Mostly Harmless

Right to Education for all children below 14

2009-10-26T05:42:00.000-07:00

Right to Education for all children below 14

Siddharth Khadke

what about food and medicine?

Rajaram Gaunker

its not today cause .. food and medicine for all ..

Siddharth Khadke

just like an army cannot march on an empty stomach, children cant study when they are sick or hungry.

Rajaram Gaunker

Food and healthcare for everyone even if it with compromise of freedom and equality of more fortunates.

Siddharth Khadke

Lets assume a being, X finds "itself" on this planet. Doesn't justice (man made concept) dictate that it gets at least whatever it needs for basic survival? I would say that the fortunates are getting a good deal.
Freedom and equality are also man made concepts. The only natural concept is survival of the fittest, in which there are only 2 rights :-
1) anyone can attack anybody for anything.
2) anyone can defend anybody from anything.

Man made concepts are designed to make life comfortable for "everyone", so that we all have a better quality of life compared to the jungle. And as long as we are at it we might as well strive for better concepts. Maybe I should publish a paper on this.

2009-06-22T19:46:00.001-07:00

the tide turns slowly but surely
don't care how much it snows or rains
when you are at it relentlessly
things do change no matter how much it pains

Run to the hills, run for your lives

2009-02-07T19:59:00.000-08:00

Non-professional runners running in a marathon is an interesting psychiatric reaction to some completely unrelated problem. It is frustrating when you can't do anything to fix your problems of social nature. You are tired of bomb blasts, don't know what to do? run. You are tired of eve teasing? don't know what to do? run. And surprisingly it works. The media covers these events, and maybe just maybe the tv cameras pick up the slogan on your t-shirt.

But the problem is that making others aware is just the start. Your job is not yet done. But all the running and hardwork makes you feel that you have done your part and you feel that now you can move on! Sorry guys it does not work that way. There is no tangible change.

I have asked this question on answers.yahoo.com too.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090207201123AAxfJKw

Obama

2009-01-22T22:16:00.000-08:00

It looks like Obama is the only one who is unemotional and focused on "results" and "change" right now. Everyone else, especially the very people who support him and voted for him are consumed by an emotional tsunami. People are busy loving the thought that America finally has a black President. If anything they need to ask why is it so late. Instead of celebrating this in such an illogical way! Leaving all that aside, irrespective of whether Obama is white blue or black, I think the celebrations should wait until Obama executes his plans.

Hold your horses guys.. celebrating for no reason makes it cliched and it gradually looses meaning. Lets see a tangible change. Lets not forget what Obama keeps repeating. "Change". Lets judge him by that alone. Because, if we fall in love with the thought that humanity somewhere rose above illogical racial thoughts and chose the better candidate even though he was black, we are taking a very small step. The world still needs to be changed.

"The world does not change just becuase our perspective has" - Alan Kay

The connection between Egalitarianism and Vegetarianism.

2008-10-04T03:11:00.001-07:00

Theme : No hipocrisy. Either accept the legality of genocide, or let animals have what is rightfully theirs.

Note: I actually wrote all of this in Jan 2008, it states a few reasons (other than the obvious ones), as to why I am vegetarian.

I think every person is unique. Everyone has a different set of skills, looks, abilities and talents which come naturally. Again there are some skills one accumulates over one's lifetime. Some people look better than others.

I need to read what Lawrence Summers and Dr James Watson have to say.

As far as statistics are concerned, I have stated my view about it before. What the bell curve about IQ might say is "Most Africans have a lower IQ than Europeans". Things we can deduce from that :-
1) There might be some Africans who have a higher IQ than Europeans
2) The IQ tests might include questions which are seemingly mundane for Europeans but completely new to Africans.
3) And the most obvious one which the title of the statistics anyway tells us.

example for 2 is a question from an IQ test I found on the net :-
"Some months have 30 days, some months have 31 days. How many months have 28 days?"

Most Africans might not be able to answer this. But if you ask this question :-
"Look at the sun and tell what time it is" or "Tell me whether there is a lion hiding behind that bush"...
An African will be able to answer better. A bell curve on physical abilities, or sports would probably find that :- "Most Africans are better at sports than the Europeans". Look at the graph above, no matter who you are, and which race you belong to, there seem to be people from other races ahead of you.

I am tired of using the words "probably" and "maybe" and "might".

Is the progress of civilization a good indicator of the ability of a race?

"Lucy" probably one of the first human beings lived in present day Ethiopia. It all started there. The oldest civilizations were in Iraq, India, China and Egypt. In those times the north-western races wanted to live on the products of these old civilizations. Civilization is a good measure of the abilities of the race (If we really need that information for some purpose). But then there are a few caveats there too. Often we have come across cases where todays successful civilizations chose to rob/kill/mooch from other civilizations (though it happens even today), and that has played an important part in their success/survival. Then there is the example of Russia and more recently China, who have experienced economic development at the expense of individual freedom.

Right, individuals are NOT equal. A comparison of ethnic groups depends on the attribute you are measuring, is it height? intelligence? fairness? I think that Indians(brown coloured) and Chinese(yellow coloured) have by and large busted the notion that intelligence and fairness have a co-relation. The Africans have busted the notion that fairness and physical abilities have a co-relation. But, I do not see why rights should be unequal. In fact (the fact that individuals are NOT equal) we should have equal minimum rights. That would be the only way to ensure that evolution takes its own course! That would be the only way to ensure meritocracy. Regarding gender equality, I think the denial of equal rights to women in Islamic countries is one of the main reason for their backwardness. The Islamic countries' backwardness that is.

The path out of this seeming dilemma is to define what are the rights :-
1) Right to life is basic.
2) Right to property (a product of your time and energy)
3) Right to freedom of speech (unless if it is a declaration of mal intent, or initiation of force)
4) Right to protect the above through fair and just means.

I could go on and on, but then no "right" can trample on these 4. Also the question will arise later, as to who has these rights and who does not.

"survival of fittest" is natural.

One animal killing another for food. The best killer survives. Mooching?
What got me thinking is that - why differentiate between savage humans and animals? And if you don't would you respect those humans' right to "be"? Another question is can you classify a whole "race" as sub-human based on their performance so far? - I think not, for reasons I have given before, so I think this clinches the issue.

A mosquito repellant. Why this kindness towards an insect which causes so many dreadful diseases... The mosquito simply keeps coming back. That is the only way it knows to live, to suck your blood. Why leave it alive if you have a choice?

what would you say to a hunter, or a fisherman. Don't they take the life of an animal (I do not care for what reason). And so they do not allow the animal to "BE". Even in the case of domestication the "will" of the animal is overcome first. I am not contesting that animals should have rights. What I want to find out is, where does one draw the line between an animal and a man? Is having 2 arms and 2 legs and standing upright enough? No. It is the faculty of reason and the ability to conceptualize and intelligence that makes a human a human. And so, who has rights and who does not.

About hitler.
What would you do if you belonged to a species that was superior to humans? In intelligence, physical ability all possible fields. To make it simple, if you have seen the movie X-men, what if that were true? Then humans would be to them (the X-men), what animals are to us. Right? Or better still, what if a more intelligent species of aliens came to earth?

For those who have not seen X-men. X-men are people who have superpowers. They are highly evolved and "superior" to humans.

Disclaimer : This post is strictly hypothetical and cannot be called racism as I compare 2 different species and not ethnic groups within the human species.

Regarding co-operation and friendship, I think that is the exact relationship that Humans and animals should share on earth. But it is on human terms and conditions. And most of the violations of "co-operation" are from the human side. Humans are a part of nature, as are animals and plants. Humans need to make sure that their actions are in harmony with the nature of nature. (corny?). Any distruction caused to nature is indirectly a distruction of humans.

Historically relations between ethnic groups also has been similar to this. Some races have tried to enslave others. But I daresay that the best scenario has been when there was an atmosphere of co-operation and friendship (as it is the case today). I am all for friendship.

case for vegetarianism

While each individual needs to make his/her choices on her own. I would like to present the strong case in favour of vegetarianism.

It boils down to the whole human-animal interaction issue. We think mooching off another man is immoral, why do the rules change when it comes to mooching from an animal? I don't think there is anything wrong with consuming dairy products as animals domesticated for dairy products are well fed and get medical care etc. In that way, I don't think becoming a vegan is an answer. Consumption of dairy products and eggs is infact keeping these animals alive and kicking, else the cow would have been extinct and the chicken would be just another dodo. But we need to make sure that they are kept in good health. I am sure most people who consume dairy products would readily pay more for a product which comes with a peta certificate or something. For those who like to think that plants and animals are same and as such, living things! The process of photosynthesis would help you to differentiate. Plants as such convert water, CO2 and sunlight to glucose, O2 and water vapour. Fungi converts dead matter to food. Plants are the food producers of the planet, and exist to provide food and fresh air. What do you think they make fruits with seeds in them for? What do you think happens to a tree which ventures too far away from its roots? I would say that these biological processes (along with the fact that animals have many more faculties, senses etc..) make plants fundamentally different from animals, and thus give the moral sanctions to animals to use them for personal purposes. Again, remember what I said about harmony with nature and do not go overboard when you clear them greeny forests. :) Animals and humans complete the cycle by consuming this food and taking care of the plants (nourishing them with good soil, water, fertilizers, even helping them to reproduce). And again, I cannot prove to those who believe that animals like plants exist as a part of nature's bounty to be used by man, that it is morally wrong to do so. I would say just check the length of your canines, and don't stop at animals, I don't know what would stop you from eating a fellow human. Thats all.

Unlike some baba in Ashram, I am not asking anyone to stop eating nonveg and drinking alcohol just because I think it is "bad". I am asking you to justify the apparent "duality/hypocrisy". With reasons as to how mooching from animals is different from mooching from other men. Are we to differentiate between animals based on their appearance alone?

Are we absolutely sure we are "superior" to animals?

Until the time we are sure. Let animals have their fundamental rights. The right to life, right to property (habitat)

I would rather...

2008-09-19T08:13:00.000-07:00

There were so many small walls which made it look harder,
In a childish rush, I ran up to it,
I looked closely, I screamed bloody murder,
there was a flash, the day was starlit.

What I thought was a wall, turned out to be just that,
meekly I tried again, and scraped over,
the deep blue sea behind, swelled, right there I sat,
tasted the salty water, I continued to stutter.

The valley was nice, plush and green,
the mountains were better, behind the cloud cover,
the sun makes it harder, but the obvious things went unseen,
the rest of the walls, now somehow looked smaller.

Hop, skip and jump, one after the other,
bored to death, I went passed them without much ado,
I came down the mountain, I ventured further,
until I saw, what I always wanted to do.

With gay abandon, I jumped into the water,
The sand in my hair, the wind on my face,
I eventually found out, what would really matter,
I end this story, I have given up the race.

choice != compromise, but compromise = poison

2008-08-31T02:34:00.000-07:00

In human relationships "compromise" is often said to be an agreement that no party is happy with.

In the UK, Ireland and Commonwealth countries the word "compromise" has a positive meaning (as a consent, an agreement where both parties win something); in the USA it may rather have negative connotations (as both parties lose something). In the former Soviet Union, the word was rather unknown.

It is hard to find the difference between what is a choice and what is a compromise. Period. But try we must ;). I guess choice is the bigger word, in the sense that it encompasses compromise. That is, often you have to choose between your objectives/principles and a compromise. So in the face of making a decision, one must identify the options which are against his/her objectives/principles and rule them out first. There is always a choice other than the compromise (else recheck your principles, they might be wrong :) - as the USSR soon found out). But all credit to the USSR for they at least know what is wrong now.

This post is inspired by the movie "Rock on". Don't choose a compromise over your principles, however small and tiny-winy it might look. Would you taste poison just because the quantity does not matter?

Choice is the power every human has (in case you are stumped by my choice of saying "every human" instead of "each of us" in my blogs ... you might as well stop reading my posts). The architect of the matrix calls it an anomaly, because 1% of the human race chooses reality over his dreamland. "Causality is the only reality" - Merovingian, and the final cause, the purpose, is within us.

The human network

2008-07-18T13:19:00.001-07:00

It is human to communicate. Period. If one is looking out for the best for himself, he can do it best by exchanging something of value with someone else. How can one not communicate in such a scenario. And yet it seems to screw my happiness? Am I the proverbial ostrich living in denial? Someone said today that when I get the .... I forget friends! Someone says that I am ignoring them! Damn. Yes maybe I am. But then would I be writing this blog if I did not really care?

Google giving me a tough time at work. A company like google has minted money out of interaction. Cisco is teasing us with their human network commercials. Nortel had to counter it with some strange cryptic ad, which does not really register, and is far from eye catching.

Why do I hate the mobile? Why do I set status messages on my gtalk but cringe when someone pings me? Why do I feel guilty when I am not working? I thought these things would pass. Anyways.. I wanna be aggressive now. Take things head on. And for that communication is key. And people will just have to get used to my me time.

The absurd question.

2008-07-10T20:47:00.000-07:00

An ant or a bee does not have a choice. It does what it is built to do. To be a good samaritan, to sacrifice! And yet, their community, the bee hive, the ant hill is almost always prosperous, with enough for everyone to eat and all that. Man has a choice. He can sacrifice! he can be a good samaritan, do all that is necessary for the good of others, he can submit his will to the will of the collective and become another ant or a bee. On the other hand he can do what is best for himself. He can pursue the best. He can keep him self at the centre of his attention.

The question is, which one is the better option for humans? I think the question is absurd. The moment you ask that question to yourself you know that you are looking out for yourself. You have already taken the second option.

To elaborate : since man is as he is.. an animal with the power to reason and conceptualize, there are bound to be differences in what different men think is best for the group if at all he agrees to put the group before himself. BUT WAIT.. I think I have committed an error in my reasoning here.. Actually given the same dataset (though this might be impossible, given that our "euclidean" perceptions differ from person to person) and the same decision making deterministic algorithm (reasoning skills, here again some people have better skills than others), the result will always be the same (might not be, for reasons look at the text in the brackets). So if the reasoning is right and the information is available for all, all men will make the same decision eventually. So does that mean that the first option is a valid one? If putting a group above oneself is pragmatic, then yes.

Now coming to the 2nd option. Is it possible for us to put ourselves above everything else? forgetting others completely? For example your kidney might not be working, if you are selfish you will probably pull out someone elses kidney and install it in yourself. BUT, then again a rational person will not? Is it because he abhors sacrifice. Either his or someone else's? you bet. This morality is crucial. That you will not sacrifice another for your gain. And only then is selfishness viable.

bengaluru ki zameen par

2007-12-28T10:45:00.000-08:00

It is amazing how much energy one needs to learn something completely new. Children seem to do it in a jiffy, but I (now on the wrong side of 25) find it quite difficult! Trying to learn a new programming language at work. It took me all week. Err, I was trying to learn it while watching the India-Australia test match at the same time. boo-hoo.

I saw Taare Zameen Par last monday. Yes on Monday. The movie tickets cost less than half the price on weekdays compared to the weekends. Bangalore is becoming a capitalists' paradise. Movie tickets cost a cool Rs. 300 in the weekends. (And I am "loving" it). In Bangalore a movie ticket is a commodity, an essential need, not a luxury. Who cares if everyone can't afford it? haa don't be silly. Even the roadside Paani-puri walah makes a killing in Bangalore. Anytime you go to him you might see a couple of babes from the North-East (who want their paani to be as teekha as the Manipuri mirchi), a hutta-kutta Punjabi (who wants more aloo in his puri), a Thambi (who wants the paani to be more khatta than his rassam), a gujju bhai (who wants the meetha paani), or maybe a Goan like me (and no I do not want beer instead of the paani). Hey, by the way that is a good idea. Maybe I should patent it.

Bangalore, or should I say, Bengaluru has become an international city, I don't need to tell you about its IT-BT success stories. Yet, there are 3 temples near my house. One of them wants to beat drums and blow the trumpet at 5 am in the mornings, and they want to close the pubs at 11:30 pm! Restaurants close much earlier at 10:30 pm. People on vehicles forget they are driving when they see temples. They give a holy beep and fold their hands, trying to look at the God/Goddess inside. Meanwhile the vehicle tries to make its way on its own through a crowded street full of stray dogs and kids. Either they trust machines (who knows it might be AI), or they think that God will take care of everything!

Coming back to the movie, I liked it, it reminds me of my childhood. I always used to score very good marks in history. Used to read it like a story and was fascinated by it. But our history teacher was too boring, she did all sorts of nonsense in class. Everything except history lessons. So I used to sit near the window and look outside in her class. But she used to get angry with me because I never paid attention to what she used to say . At that time I used to feel bad and think it is my fault somehow. Once another kid asked her why she picks on me even though I get good marks anyway. She said that she did it just for the heck of it!!! that set me free. That moment on I took only selected teachers seriously

I hated poetry in school. Our teacher would give us pages and pages of what she felt about the poem and we just had to reproduce that in exams. But now I find poetry so interesting. All those wonderful poems I read in school - I never understood their meaning at that time. But now that I do, I wonder how different it could have been had the teacher not forced her views on us.

In my point of view

2007-12-17T09:30:00.000-08:00

Assume that you are in space standing on some planet. You know 5 other people each on a different planet. You all have been told that a large object will appear in the sky for some time, and you need to accurately say what you saw. Soon it is visible. There is an object in the sky, far away. It looks like a square to you with 1 dot in the centre. The other 5 people also see it. One sees 2 dots. One sees 3 dots. One sees 4 dots. One sees 5 dots. One sees 6 dots. If you all are asked what you saw seperately, each one of you will give a different answer. Now assuming all of you have seen a die before. If you know what the other 5 people saw. You might realise that it was actually a die.

In this example :-
To come to the conclusion that it is a die
1) you needed to trust your vision. If you were a subjectivist/mystic you would mistrust yourself or reality itself becuase the other people said they saw something else.

2) you needed to ask the others what they saw. you need to trust them. Nothing wrong in that provided you do not negate your own vision.

3) you needed the faculty of logic.

When you hear to what the other 5 persons have to say, you realise that the 6 views in question are in total contradiction with each other! But contradictions do not exist. At the same time we should not hate contradictions. They are just an opportunity to find out the truth. Saying that you saw 1 dot in a square is true. But then you are seeing only probably 1/6th of the truth. In real life cases realitiy might not be as simple as a 6 faced die. It might have many many different aspects, that is where every view counts.

A view/perspective/opinion (w.r.t me/I/myself) is subjective in nature, it can never be purely objective. In my example your view is subject to your planetary position. But, yes it is possible to make your view as objective as possible only when you consciously try to find out all aspects of the truth.

These were my posts in a community.

Pride, arrogance and humility.

2007-12-08T21:53:00.000-08:00

It was a laidback wednesday morning. I had been drinking chai with my colleagues when it happened. My manager walked up and said "It will not do, that tool which you built is just not good enough. You have got to improve it! Everyone is cribbing. It is so much hard work for them."

Flashback :-
3 weeks back I got the idea and started working on this software tool which would solve our equipment crisis! Though in hindsight it seems to be a very simple idea, I assume that it was not that simple as no one got it till then. Its advantages are so much that it was just mind boggling that no one thought about it before. Before I get carried away - I cannot tell you the exact details of what the idea was or what the tool does, it is confidential. Anyway, so I got this tool done in 2-3 days flat. Surprisingly, it was as if I was on steroids, hardly slept, I was too excited. Though there were some glitches and caveats, the tool was working for 80% of the cases. But soon people were not satisfied. They started blaming me for not solving the problem completely! When I tried to explain the corner cases and have a discussion so as to come up with a better solution, I was given the cold shoulder. No one really understood what I was talking about! It was frustrating. But I put my foot down finally and said that this is how it is, take it or leave it. I will be able to improve it only when I think further, research a better solution or get another idea. Until one fine day my manager came and said "It will not do, that tool which you built is just not good enough. You have got to improve it! Everyone is cribbing. It is so much hard work for them."

Present :-
It struck me.. another idea, I almost spilt my tea on my manager. I just ran from there like a mad man. Must have said eureka too perhaps. By evening I had it ready. Can you beat that I thought! 2 ideas in 1 month for a problem which people had been slogging for years now! I was brimming with arrogance. In fact I just spent hours looking at what I had created. Almost Narcissism.

Yesterday I went to answer my test in IISc. The Prof. has asked me to submit my project proposal. I had a couple of ideas. I went to the IISc library to see if they can be implemented and how. There I see a shelf of books on the rutherford model. I remember how I promised myself that I would study this as a kid. I go ahead and come across the latest German journals on Networking. I remember how I promised myself I would learn German. Many more before I go ahead and start looking for what I wanted to in the IEEE journals. I find that not only my couple of ideas have been implemented already but are also being sold as products in the market! I have learnt my lesson in humility! What I have done makes me proud, but what I am capable of, and all that I am yet to do makes me humble. The IISc library does that to people, It is after all one of the largest in the world. http://www.library.iisc.ernet.in/aboutus/aboutus.html

A joke I found somewhere

2007-11-29T20:14:00.000-08:00

HER DIARY
Day night, I thought he was acting weird. We had made plans to meet at a cafe to have some coffee. I was shopping with my friends all day long, so I thought he was upset at the fact that I was a bit late, but he made no comment. Conversation wasn't flowing so I suggested that we go somewhere quiet so we could talk, he agreed but he kept quiet and absent. I asked him what was wrong - he said, "Nothing". I asked him if it was my fault that he was upset. He said it had nothing to do with me and not to worry.

On the way home I told him that I loved him, he simply smiled and kept driving. I can't explain his behavior; I don't know why he didn't say, "I love u, too". When we got home I felt as if I had lost him, as if he wanted nothing to do with me anymore.
He just sat there and watched TV; He seemed distant and absent.Finally I decided to go to bed. About 10 minutes later he came to bed. I decided that I could not take it anymore, so I decided to confront him with the situation but he had fallen asleep. I started crying and cried until I too fell asleep. I don't know what to do. I'm almost sure that his thoughts are with someone else. My life is a disaster……………………..

HIS DIARY

Today India lost the cricket match against Bangladesh. DAMN IT. !!!!!!!!!

My objectives (in order of priority)

2007-11-13T22:52:00.000-08:00

1. To do my work. To
the best of my ability. In my own eyes, it is my work that defines me
completely.
Mind you, I do not say that I should only do rocket science. Even if I am doing hard labour, I will do it with dignity.

2. To earn more money.
Who said money is nothing. Money is a very useful tool. Why not have as
much of it as possible?

3. To spend more money. What
happens to a tool when you don't use it? It rusts.

4. To enjoy the all the pleasures in life. He he... if you know what I mean.

Some interesting quotes :-

Tom Cronin: He's making his (Jason Bourne) first mistake.
Nicky: It's not a mistake. They don't make mistakes. They don't do random. There's always an objective. Always a target.
Pamela Landy: The objectives and targets always came from us. Who's giving them to him now?
Nicky: Scary version? He is.

If you think it is as simple as it seems to be.... try and understand this :-

"many commercial systems have provided fixed-priority scheduling for real-time tasks [Khanna et al. 92, Custer 92] in addition to round-robin scheduling for timesharing, often with the drawback of the possibility of starving timesharing tasks [Nieh et al. 93], while still providing no guarantees for real-time tasks unless they are executed at the highest priority."

God

2007-10-21T11:59:00.000-07:00

According to the uncertainty principle of quantum physics, our senses, and hence our observations/perspectives/views are subjective in nature. "Note also that the product of the uncertainties, of order 10^−35 Joule-seconds, is so small that the uncertainty principle has negligible effect on objects of macroscopic scale, despite its importance for atoms and subatomic particles." (wikipedia)

Though the uncertainty is negligible it is an uncertainty.

On the other hand most physicists have said that this is nothing but a "measurement" and not an observation. A measurement which has to be defined in terms of quantum mechanics and not physics applicable to macroscopic objects.

Besides this I would also like to ask that since our senses are not 100% don't we depend on the "subjective" faculties of our mind to fill into the gaps? Example:- The vase which also looks like 2 faces, or the 3 dimensional cube mapped onto 2 dimensions.

The above, makes possible different perspectives of the same reality (probably the basis for libertarianism). This combined with the fact that there exists a reality independent of the mind gives some room for stuff like "God". And many many other entities and probably the whole concept of religion/spirits/ghosts etc.

When people ask me why I do not believe in God. I ask them to define God. Either there is no definition for God, or the definition given is ambiguous/a paradox at best. So I say by definition, God does not exist.

Consider the observation of certain physical phenomenon like the photo-electric effect and interference of light waves (alternating dark and bright strips occuring on a screen when light falls on it only through 2 slits). Something we learn in high school physics.

While blind faith would squarely attribute this to God. A vibrant mind gifted with reason would try to approach the problem mathematical. It would make assumptions to aid the process. Assumptions to modularise the problem. This is possible only through creative imagination, a romanticism if you will. The mind assumes the light to be a wave and them proceeds to mathematically to derive a "formula" for the phenomenon of interference. Similarly we assume that light travels in the form of packets (photons) and thus causes the photo-electric effect (release of electrons from a metal surface when light falls on it).

So though our senses and observations might not be 100% perfect. Our reasoning and creative mind combined with all the tools it has created should more than make up for that. Notice the irony here. Tt is our mind which has made God. The mind is hungry for an explanation. It is our choice as to whether we believe in blind faith or reason and find out.

Profession

2007-10-21T11:53:00.000-07:00

I am a network engineer. I studied Engineering in Computer Science. I learnt programming as a kid. My favourite subjects were Mathematics and History. I love to apply logic and reason (that should be obvious). I love to gather information and read stories.

But my profession has led me to develop another skill. That of creativity and innovation. I also deal with some problems which might not have a known "correct solution" (such problems are called NP hard) or a solution which is guaranteed to complete in a given amount of time. But yet we go ahead and "solve" it using temporary solutions (engineering) and searching for the correct one all the time (research).

Ask yourself why :-

Ragnar Danneskjöld is a pirate, though he wants to study philosophy.
John Galt works as labourer on the rail road despite his obvious talent in making motors.
Howard Roark works as a miner even though he is the best architect around.
Hugh Akston flips burgers.

And what Ayn Rand wants to say when she says "Contradictions do not exist".

They do what they do because for them work is a means of livelihood and thus more important than working in their favourite field. They are willing to give up their passion for the sake of honesty and integrity in their profession whatever it is that they have to do. The world will not allow them to work with integrity in their favourite or chosen field so they simply give it up, but refuse to compramise on their fundamentals. Mind you even when they choose to do what they do it is still some of their skills and their able body that they use to do it.

That is what the Roarks and Galts in this world mostly end up doing. What I want to point out is that even if you are not in the profession you would like to be in what matters is how you earn your livelihood. And also that one should never give up on what he would prefer to do.. keep trying to get into the profession of your choice.

Objectivism is for the strong willed

2007-10-21T11:50:00.000-07:00

Objectivism is for the strong willed
While Ayn Rand had very strong views, she was always rational. She was integral with her observations. She could give proper logical explanations leading from her observations to the stance she took, and from the stance to her actions. (Although this sounds simple it really is not). This led her to say that all those who did not agree with her must be irrational. The point is this : what happens when you see a point she misses. She might call you irrational, the whole world might call you irrational/wrong. But, what matters is that you know you are not.

I have 2 points to make here :-
1) Ayn Rand confesses that she was not a good psychologist. So when she made villians out of the irrational people, calling them evil, it induces a tendancy to conform to her views in the weak willed/unintelligent reader. And so Ayn Rand, unknowingly, ends up doing more harm than good for such people. Unfortunate.

2) It is imperative on rational individuals to hold their views/actions which are based on sound reasoning and observations as a line in stone. Unchanging, except when you see that your observations were inaccurate.

3) If you can prove that someone has been irrational or has malintent... then he/she deserves no respect.

We were taught economics in school

2007-10-08T06:36:00.000-07:00

I was reading "The wealth of nations" by Adam Smith. And I realised that I seemed to understand what he was saying really well! It is strange how real life events teach you so much more than you can ever cram. I learnt economics when I was in class 5. And my younger brother learnt it in class 2. I think Funskool had set up shop in Goa recently. They were manufacturing their stuff from somewhere near Panjim. They came to our school (Sharda Mandir School) to promote their products. My bro and I were already huge fans of funskool toys (we had our own collection of G.I. Joe's at home), as were most of the other boys I guess... Don't know about the girls. At that age I hated them anyway ;-).

They gave each one of us some cool G.I.Joe book labels. Remember the kind of labels we used to put on our school books. Well these were no ordinary labels, they had cool G.I.Joe figures printed by the side. Like firefly, snowjob, cobra and gung-ho and gosh I dont even remember their names now :-(. Anyway we were all very excited to have this cool stuff... Two points to be noted here. Sharda Mandir School, a very strict school allowed funskool to distribute the labels. And secondly, funskool, knowingly or unknowingly I don't know, but I suspect that it was a marketing strategy - distributed unequal numbers of various kinds of labels.

So while everyone got like around 50 labels, some labels were quite rare. For example for every 10 firefly labels they gave out, they gave 2 snowjob labels, and maybe just one gung-ho label. Guess what happened in the days that followed. Everyone started collecting these labels. People started showing of their labels and trading them. Someone would have like the rarest of the rare cobra label!! He would be the envy of the whole school.

The labels were treated like currency notes. If a firefly label was worth 10 bucks, the snowjob labels were worth 50 bucks and the gung-ho a 100 bucks. The cobra would ofcourse be pure gold. Note that the "value" of the labels was more if it was rare. This basic funda in economics was known to kids who were still learning addition and substraction in class 1 and 2. Also note that the exchange was strictly barter. No real currency was involved. You give 10 firefly labels you get 1 gung-ho label. But surprise surprise.

The values began to change!! It was probably because some smart kids went and brought some more labels into the system from either the factory or shops. Suddenly
there was a flood of Gung-ho labels (100 bucks) and so its price fell drastically :-). Until one day it was almost equal to the firefly label! So although the guys who "innovated" by procuring labels from the factory itself made a huge initial profit, they had to innovate once again to make the same kind of money :-). One dude had a colour printer in his house ;-) ... hehehe no prizes for guessing what he did.

My collection was basically a joint account with my brother. He once gave away some precious labels to his "friend". He told me that his "friend" had taken them by force. I being the elder brother decided to take matters into my own hands. Went to the kid bro's friend and held him by the collar. Gave him a good trashing, and asked him to return the labels to my bro. Don't really remember if he did though. There were many more such fights happening all over the school. Finally the school administration got fed up and confiscated all the labels. Now everyone was sad.

Soon we got fed up of the damn labels and moved on to bigger things. Now I realise that I am actually stuck with the damn labels for the rest of my life. The only difference is that the new labels look much more boring than the funskool ones and the rare ones have the picture of a bespectacled bald man instead of cobra or gung-ho.

This post is boring!

2007-10-05T06:11:00.000-07:00

Only boring people really use this word "boredom". It is a sign of a short attention span. It is somehow the lower standard of any activity they indulge in. As if it is the duty of others to entertain these people. People complaining about boredom are usually very lazy. Here is what wiki says about boredom :-

"Boredom is a condition characterized by perception of one's environment as dull, tedious, and lacking in stimulation. This can result from leisure and a lack of aesthetic interests"

It is an irony how boredom is actually the root of many different phylosophies and thoughts. In 1670, Blaise Pascal's unfinished notes were published under the title of Pensées (i.e., "Thoughts"). In the work, he described many fundamental themes of existentialism. Pascal argued that without a God, life would be meaningless and miserable. People would only be able to create obstacles and overcome them in an attempt to escape boredom. These token-victories would ultimately become meaningless, since people would eventually die. This was good enough reason not to choose to become an atheist, according to Pascal.

Boredom can make man move, take action, do things which seem meaningless to someone else. For example. Some people indulge in sex to drive away boredom. Software engineers in Bangalore who are bored with their daily lives in office decide to go on a "trek". They brave heavy rains, bad weather, leeches, roads which look like the moon's surface, all for a little bit of thrill. In fact just to get tired and feel the nature around them. My friend went on one such trek and was bit at almost a dozen places by leeches. DAMN, I WONDOR IF THE LEECH EVER GETS BORED OF DRINKING BLOOD?

The answer is that it does not, it drinks as much blood as possible.

Boredom at the subconcious level makes many decisions for us. In fact it is a driving force comparable to the ego itself.

I miss being a fisherman.

2007-09-14T14:20:00.000-07:00

I miss being a fisherman.

Goan and laid back. Yeah it is not NP hard to catch fish. Or is it? well well well. The truth is that NP hard or NP soft, it does not really matter. Check your premises, what matters is :-
1) Does it make you happy?
2) Does it fill your stomach.

Thats it. Thats it thats it thats it. For your information I am typing under the influence of the best wine available in Goa. Vinicola. Coming back to the point...

We need to learn... excuse me, correction... "I" need to learn that I earn, to make myself happy and to fill my stomach. Thats it thats it thats it. Please, excuse my grammer. And so I say... I miss being a fisherman. Because I love fish. I love eating fish. And I love fish. thats it .. thats it thats it thats it. I can't believe I have to struggle to be simple! Now to those of you who demand reason. Is there any honour greater than satisfying your needs ? This thought occured to me on seeing the Greek coastline in the movie "The sisterhood of the traveling pants". No, do not laugh, I realised, that logically I should have been a fisherman. I should have given it a shot at least! And I must say that I miss being a fisherman. Yes. I miss doing something that feeds me directly. I miss the simplicity of life.

Hunt, catch, eat. Thats it, thats it thats it. Its as simple as that. And only when you understand this basic funda, can you try to understand NP hard problems and dream to solve them.

I miss being a fisherman.

My lifeline

2007-09-10T09:27:00.000-07:00

Yahoo! Finance
Quote for JNPR/

This post consists of 2 parts. Above you see my lifeline, the value of Juniper Networks, the result of the efforts of my colleagues and myself. Below you see just an excerpt from a great masterpiece.

"So you think money is the root of all evil?"
'Atlas Shrugged' | 1957 | Ayn Rand

said Francisco d' Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the prinicple that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tommorow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor - your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on the moral principle which is the root of money. Is this what you consider evil?

Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by mean of nothing but physical motions - and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all goods produced and of all wealth that has ever existed on earth.

But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strenght do you mean? It is not the strenght of guns or muscle. Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by a man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made - before it can be looted or mooched - made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.

To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money premits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss - the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery - that you must offer them values, not wounds - that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men's stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find. And when men live by trade - with reason, not force, as their final arbiter - it is the best product that wins, the best preformance, the man of best judgment and hightest ability - and the degree of a man's productiveness is the degree of his reward. The is the code of existance whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?

But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as a driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality - the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.

Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants: money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brain of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth - the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry the money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his weath is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that is should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

Money is your means of survival. The verdict you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you have pronounced upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men's vices or men's stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment's or penny's worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribue to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you'll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?

Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?

Or did you say it's the love of money that's the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It's the person who would sell his soul for a nickle, who is loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money - and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know that are able to deserve it.

Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it

Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another - their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.

But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or keep it. Men who have no courage, pride or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich - will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt - and of his life, as he deserves.

Then you will see the rise of men of the double standard - the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money - the men who are hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law - men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims - the money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

Do you wish to know wether that day is comming? Watch the money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you seen that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection and the base of moral existance. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked: 'Acount overdrawn.'

When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world?' You are

You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it's crumbling around you, while you're damning its life-blood: money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edges of your cities. Throughout men's history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, whose names changed, but whose method remained that same: to seize wealth by force and keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves - slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody's mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, of aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers, as industrialists.

To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money - and I have no higher, more revernt tribute to pay America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man's mind and money were set free, and there was no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being - the self-made man - the American industrialist.

If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose -because it contains all the others - the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to make money.' No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity - to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality.

Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters' continents. Now the looters' credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide - as, I think, he will.

Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for you own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become tools of men. Blood, whips and guns - or dollars. Take your choice - there is no other - and your time is running out"

Next step

2006-12-19T01:09:00.000-08:00

Days just pass by, no work gets done. In office I surf and at home I entertain myself. In blogs I write things and never seem to get things done... Until yesterday :-) I found my touch. I was back among the books. (I hope the Indian batsmen get back among the runs too). In other words "phod diya". (college lingo). Downed a whole O' reily book on Perl in just 2 nights. Well now that it is done, I can concentrate on other stuff... And hopefully I can get my work done double quick in office, and focus on the real issue.
AVOIDING BUGS...

SMART-TESTER

lets say we want to simulate ospf neighborship between 2 routers.

starting this practise of writing down my ideas as soon as I get them...
1) Ospf protocol simulation using routers as objects with attributes like interfaces etc.
2) simulation "knows" what should happen and live routers will have to conform
3) this simulation will be superior and relatively bug free because :-
(i) It does not have millions of other features to support
(ii) It is not constrained by complex hardware issues etc.
(iii) It is a light weight application compared to the actual protocol
(iv) It will have model based testing brains ;-)
(v) In future we need to add "machine learning"

Thanks Pradeep Sindhu et al, Juniper routers can speak in xml
boy.. I like that so much.. after the dead text processing in Cisco...

hohahahaha
I feel so good since I stared writing down my thoughts.. It is conservation of my thought energy.. I am not allowing my it to dissipate. I have been guilty of that so often. Simply procrastinating does not get you anywhere. One has to move his ass. And I swear damn it, that is exactly what I am going to do.

Objective : To proofcheck a network. Not just test it.. but to prove that it will work the way it should. (million dollar SLA's are signed for this.. and maa company would be happy to spare a few thousands for me) This product has a lot of value.

Can we have a simulation of a network? with ALL the complexities built in it? no.. KISS: keep it simple, stupid. I would be better of designing seperate simulations for seperate features. Built on a basic simulation of routers and interfaces... OOP anyone? A classic and intelligent implementation of OOP is required. Rajaram, (my baap working in Amazon.. and by now I bet he is the baap of OOP too) help me! It is important to define what functionality is "basic". That is what will be built into the primitive network simulation. This will be the parent of all other simulations.

Okays, lets say we have a simulation of OSPF neighborship. Now what? We need to define states in the simulation which are possible real time scenario's. We need to build a model, a deterministic finite state machine.

Something has to be done dude.. we cant have millions of perl scripts running on billions of routers and zillions of software engineers supporting them!!! some sort of intelligence has to be built into the simulations.... but what and how..

I am coming

2006-12-13T21:39:00.000-08:00

Hmm another bug to reproduce! Another customer bug, and no steps to repeat. I have no idea how DHCP works. Until the recent past I used to be very excited about new stuff coming my way. I would take it up as a challenge. I would want to learn, know more! Where has that fire gone? Damn, now I am looking for steps to repeat. I am like, who cares what this router does and does not do? (I forget that it is my little knowledge in this field which puts the food in my plate everyday.) But I want to be true to myself after maybe a long long time. I wish life was simple. As a kid, I knew exactly what I wanted. But then this world taught me to compromise! And now I have compromised so much, that I have lost myself in this world. Whatever I do is for this world. I have been reduced from a human to just another tool/cog/piece/flowing stream/wind or a mindless element of nature. Which is so not what I should be! :-(

So what do I do now? hmmm.. if I think what I do is not worthwhile, the next question to be asked would be, then what is? He he he.. it is all a bit more clear to me now. :-) Nothing is worthwhile. Even if you are the richest/learned/knowledgeable/intelligent person in the world you have to die one day - oopsie daisy, is that another thing this world has taught me? maybe one can survive and be young forever. That said, being learned/knowledgeable is an achievement in itself, and something worth living for! Some meat in a life which would otherwise be so dull. I tried doing absolutely nothing for half a day. And boy, I was like super bored. I wanted to jump off the office building just for sheer excitement. So I need to do something with this life. But what If I am to do something it better be very good. I once told someone that if you keep looking at the bigger picture, you ignore the small corner that you own. So I guess taking that further, I will strive to make my small corner a masterpiece :-).

Anyway, someone said the process is more important than the end. (I guess it was MK Gandhi). I disagree. I think both are equally important. But again, what is it that really gets me going? What is it that will make my corner a masterpiece? Will knowing networking and programming make me passionate enough? Are these my reasons for living? Does it make me happy? Do I need to be a family man to be happy? Do I need to live a superb lifestyle and maintain cleanliness and orderliness to produce a masterpiece? These can get me a beautiful picture. But for something beyond beauty, I need passion! What am I passionate about? That's the question!

Is it money? Hmm no... I think I have enough, and will keep getting more than enough, to have a decent quality of life. Anyway, earning money, I have found out is like an endless race between 2 donkeys - money and satisfaction. They keep running laps on a circuit with no hope for the checkered flag. Is it amassing knowledge? hmm.. that seems to be a pretty good option to me :-). Let’s see now. Hmmm... Yes I think this appears to be the best option. Some time back I decided to increase the options in my life. I took up sports like tennis. Took interest in classical music - both eastern and western, that was a big bore, it is boring. Reading stories and novels and history has always been interesting (though only for leisure). I used to love mathematics, not so long ago. And now, I have lost touch with math too :-(. I think I will try to revive this option. Muahahahahah. I think I know. It is knowledge which calls me. I am coming dude. I am coming... muahahahahahahahah

Back to that customer bug I go. I have an idea. I think I can revive this math option through my work. Dude I just got a patent idea.. (Actually it was always there, I think I have just motivated myself to take it up with passion). Guess what the idea might be? It is something which will help me to make code bug free. So here's what I got to do now. Get this knowledge of the network done, get it over with first. It is just a tidbit in my scheme of things now. Let’s say by end of this week? Monday is going to be a new day for me... I am coming dude... I am coming.

Welcome Sid

2006-11-24T05:38:00.000-08:00

Hmm... I just told my younger brother that whatever you do should have a purpose! And I told him that similarly every blog should have a purpose. But is that true? Hmm... my apologies to lovers of logic and reason, but while we rant endlessly about reason, can anyone tell me for what REASON are we on this earth in the middle of nowhere in this meaningless Universe anyway... Be that as it may, let me asume that there might be some purpose which we all are unaware of. That reminds of that famous anecdote about Bertrand Russel and the taxi driver, who asked Russel this very question.. "Why are we here?" Russel failed to answer it in the 20 minutes that these 2 were together. Do we call the taxi driver foolish for asking such a difficult question and expecting an answer in 20 minutes? or do we just call philosophy a futile exercise, having no purpose but to just think vaguely! I mean isn't philosophy all about love for wisdom? What use is wisdom if it can't answer such a basic question? Somebody help me.. I am going in recursions and might get fits because of overload! But this is a dreaded question and all of us somehow have learnt to ignore it.

Was reading an article about Indian youth being the happiest. Survey conducted by MTV. Some guys said that success is important to us, some said spirituality is, while some said relationships, and the majority said money. No wonder they are happy, the youth is making easy money these days (BPO). No.. I won't screw the BPO's like everyone loves to. But success is so relative. I mean, for some success is about scoring with a chic or something!

I have found that it is the success-achievement-accomplishment trio which has lead to happiness for myself. I have repeatedly found that for me, success is achieving a goal. Hmmm.. but is it a goal I have set myself or which others have set for me? I thought of doing a CCIE (cisco certified Internetworking expert) just because "it is there".. as some friend of mine said.. Its true! more than wanting to be an expert at networking! I wanted to do CCIE because it is there.. and very few people manage to do it and it is very tough. So am I a typical 2nd hander from Ayn Rand's Atlas shrugged? Maybe..

I am a CCIP (Internetworking Profesional) now, and have decided to put on hold this whole CCIE thing until I find out the real purpose behind the whole thing!! Here we go again- "purpose". Anyway thats that.. Now that I am in Juniper, the biggest competitor of Cisco, I have changed my views a bit.. more about that in a different blog though. Now I am looking at exactly what I want to do.. will write again when I figure that out.