Happy Birthday To Me

I turn 20 today. As I look back over the years, how I’ve changed, how I’ve grown, I’m filled with mixed feelings. I’ve come quite far in this journey called life, but what have I got to show for it? I’ve amassed a wealth of knowledge- all of which are of no practical use. I’ve questioned why certain people do certain things and come off worse than the people whom I questioned. I’ve tried to understand this world using logic, using emotions, using philosophy and religion- and I’m back right where I started.

Sure, I’ve touched the lives of a few people whom I call friends, most of whom read this blog (which is why I blog!). Apart from that, I haven’t much else to show for my 20 years of existence. If I were to die today and God asks me to justify my time spent on earth, what would I answer? That I just lived like a parasite, squandering the resources of the planet without contributing anything, and worse, leaving behind my carbon footprint? That I’ve failed over and over and over again, but unlike Michael Jordan, haven’t succeeded? But there, I’m just making it harder on myself.

I’ve had a few private successes, but nothing I can gloat over or get recognized by society. Like, I’ve battled with and against various pixelated images on my computer screen. I’ve won quite a few virtual rewards. I’ve succeeded in making quite a few good friends, but people now judge friendship by the amount of people you have on a social networking site- friendship is a numbers game today.

On the down side, I’ve screwed up more often than I can recollect. The time when a birthday gift to a girl exploded on my face, the time when my terrible penalty kick cost our team the game, the time when I fought with a friend over a game of DotA, the time when I grossly misjudged another friend, all those ego clashes, the list goes on.

Terrible as that may seem, when I weigh it against all the wrongs done to me, it balances things out. A triple backstab worthy of a manta style divine rapier Rikimaru- betrayed by 3 mutual friends who conspired against me on the same day. People who say they will get back to me later and never do. Someone who calls me a friend but thinks hard before spending a few odd rupees on a call. Someone who treats me as a Rent-A-Friend; there for you when you want him, on hold and waiting at other times. Someone with an inflated sense of ego who won’t compromise or say sorry for anything. This list is vast too.

This is a classic example of the working of Karma- whatever you do comes right back to you. So I deserve all that. This is also why I sometimes lack in sympathy when someone tells me their sufferings. I view it as bad Karma- either that or God is testing them. According to me, unless you live in misery and sorrow, you cannot understand happiness. Pleasure and pain are two sides of the coin.

Life’s going to get a whole lot tougher and challenging henceforth. I’ll soon be leaving the nest in search of my own, living within my own thoughts most of the time. I’m entering the final year of engineering, the last year of my life as a full time student. But this is good. Facing the unknown challenge is what keeps my adrenalin going.

There is also going to be a phase shift in my attitude. I’m no longer going to be Mr. Nice Guy. (Thanks to my two best friends for making me realize all that I’m doing wrong). No more returning deliberate missed calls. No more friendships with undeserving people. The flowerbed may look thicker with weeds, but it’s just the few flowers which really matter the most. I’m weeding my garden, throwing away all my emotional clutter. I will now sail free over the ocean of life, flowing with the current, appreciating whatever tidings it may bring.

Games and Violence

Is aggression and violence in games making the players take to violence in real life? Some old fashioned people would directly answer yes, without considering any evidence, simply because they don't like games and therefore would say anything degrading games. They would condemn violent games without taking a second look at them. Personally, I view violent first person shooter (FPS) games with distaste; they give me a headache and are not at all a means of relaxation and recreation, which is what a game means to me. But then, I'm not denying that they are recreational to others- they are.

Saying that violence in games makes the gamers naturally aggressive is going over the top though. Drawing a parallel, playing NFS should then make drivers reckless. However, this has never been raised as an issue. And it would have, if games mirrored reality. Even though road accidents are as common as a one rupee coin, no one blames games for them. Why? Because it's not the gamers who have a high likelihood of causing an accident. Indeed, with reflexes acquired from skilled driving in games, they may possibly have a better chance of averting a high speed disaster.

Therefore, blaming games for inciting violence is a very biased way of looking at the issue. Gamers know the difference between fantasy and reality. No one wants to play a game resembling real life- no one would possibly want to play a game where a sprite sits in class or office all day long and then comes home to do homework. No, thank you. It'd be more interesting to spend some time shooting down aliens on a console and then going back to the actual homework.

Games are merely an escape from reality; they allow us to immerse ourselves in a fantasy world. And violent games have their appeal because they are far removed from our peaceful daily life. Also, killing some noobs releases all the pent up tensions from a hard day of work, and makes us relaxed. Thus, these games are beneficial too!

That said, I don't like the amount of blood and gore in some games. It's a major turn-off for some people, especially girls. Here's when you see games mirror reality: the people who can't stand blood in a game can't stand the sight of it in RL too.

To sum up, to say that violence in games causes violence in real life is like saying playing contact sports causes aggression. If that were so, we'll all have to grow up playing tiddlywinks, and who knows, maybe boys will fall in love with barbie dolls too :-)

A Question

Here's an interesting question: Do I want to win in life, or do I want to be happy?

When I was marching towards victory, I haven't been very happy (satisfied maybe, for having achieved some milestone). But for the past year, I've taken it easy and I've been very happy. And I like this happy life. So, do I want to win?

Let's argue this in another way. You've worked hard these past 3 years, so it's O.K. to take time off to be happy. But there will come a point when I have to take up the mantle again. That time will come when I can no longer revel in my past accomplishments. Till then, I'm doing fine.

I haven't been doing any self-analysis or retrospection for quite some while now. I'm so at peace with myself that I don't want to do it. Heck, I've decided to play without rules. Having fun has become one of my goals. I just want to live in the present and be happy. The future can take care of itself for now.

People tend to envy the ones who win. But, is it really a good thing to win? The ones who do spend so much time and mental energy on it that they don't have any left to appreciate the finer aspects of life. In other words, the high achievers don't live a very balanced life.

Picture this: An independent guy who can do his own cooking, all the menial chores, can maintain his garden, is healthy and sociable with his neighbours, respected as a dedicated worker, a family man with spirituality, religion and altruistic tendencies. Add in a loving wife and kids.

Now, contrast this with a high achiever who puts in 70-80 hour weeks, a brilliant decision maker and efficient manager, successfully running a business in a field with cut-throat competition, is respected for his analytical ability and business skills. Is it uncommon to associate such a person with a small social circle, a not so happy married life, too important to do his own cooking and household chores, not highly concerned with anything that is not materialistic, even a lifestyle disorder. I think not.

Which sort of person would you like to be? It should be noted that there are achievers who have a satisfying personal life. In that case, I guess they weren't stars in school or college but mediocre people. Only then would they have realized the value of leading a balanced life, of having fun without thinking of it as wasted time, or attaching an opportunity cost to it.

That's the sort of person I'd like to be. I know the value of human relationships, money and power. I want to be a person who is better than most in my field, yet not the best. The best guys never have it easy. Eminem is a living example. I want to be a freelancer. That way, I can say no when my heart says no and my wallet accepts.

I shall work hard to achieve this ideal: to be successful, to gain money and power, at the same time leading a rewarding personal life filled with love, family, friends, spirituality and altruism.

This is an excerpt from my diary, written in mid May. I wrote this because I read this question in a book on relationships. And guys, I'm posing this question to you too. Decide whether you want to win, or be happy. Ask of yourself this question whenever you embark on a new venture, and review your priorities often. Be clear on what you want to do, focus on what you want, and may success be with you.

Random Stuff

I have this word file called important in which I copy paste all the well, important stuff which I find on the internet, which I know I'll want to refer to in the future. Not links, phrases or paragraphs which appeal to me. I'll share these:

"You can’t turn people into puppets with hypnosis, but it does tell you how to get in synch with them in a way that they are more likely to trust you and want to have you around. That’s handy in every walk of life. And you can tell if what you’re saying or doing is having a positive or negative impact as you are doing it. That helps a lot too."

This one is from the Dilbert blog, from a very, very old post on Hypnotism. This was the first thing I saved actually (or the first thing which I saved after the nth purging of my PC from viruses). It especially struck me because I was seeing someone having this very same hypnotic quality, and I noticed the effect of that on me.

"When you're feeling alone, like no one cares, read this cuz its absolutely true: Every night , someone thinks about you before they go to sleep, At least fifteen people in this world love you. The only reason someone would ever hate you is because they want to be just like you. There are at least two people in this world that would die for you. You mean the world to someone. Someone that you don't even know exists loves you. When you make the biggest mistake ever, something good comes from it. When you think the world has turned its back on you, take a look. Always remember the compliments you've received. Forget the rude remarks."

Although it sounds a bit like wishful thinking, I just liked it.

"SHED- separate the treasures, heave the trash, embrace your identity from within and drive yourself forward."

This was from some site which propounded reducing the material clutter around you to achieve a sense of spiritual liberation. I know it sounds corny, but it does make sense.

"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst if he fails, at least fails, while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

Truly mind-blowing quote, but no idea where I read it. Maybe it was in someone's sig in one of the many forums I frequent.

"Five simple secrets of success (People skills necessary for success)
Rapport, empathy, persuasion, cooperation and consensus building"

Don't mind this. I'm into management, leadership, self-help and corporate training in a big way. I probably picked this up from one such book.

"Relationships do not end when a person dies. Some other aspect of it deepens and begins. Your relationship isn’t over, it is just no longer externalized. The pain involved is the consequence of love. That’s what love costs. Some people say the price of love is too high. They will take many incarnations to get by that fear, which is fine. However, there is a point in which fear does not lead our life anymore. We are willing to love even if it is painful at times.

Love is the only rational act of a lifetime. Everything else pales in comparison. Things that are motivated by love can still turn out badly in the physical world, but the intention for love does not turn out badly, it can only bring a deeper capacity for love."-Stephen Levine

Profound. If that touched you, google Stephen Levine or get your hands on Tuesdays with Morrie by Mitch Albom.

"Immanuel Kant- Kant believed himself to be creating a compromise between the empiricists and the rationalists. The empiricists believed that knowledge is acquired through experience alone, but the rationalists maintained that such knowledge is open to Cartesian doubt and that reason alone provides us with knowledge.

The mind itself necessarily makes a constitutive contribution to its knowledge, that this contribution is transcendental rather than psychological, that philosophy involves self-critical activity, that morality is rooted in human freedom, and that to act autonomously is to act according to rational moral principles

The concepts of the mind (Understanding) and the perceptions or intuitions that garner information from phenomena (Sensibility) are synthesized by comprehension. Without the concepts, intuitions are nondescript; without the intuitions, concepts are meaningless—thus the famous quotation, "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind."

That's a bit of psychology/philosophy. I do have varied tastes. Having obtained some knowledge of this realm (as much as Wiki provided), I feel Kant's school of thought is sound. I agree with Freud too, in certain things, but I'm in disfavour of the Jungian school of thought.

"Just because you do the same thing day after day everyday, doesn't mean life is boring. The trick is to find what is interesting in the repetition - to find meaning for every iteration. Then, and only then, will you discover that there is actually something new in what you have been doing, and you never really saw it because you never really looked."

Reminds me of my own blog post on Repetition. It's true in essence, there is a meaning in every iteration, if only you care to look for it without thinking of it as a drudgery.

"No offences , but over my schooling , engineering and MBA , there have been numerous occasions when students from the reserved categories have made it while far smarter and deserving ones have been left in the cold. It’s all too moving to read about the son of the rickshaw puller who made it to Infosys , but what about the guy from the general category who had double the brains but could not get into a decent engineering college because the rickshaw puller’s son got in through the quota ? I am sure that one day, there will be little kids dropping years to get into nursery class."

And THAT is why I really hate India, the whole damn country is ruled by greedy politicians who mess with the education system and wreak havoc in the lives of millions of students year after year. Reservations in IIT and IIM? The dream institutes for many brilliant minds, who work hard and long, only to be beaten at the end by the son of a biscuit who proudly presents his SC/ST/BC certificate (thus degrading himself calling himself a 'backward person', and without even having as much self-respect as to care about his own status), walking away with the seat of a more deserving candidate.

That was from the blog of an ex-IIM guy by the way. On another note, I don't condemn the people who make use of their 'free' seats. I'd do the same if I were in their place and have the same lack of dignity and self-respect.

There's lots more, but I'll save that for another time.

God, Science and Atheists

Suppose I were to say that a bridge, a perfectly engineered structure, was created without an engineer, that it just happened to exist and I discovered it. The scientific community will ridicule that saying a bridge can't be created by nature without human intervention. Yet, these very same people propound that a 'supernova explosion' created the universe. (The Big Bang Theory)

Has any scientist ever created anything using a bomb? The mightiest bomb ever created, the nuclear bomb, destroyed 2 cities and still continues to do so after well over 50 years. So, can the scientific community kindly explain how a 'big bang' created the universe, to the tiniest detail- we, the Earth are all just the tiniest details if we are to believe the expanding universe theory- without some Almighty's assistance?

If a single particle exploded to form the universe, who programmed or triggered the explosion? Or do you claim it happened just like that? By sheer chance.

Even believing the supernova explosion theory, God had to create that explosion. What are the chances of your toaster exploding if you just stand still and wait for it to happen? And even if it does explode sometime in the next 10,000 years, what are the chances that this explosion will create, not destroy.

Clearly, there are unknown forces at work which you scoff at because you can't understand them. Or you are too drunk by the power of science and blinded by your arrogance to notice a force more powerful than you ever imagined. Even if you do notice it, you tell yourself it doesn't exist since you won't believe in things you don't understand and won't try to understand the things you don't believe in. That's a vicious circle of ignorance you are in. Or is it that you prefer this ignorance because you don't want to acknowledge that there is someone more powerful than you?

"A group feeling is a wonderful thing." Humans are social animals; they like groups. It gives them a feeling of belonging. They even risk personal safety and comfort for the sake of the group. That's why you have people willing to die for their country, willing to die so that someone else enjoys freedom, soldiers who throw their bodies at a bomb to protect their friends.

Why do all that? When a person dies, he's going to leave this world anyway. How does it matter what the world does when you are no longer a part of it? The most natural thing to do, then, would be to protect your own skin rather than giving it away for a 'cause'. What's the glory in dying for the country? The 'country' is just a piece of land. Is that land worth more to you than life? Apparently, it is for so many.

From a scientific point of view, patriotism is utter bullshit. But no one dares to say that in public still, because a hardcore patriot may hear them and make life hell for them. Thus, this very unscientific feeling is spared from contempt.

Soldiers believe in a cause, something unbelievable which in the long run doesn't even exist and are called heroes. Theists believe in God, and are said to be deluded, while God is very much existent and his presence can be proven. Jesus brought about Christianity, bringing hope and faith to many. People started believing in a new cause- a cause which didn't require them to sacrifice their life, but to lead it in such a way that they become a better person and benefit humanity. Hindus have to lead a life of Dharma, and our Karma affects our afterlife.

Religion is a good cause, one which-
1. gives a group feeling; people of one faith
2. benefits entire humanity, not just the people in a small piece of land
3. is open to anyone, regardless of their age and physical strength
4. guides you along your path, towards your destiny
5. gives you meaning in life and opens you to the path of spirituality
6. is peaceful and preaches love and altruism

Is that not a better cause to live for? (Not die for, note that!) So, who are the real heroes?

But, we are now in a society that wants to go against religion, against the very thing which unifies all humanity and is the reason for human kindness and the superiority of humans over the animal kingdom. We are now in a society where people think it cool to not belong, to defy God, to defy the tenets by which humans are bound. We have people who use science as a weapon and crusade the world trying to prove God doesn't exist, deceiving themselves by saying it repeatedly, blocking their inner voices which screams at them to acknowledge God.

We have self-proclaimed atheists, who are mostly emo kids saying vile things over the Internet, emboldened by anonymity to say such puerile things against religion which they would dare not utter in public. And we have some atheists, who actually don't believe God exists. They are poor souls lost in life who move through it without any meaning and die without even understanding the true purpose of life.

And then there are agnostics. These are people who believe in themselves more than they believe in God. These are the people who, while acknowledging that God may exist, don't really care about it either way. They observe both sides, and draw their conclusions from facts and logic, rather than from the blind ignorance which characterizes atheists and the over-zealousness and the ends justify the means attitude which characterizes some religious zealots.

I'm a believer. I choose to be one. Not because someone wants me to believe. Not because I was born one. I believe because I want to believe. I believe in God because I know God exists and looks after us. To the non-believers I'll say this: If you want to prove something wrong, you can disregard 100 people's logical arguments for it and still think you're right. Unless you open yourself to the possibility of God's existence, you will live in ignorance of his doings and continue to live in your ignorant bliss.

But I'm no bigot. I'll say this in favour of atheists. If you are altruistic and believe in doing good for humanity, believe in love and more importantly believe in yourself and are driven to do good deeds by your own free will, you are following your own religion and although you may blind yourself to the presence of God, you are probably better off than the theists who follow a religon because they fear God.

I'm Back

I read this somewhere in this vast cyberspace, and I couldn't help but laugh on reading it. So here I am, sharing it with everyone else. Beware, geeky stuff ahead!

Engineering vs. Computer Science : A Perspective

Once upon a time, in a kingdom not far from here, a king summoned two of his advisors for a test. he showed them both a shiny metal box with two slots in the top, a control knob and a lever. "What do you think this is?"

One advisor, an engineer, answered first. "It is a toaster," he said. The king asked, "How would you design an embedded computer for it?" The engineer replied, "Using a four-bit microcontroller, I would write a simple program that reads the darkness knob and quantizes its position to one of 16 shades of darkness, from snow white to coal black. The program would use that darkness level as the index to a 16 element table of initial timer values. Then it would turn on the heating elements and start the timer, with the initial value selected from the table. At the end of the time delay, it would turn off the heat and pop up the toast. Come back in a week and I'll show you a working prototype."

The second advisor, a computer scientist, immediately recognized the danger of such short-sighted thinking. He said, "Toasters don't just turn bread into toast, they are also used to warm frozen waffles. What you see before you is really a breakfast food cooker. As the subjects of your kingdom become more sophisticated, they will demand more capabilities. They will need a breakfast food cooker that can also cook sausage, fry bacon and make scrambled eggs. A toaster that only makes toast will soon be obsolete. If we don't look to the future, we will have to completely redesign the toaster in just a few years."

"With this in mind, we can formulate a more intelligent solution to the problem. First, create a class of breakfast foods. Specialize this class into subclasses: grains, pork, poultry. the specialization process should be repeated with grains divided into toast, muffins, pancakes and waffles; pork divided into sausages links and bacon; and poultry divided into scrambled eggs, hard-boiled eggs, poached eggs, fried eggs and various omelet classes."

"The ham and cheese omelet class is worth special attention because it must inherit characteristics from the pork, dairy and poultry classes. Thus, we see that the problem cannot be properly solved without multiple inheritance. At run time, the program must create the proper object, and send a message to the object that says, 'Cook yourself.' The semantics of this message depend, of course, on the kind of object, so they have a different meaning to a piece of toast than to scrambled eggs."

"Reviewing the process so far, we see that the analysis phase has revealed that the primary requirement is to cook any kind of breakfast food. In the design phase, we have discovered some derived requirements. Specifically, we need an object-oriented language with multiple inheritance. Of course, users don't want the eggs to get cold while the bacon is frying, so concurrent processing is required also."

We must not forget the user interface. The lever that lowers the food lacks versatility, and the darkness knob is confusing. Users won't buy the product unless it has a user friendly, graphical interface. When the breakfast cooker is plugged in, users should see a cowboy boot on the screen. Users click on it, and the message, 'Booting UNIX v.8.3' appears on the screen (UNIX 8.3 should be out by the time the product gets to market.) Users can pull down a menu and click on the foods they want to cook."

"Having made the wise decision of specifying the software first in the design phase, all that remains is to pick an adequate hardware platform for the implementation phase. An Intel Pentium Pro with 32 Mb of memory and a 2Gb hard disk and a 17" super VGA monitor should be sufficient. If you select a multitasking, object oriented language that supports multiple inheritance and has a built-in GUI, writing the program will be a snap. (Imagine the difficulty we would have had if we had foolishly allowed a hardware-first design strategy to lock us into a four-bit microcontroller!)"

The king wisely had the computer scientist beheaded, and they lived happily ever after.