many religious.In what looks like a journal it gives us proof that Mongke Khan, who was the fourth great Khan, gave a speech saying â€Å"But just as God gave different fingers to the hand so has He given different ways to men. † (Doc 9) What all of these documents have in common is that they showed what the Mongols did to benefit many places that they conquered and yes they did contribute a lot but they did too much wrong to forget the fact that they are ruthless killers. Many of the Mongols laws also showed evidence that they were strict, ruthless, and unreasonable people.Like on their laws about adultery it says that whoever commits the crime of adultery they shall be executed. But it also says that if you are a non-believer and you want to get with the married woman then you have to kill her husband first. Another outrageous fact about their law that I found out about is that the man could have as many wives as he can keep. It was a general custom for them to marry any of their relationships except with their mothe r, daughter, or sister but they could still marry their step sister and his father’s wives but only after the father has passed.To the Mongols, drunkenness is considered an honor among their fellow people. (Doc 10) This whole article clearly proves that the Mongols were very weird, disgusting, and uncivilized barbarians. Even though the Mongols conquest did benefit the conquered lands by giving religious tolerance, outlawing theft and adultery and a little bit more but it still doesn’t wipe away the fact that they were cruel with the way they treated survivors and the number of deaths that were caused by them.Also it doesn’t change the fact that they have took away so many home and live from the people of the lands that they have conquered. Last barbaric act that they have committed is that their laws to their people were uncivilized I mean 1 man could have as many wives as he could hold and their punishments all led to execution. So through all of this evidence it clearly shows that the Mongols were in fact ruthless barbarians. Mongols are Ruthless and Barbarians In the 13 century a small tribe from the steppes of central Asia conquered much of the Middle East and Eastern Europe. The tribe was known as the Mongol warriors. The Mongols were ruthless and very barbaric. While the Mongols conquered many countries they didn’t care who they hurt. Even though they did benefit some of the areas that they conquered, they did too many bad things that over powered the good things. Their law was very confusing and at some parts it was unreasonable.They would torture survivors and they conquered more land than any of the greatest world conquest. As ruthless as the Mongols could be, to my surprise they were quite organized as a union. In documents 2 and 3 it talks about how the army should be organized and how they go out to war and fight. John of Plano Carpini wrote in document 2 that the Mongol organization was very precise and strict. For example 1 man was in charge of 10 men and 10 men were in charge of 100 men and if one member of the group fai ls or try’s to run away they would kill the whole group.This statement proves that the Mongols were all about war and rules. Document 3 talks about already being on the battle field. In the passage it says â€Å"chiefs or princes of the army do not take part in the fighting but take up their stand some distance away facing the enemy†. The Mongols were very smart people for example to make their fighting group look bigger and to give out a scary impression they would put figures of men and set them on horses.They would also send a group ahead to start the fight and when they enemy would get tired a new and fresh set of Mongol warriors would appear to continue the fight. Sometimes they would even take the fat of the people they killed and melt it then throw it on houses and wherever the fire falls on the fat it is almost inextinguishable that’s why they call it â€Å"Greek Fire† which proves just how ruthless and barbaric they truly were.John of Plano Carpi ni probably wrote both of these passages because he was the first European to visit the Mongols in their homeland and got to experience the ways of the Mongols first handedly in the point of view of a non-Mongol. In documents 1, 4 and 5 it talks about the amount of conquered land and the number of tragic deaths or just the death caused by the Mongols in general. Document 1 shows all the big invaders of history and how much they invaded in a chart and it shows that Genghis khan took the lead with 4,860,000 square miles, ahead of alexander the great, Adolf Hitler and Cyrus the great.It also shows a graph of the Mongol empire after the death of Genghis khan and the land was divided into 4 parts for his grandsons which helps us prove that he was all about proceeding his role and the bigger the amount of land he had the better which sounds really selfish and mean. The next document which is doc. 4 is a passage from Ata-Malik Juvaini who was a Persian chronicler who was in the employ of t he Mongol II-khan of Persia who served under the Mongols rule as the governor of Bagdad. The passage informs us about the invasion between the Mongols and the city of Nishapur, a city in Persia.It states that Nishapur had a good defense system with three thousand crossbows, three hundred mangonels, and a quantity of missiles and naphtha but that still wasn’t enough to defeat the attack of the Mongols which clearly shows how powerful they were. A time later after the attack there were walls covered in Mongols and they began to slay and plunder the people and even worse they drove out all the men, women, and children who survived out into the plains where killed them all and if that doesn’t prove that he was ruthless then I don’t know what will.The next evidence that Ata-Malik Juvaini provided for us is a chart of different places that were attacked and how much people died and or if there were no survivors. Juvaini wrote the passage because he got to see what was going on but what I would have liked more is a passage from a Mongol soldier’s point of view to see if some of the soldiers thought that what they were doing was a bit too extreme. In document 5 the Mongols were once again demonstrating another act of inhumane cruel behavior.It’s a scene from a Persian manuscript showing the Mongols soldiers shoot some of the survivors with arrows while they also buried the rest of the survivors upside down in the ground face first and to be honest it doesn’t sound so comfy. Even though historians like myself try everything in their power to set the record straight about the Mongols being ruthless barbarian there is always a group of people who dare to argue. They say that the Mongols benefited many of the places that the conquered like for example the Persian silk industry also benefited from the Mongol conquest by all the contacts that opened up with china.Another benefit is that Persian winemakers thrived under the Mongol co ntrol because the Mongols were such heavy drinkers (doc. 6) and the list from there goes on and on at least that what they say. They also say that the Mongols did demonstrate some act of kindness like the fact that the leader of the Mongol empire, Genghis’ khan, outlawed any acts that involved theft and adultery. Ibn Battuta said that if you lost something on your way expect it to be brought to you because the law against theft was that strict (doc.7). They also created or started up messaging systems. First they would send a man 25 miles to the posting station but in their language it was called yams. Once the man arrive, he packs the mail onto the horses and they take it from there. If they ever come across a lake or a river then the messenger’s must pass through with ferry boats that are kept by neighboring cities (doc 8). The thing that sold the Mongols good act to many people was the fact that the Mongols was tolerant of many religious.In what looks like a journal it gives us proof that Mongke Khan, who was the fourth great Khan, gave a speech saying â€Å"But just as God gave different fingers to the hand so has He given different ways to men. † (Doc 9) What all of these documents have in common is that they showed what the Mongols did to benefit many places that they conquered and yes they did contribute a lot but they did too much wrong to forget the fact that they are ruthless killers. Many of the Mongols laws also showed evidence that they were strict, ruthless, and unreasonable people.Like on their laws about adultery it says that whoever commits the crime of adultery they shall be executed. But it also says that if you are a non-believer and you want to get with the married woman then you have to kill her husband first. Another outrageous fact about their law that I found out about is that the man could have as many wives as he can keep. It was a general custom for them to marry any of their relationships except with their moth er, daughter, or sister but they could still marry their step sister and his father’s wives but only after the father has passed.To the Mongols, drunkenness is considered an honor among their fellow people. (Doc 10) This whole article clearly proves that the Mongols were very weird, disgusting, and uncivilized barbarians. Even though the Mongols conquest did benefit the conquered lands by giving religious tolerance, outlawing theft and adultery and a little bit more but it still doesn’t wipe away the fact that they were cruel with the way they treated survivors and the number of deaths that were caused by them. Also it doesn’t change the fact that they have took away so many home and live from the people of the lands that they have conquered. Las

The Dirty Heads Relationship - 1717 Words

For any market to achieve success, said market must define, create and outline some measure of happiness for its consumers. A solid awareness and knowledge of what makes a consumer satisfied will generally lead to successful business for any specific market. However, if a particular market of an economy attempts to define happiness for its consumers, don’t they have an obligation to accurately appeal to their targeted audience? Does the cost to a consumer’s morals and ideals matter? What’s the cost for that? A television show may try to define their consumer’s happiness by a mutual connection to plot or cinematography. A musician or band may try to define their consumer’s happiness by a connection to music genre, tempo, style, title, or†¦show more content†¦The album’s title Any Port in a Storm is an idiom: sailors thankful for a place of safety when dangerous gales arise. It is a fairly common expression. Many have, or are, dealing with the challenges of finding a safe, comfortable place to rest. We all need to feel that we belong, that we are accepted. Social norms and themes such as the ones expressed in this album are generally positive, but at a point may lead to negative pressure. When social norms suggest that you drink to fit in, the expressions are no longer beneficial. Finding safety in a port that harbingers drugs and alcohol may be harmful. According to a scientific journal by accredited health professionals, â€Å"The ‘Susceptibility to P eer Pressure’ index correlated more highly with†¦ adolescent substance use, [and] misuse† (T.E. Dielman). A susceptibility to peer pressure leads to an increased risk of substance abuse. The album’s cover shows the band’s name, The Dirty Heads, in large white font, as well as the band’s peers split in two; some are enjoying commanding their vessel and drinking. Others are pulling the boat lying on the desert floor; baking in the hot sun. The album shows two members of the band struggling and the other two relaxing together, looking for their port in the storm. The lead singer and guitarist are working and the other band members are basking in the sunny success. If everyone needs to fit in, then don’t we all have to work equally hard? This album suggests otherwise. Every