SAST Wingees

Comments (14)

Sports fan – Aren’t you a hypocrite!

Happy Diwali to all the readers that celebrate it. What is Diwali without some fireworks – NK Sreedhar has a thought-provoking post that may provide some fireworks. Please fire away your comments.

—

I am game to holding people to a higher standard, especially those snarly ruthless politicians since they are coaxing and cajoling me to reach the highest office. Even I was shocked to find myself outside of the political realm and moving into another realm altogether. I could hear Rod Serling voiceover in the background – you unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension, a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of mind. You just entered the twilight zone of – Professional sports!

That’s right ladies and gentlemen – Professional sports! Today, it’s not as easy as throwing marbles or playing sticks, is it? It’s highly complicated and life consuming. We are talking about putting people on a pedestal, holding them accountable, and expecting them to dole out miracles everyday. Even Jesus Christ didn’t have this kind of pressure on him to perform miracles every day. And sports fans, oh we are ever so picky and downright hypocrites.

Hypocrite! Me, you say. Yeah! You and me both darling! Let’s look at some of the recent events that rocked the sports world. Sure, I exaggerate a little bit, but, you know me – what’s life without a little drama. Manny Ramirez, for those of you who don’t know him, is arguably the best right hand hitter in baseball, goes from Boston to LA and Boston fans hate him like he’s their evil Mother-in-law and cry foul. Should Sourav Ganguly be playing or sitting it out? Is he being selfish for wanting to play? Australian cricket team decides to travel to India, but not to Pakistan and Jones cries foul – they are doing it only for the money and not for security reasons. Finally, the outcry over IPL – players are selling their souls and doing it for the money. How can we lose our culture and do such a thing? What’s this country coming to?

Let’s look at the logic here. What’s wrong with playing for the money? We all do it, but only when we do it, we claim a noble goal (career growth, right opportunity – fill in the blank with your favorite cause here). The noble and not-for-profit messiah Jones himself did play for the money and continues to do so even today. Why else did he leave a trail of vomit at Chepauk like a scavenger hunt gone bad and continued to play?

It’s easy to critic Manny, Sourav, Australian team and players in the IPL, but, it’s downright hypocritical for you and me to question it and pretend that we don’t / won’t do the same. Let’s not kid ourselves. We’d jump ship too if someone offers 100% or 200% more money to do the same job, or pay 50% more than the next person for the same house. Not one of us will say, Oh no! I’ll only take half that money because I like charity. Of course, you are exempted if you are doing real charity work.

Let’s stop holding sports stars to a higher standard that we won’t hold ourselves to. They are, after all, human. And please, let’s stop pretending that it degrades our culture. Unless you are a Martian and you just landed here, you are no different than the next Joe Sport and it’s not detrimental to our culture any more than you switching houses.

What do you think? Are you a hypocrite or did you just land here?

Comments (22)

Gender Bender

NK Sreedhar is back in action with a timely post on the US elections which has gained a surprising amount of attention in India as well. Please encourage him with your comments. – Sukumar

—-

Just in case you didn’t get to see / hear the news in the past few months, it’s election year in the US. Hema and I are going to be voting for the first time and we are very excited. One of the best aspects of the US political process is the debates – where the average voter gets to see where the candidates stand and how they articulate their thoughts and ideas. We love the debates. In fact, we debate for hours together after watching the debates.

It’s no wonder then that after watching the VP debate, our conversation turned to Ms. Barracuda (Governor Palin for the rest of you elites). As recent poll numbers are showing, Gov. Palin’s support amongst women is dwindling and most women are starting to say that they wouldn’t vote for her. On the other hand, when we were sitting in the hall for oath taking, there was an African American to the right and left of me. Both of them have been in the country for over 30 years and this was the first time they wanted to become citizens, so they get the chance to put one of their own in the White House. In fact, analysts are predicting that there will be extraordinary turnouts of African Americans at the polls come November 2nd.

For the first time in the US history, an African American has the chance to become the president or a woman has the chance to become the Vice President. I wanted to understand why African Americans are feeling the maternal instinct of protecting one of their own, but, women are not feeling that same instinct in protecting Gov. Palin. No two segments of people have been more tortured, oppressed, denied their rights and treated as slaves than an African American or women. Yet, women who have been oppressed and sidelined since the hunter-gatherer days still won’t support one of their own, if only to elevate their collective condition, but an African American would and does. I find that very intriguing. Of course, I am over simplifying things by leaving out lot of nuances, but, you get the general idea.

I ask every one of the women that tells me they wouldn’t vote for Governor Palin, including my wife, why they wouldn’t. Most tell me that they are unable to identify themselves with the Governor and they can’t understand what she’s saying most of the times. Of course, their opinion of her collectively changed after the now infamous interviews that Governor Palin gave. The answer gets complicated when I ask them if they’d support her if she was eloquent and thoughtful and empathetic. Most of them are unable to point out why they wouldn’t support her even at that point.

Forget for a moment that a President and VP have nearly 3000 people to support them through key every day decisions and wouldn’t have to be great orators themselves – think of George W. Bush. Of all the virtues he had, public speaking wasn’t one of them. It can’t be that we value communication and inter-personal skills so high that it trumps our instincts to protect our own? If so, how did the independent women vote for W. Is gender instinct not as strong and clear-cut as racial instinct?

No matter which way we lean, at least at the outset, it looks as though women are able to overcome their gender-bias and no matter what gender you are, racial bias is much more difficult to overcome. What do you think?

Comments (28)

iWatch – Never carry a mobile phone again!

Updated Oct 14, 2008: This week’s Carnival of the Mobilists hosted by mjelly has featured this post. Thanks a lot James.

The last concept hack i did called the iPod SD became a popular post. Too bad, Apple never built the product 🙁

Yesterday, i came across this interview of Steve Wozniak (via Techmeme) where he mentions an iWatch.  I decided to daydream about the iWatch.

At a minimum the new concept should cure a disease of mine that has me embarrassed down to the bones – one that possibly afflicts most people that have reached a ripe old age like me 😛 I am walking around, someone comes around and says “Hi Sukumar, how are you doing” with such affection and familiarity, that it has me cringing – oh god! – i don’t remember the person’s name.

Wouldn’t it be cool, if i could have a camera, built-in to my spectacles, that would recognize the person and whisper the name of the person in my ears.

I knew that oakley had built mp3 sunglasses which gave me the hope to pursue this idea. I proceeded to look for sunglasses that had a camera built-in.

W00t! There is a whole range of spy cameras that are available that have cameras builtin to sunglasses and other sundry items. The only issue is that they all looked like the ones robocop would wear – not meant for humans 🙂

After some searching, i found one made by Brando that i thought i could wear with some alterations. I had to add a earbud headphone similar to the oakley so that i could hear what the sunglasses would eventually tell me. Then I wanted to strip out all the memory and other electronics needed from the sunglasses and leave only the bare essentials needed for the camera to work. That way i figured i could convert the Brando into a sleeker one that normal humans would consider wearing 🙂

That meant that i have to store all the electronics somewhere else and use bluetooth to communicate with the sunglasses. Additionally i realized i needed some kind of platform to run my face recognition program that would analyze the picture and whisper into my ears. Similar to my decision on using my spectacles to host the camera, i wanted to use something else that i always have with me to host the back-end electronics for the camera – the wristwatch.

After some Googling, i found this Hyundai wristwatch cell phone – it is a full fledged GSM cellphone+mp3 player+camera+bluetooth stuffed into a watch form factor. Conceptually i could take the camera lens and the mp3 speaker out and have it talk to the modified Brando sunglasses i described above.

The problem with these watchphones is that there are too many buttons making the user interface too clunky and complicated. I wanted something like the iPhone – a multi-touch based watch phone which had a superior user interface.

Dame luck smiled on me again. Yankodesign has published a concept phone called Cobalt that fit the bill perfectly – oozing OLED goodness. Yanko Design had it made like an old time pocket watch. I had to crop the picture to get the design that i wanted.

Drumroll please, here is our concept hack – the iWatch.

The spectacle piece is on the left and the watch piece is on the right. The watch is showing the time, temperature, a recent text/sms, the date/time, voicemail and email notifications.

If you are wondering where the camera is, i decided to give you another view of the iWatch.

The spectacle piece has the camera highlighted and the watch piece is showing the mp3 player.

With this on, i hope to recognize you when you come say hello 🙂 Not just that, the iWatch can replace the mobile phone, digicam and mp3 player that i need to carry around.

Hope you liked the concept hack. How would you enhance this concept hack further?

Comments (70)

Do bridges matter anymore?

(On the occasion of Gandhi’s birth anniversary, I dedicate this post to the memory of late Rajnarayan Chandavarkar among the finest sons and historians of India. Raj was based at Cambridge, England.)

“We can help make the world safe for diversity. For in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal” – John F. Kennedy

I have a fetish for bridges! I have been puzzled by it myself: whether its those small structures across our very own Cooum , the Thiru.Vi. Ka bridge across Adyar or the Napier Bridge near the Madras University or the Howrah Bridge in Kolkata or the Laxman Jhula in Rishikesh or the Blackfriars bridge across the Thames or the San Franscisco Golden Gate. Recall the movie the ‘Bridge over the River Kwai’ or the TV ad zooming in on the magnificient Tower Bridge of London?! Bridges have me all excited and thrilled. For a long-time I thought this was a fascination promoted by TV and Cinema.

Until I came across this book by Ivo Andric titled the “Bridge over the Drina” It is a fantastic book and clearly ranks as one of the greatest pieces of world literature. Over a period of 300 years, the destiny of the town and the individuals and communities living near the river Drina get inextricably interwoven with the history of the bridge. The bridge becomes a metaphor for the life around it. Andric’s masterpiece documents the unities and challenges between ethnicities and faiths, Bosnians, Serbs, Jews, Muslim and Christians and their relationship with the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires. The bridge is a silent witness to the history of Europe over centuries.

Cut to the chase. I turn to the contemporary developments across the world including our country. It seems as if some storms are causing bridges to break down and the chasms widening. There seems to be a growing passion for hate! Horror of horrors. Why would anyone want to have a passion for hate? Nicholas Fraser in his book ‘The Voice of Modern Hatred’ sets out the contours of this problem in Europe. This is truly a global problem. Hate is like a ‘malignant tumour’. Young innocent minds have been poisoned to dislike entire cultures through the sustenance of stereotypes. This is because increasingly one can notice a gross distortion in the way entire cultures, communities and identities are being represented especially in the electronic media mainly because of the violence of terrorists. There are other kinds of institutions and organizations too that indulge in violence but that is a separate subject.

I find myself very concerned with the manner in which society and media creates ideas and images of groups of people and their impact. These images to cite a few often take the form of ‘Muslims’ versus ‘Hindus’, ‘Maharashtrians’ versus ‘north Indians’, ‘Hindus’ versus ‘Christian’, ‘Dalits’ versus ‘upper-castes’, ‘Sunni’ versus ‘Shiah’ , ‘Sinhala’ versus ‘Tamil’ and ‘Christianity’ versus ‘Islam.’ The stereotypes and caricatures of ‘us’ and ‘them’ seem to be on the increase. The blame game as to who is responsible for what mess goes on endlessly.

In this madness, where are innocent, peace-loving people to go? Whom can they turn to for solace? Most sober people have adopted the posture of “Forgive them, O’Lord for they know not what they do!” The less said about the political class the better. Of course, there are always exceptions among them. What about the intellectuals? We are reminded of the ‘Prophet of Gloom’ in the form of Samuel P. Huntington who is (in)famous for his theory of the ‘clash of civilizations.’  His theory of clashes found its practitioners in the person of those hawks who promoted the invasion of Iraq and the ‘war-on-terror’ with all its attendant disastrous consequences. Such hawks made the world a more dangerous place. As for me, I draw solace from my favourite subject ‘history’ which would indeed judge these hawks and their global disciples very unkindly.

History is a great teacher. The problem with us is that we are poor students of this subject. The common refrain is that our teachers made this subject boring for us. Alas, if life were to accept such excuses, then everything would be a cakewalk. We would have often heard that those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. I would like to add repeat it at a huge cost to themselves and everybody. I wonder why anybody in their right mind would want to incur these costs. My friends and colleagues often ask me ‘what is the solution to all this? I wonder when an individual falls mentally ill, we escort him/her to a shrink. When a whole society falls sick, what do we do? Which physician knows how to treat ‘collective schizophrenia’? As I write this, there has been terrorist violence in Delhi and attacks on Christians in Orissa and Karnataka.

We are now faced with an epidemic of hate of sorts. Those who believe in religion say that these are signs that the world is coming to an end. Yet others attribute the problem to primordial sentiments and say that it has always been that way and will continue to remain that way. I refuse to buy any of these arguments. I firmly believe that human beings are capable of acting in their self and collective interest in a positive and enlightened manner.

There is still hope for and in reason. I believe that rationality can still play a role in the face of the madness of hate. I believe that millions of people are puppets on a string, or pawns in a chessboard or gullible creatures following the pied piper. It is the ability of ‘vested interests’ (the list is long depending on the context)  to elicit consent from the people to their being manipulated. There is adequate proof in historical studies that masses get easily and unknowingly misled through a set of motives different from what is in their interest. And that is indeed what is happening in this world. If there was no perception of threat to each other’s community, several politicians would be called upon to deliver on issues of bread and butter which are far more difficult than pitting one group against the other. This is true of the East and West, North and South, whether its of India or the rest of the Globe. Distraction by peddling hate is a favourite form of politics for those who are desperate for power. We have all seen in contemporary politics, the love for power. We need to show ourselves the power of love!

Now that the picture is clear, what can individuals do? To start with, we can borrow Nancy Reagan’s famous slogan “Just Say No” to hate. To prejudice. To disunity.

We can then build bridges. Bridges of Love. We can all do it small ways.  Begin with our neighbours and colleagues – do we in the first place know who they are? Do they have families and children like ours? Take an active interest in their well-being. Move beyond that to the residential area or the street or the locality in which we live. Can we build bonds of trust and oneness? As Kennedy rightly argues are we not all faced with the same challenges? We wake up, go to work, fend for our families, return take care of our near and dear ones. We all have children about whose welfare we are worried about. We all have elders who in the sunset of their lives need our company as much as we need their blessings and counsel. There are plenty of interstices and intersections where these bridges can be built. We just have to think creatively about it. Festivals, Ceremonies, Family occasions, Music, Movies and so much more are unexplored arenas of building a sense of togetherness among individuals and communities. Can the effort of an individual in this matter? Certainly. Drops make the ocean. Its better to light a candle than to curse the darkness!

The challenge before us is to build bridges -across time and space; across castes, communities, religions, races, languages and not to miss gender. We need these bridges badly. There will always be naysayers. The villains. The troublemakers. Is it not noteworthy that during war, bridges are the first structures to be destroyed to prevent the movement of people and supplies? To those who believe in a God, (s)he made us such: different from each other. Varied and Diverse. Tomes have also been written on the ‘unity of existence’ that brings together all these differences. There is no religion that by itself preaches hate – that religions can be used to create tensions is a different matter. I believe that the ties that bind people with one another are sacred. Let no one undo those bonds of togetherness.

It is the bridges that connect us all. I for one am a die-hard romantic. Its high time that all peace-loving people resisted the stereotypes promoted by the media and thought beyond them. I raise a toast to several friends, colleagues and the ‘common man’ who have rejected these caricatures. I was brought up on the staple of ‘Enlightenment’ with the firm belief of a ‘common humanity.’ I believe friendship and love will prevail. I think we need to take ‘bridge-building’ more seriously than ever before. We have to work at it.

Comments (24)

Deadly Justice – Part 1

Very few social issues galvanize people irrespective of their geographies. Abortions. Gay Rights. Prostitution. Drugs. The Death Penalty. If people could be roughly grouped into “Conservatives”,  “Liberals” and “Moderates”, their views on the 1st 4 issues would neatly fall into “No Way, No How!”, “Why not?” and “That Depends”. But, Capital Punishment is different. Its a cause that cleaves the Overtly Pious with the Bohemian. This leaves many conservatives sputtering and purple-faced.

I’ll acknowledge the elephant in the room & state my position. I support the Death Penalty, as long as certain conditions are met. This stance of mine confounds many academics who count me among their ranks. While I have a preponderance of liberal views, I’m too brutal & pragmatic to be a quintessential bleeding-heart.

Let’s weigh the relative merits and demerits of the arguments on both sides.

Most Civil Liberty activists ask me, “What if we kill an innocent person? Can you live with that?”. Yes, many an innocent person awaits execution on Death Row. Advances in Forensic Science – such as DNA Finger-printing – have exonerated many inmates from prisons.

I’m not flippant about life, that too, human life. Can we improve the technology used to convict defendants so that the error rate comes down drastically? Nothing works 100% of the time. Let’s pick a % of error in Death Penalty convictions we can live with: 0.01%? 0.001%? If you think that’s too high, let me offer a counter-example: Mortality rates for an Appendectomy. It is 0.2% – 0.8%. Most of us won’t bat an eyelid to get such a seemingly simple surgery done. Now, there’s nothing political about an abscessed appendix, so you don’t see people waving placards before the Operation Theater!

“What if a person killed in the heat of the moment?” I’m asked. “Do you want to fry their brains in an electric chair?”. I’m surprised at how common this misconception is. The law in most civilized countries differentiates between Murder and Manslaughter.

“First Degree Murder” is a cold-blooded murder, where the killing is premeditated, planned willfully and executed by the accused. In a “Second Degree Murder”, the accused nurses a grouse and kills the victim vindictively, but there is no premeditation – the murder was not planned. “Voluntary Manslaughter” is a classic “Heat of Passion” killing, where the accused did not plan the murder – but committed the crime in an emotionally distraught state. In an “Involuntary Manslaughter”, the accused shows criminal negligence of human life – for example, s/he may kill someone by recklessly driving a car.

Out of all these categories, only Murder-1 (First Degree Murder) is punishable by the Death Penalty. Where motive, intent to kill, opportunity and premeditation can be clearly determined.

Why does this topic garner so much press? Why does this raise the hackles of the left & right wings? For that, we must look at the origins & evolution of Criminal Justice.

The earliest laws followed the principle of lex talionis – or, Proportional Punishment. Roughly stated, “Eye for an Eye, Tooth for a Tooth”. The Codex of Hammurabi, a Babylonian king, is the earliest written law that dates back to 1760 BC. In that Stele, Hammurabi laid down a precursor of today’s Constitution along with his Punishment system based on lex talionis. Since the Old Testament draws heavily from Babylon, the Jewish Torah mentions “An Eye for an Eye” – equitable punishment – in the book “Exodus”. That this conflicts with God’s Commandment to Moses – “Thou Shall Not Kill” – is a cause of much debate among Rabbis.

Christianity and Islam, the later Abrahamic religions, urge its followers to forgive. Islamic Sharia however, also permits “Mirror Punishment” – AKA, Similar Punishment. The punishment may be milder or harsher than the original offense. For example, someone that caused bodily harm to others may be whipped, stoned or roughed up in a similar manner. Or, the organ that caused the offense maybe punished – Cutting off a thief’s hand, for instance.

It is interesting to note that much of the West’s adverse reaction to Capital Punishment can be traced to the New Testament. It all boils down to a fundamental tenet of Christianity – Confess your sins and the Lord forgives. Jesus Christ being the role model for devout Christians, the pious are urged to do what JC would do – Turn the Other Cheek.

Proportional and Mirror Punishments and their derivatives can be classified into “Retributive Justice”. They are Criminal Justice systems based on vengeance. As such, they’ve been criticized as being too rudimentary. A widely implemented alternative is “Utilitarian Justice”. Modern Justice systems are largely derivatives of Utilitarianism.

The essence of Utilitarianism can be condensed thus: Human beings attempt to eliminate suffering and maximize pleasure. It has a disturbing corollary though: It strives to increase the greater good of the society, sometimes at the expense of the individual. A detailed analysis of the ramifications of the Utilitarian ethic is tangential to the scope of the current post, so I’ll briefly touch upon the cankers as needed.

Utilitarians argue that punishment is negative and that we accomplish nothing by punitive measures. Instead, punishments are used primarily to deter potential offenders from committing the crime. An example could be the much-criticized Draconian laws for drug (Marijuana) possession. Individuals may be penalized steeply & harshly, to make an example of them. If this deters future offenders, the society at large has been protected – though by following an “Ends Justify Means” approach.

Where deterrents fail, the offender is incarcerated. The offender is incapacitated temporarily or permanently from doing harm. If a doctor is caught for malpractice, his/her license could be revoked. Or the convicts are rehabilitated – medical help is provided for the mentally unstable or the offenders are given vocational training, so they can earn a livelihood without resorting to crime. Execution is often the last trick in their play-book, as a means of incapacitation.

Coming back to the point, I think Utilitarianism and Abrahamic religions have overtaken Retributive Justice to the point where the merits of the Death Penalty – which has its origins in revenge – are questioned. Utilitarians focus on reducing suffering even when a perpetrator is punished. And the pious want to forgive sins.

“How can we conclude that these people are not fit to live?” they ask. “Killing them is too much!”. I believe certain crimes are unacceptable. We cannot pardon everyone. The International War Crimes Tribunal prosecutes tyrants and dictators for genocides as crimes against humanity. Should we forgive them of the heinous crimes they committed? If you think they should be executed, where do we draw the line?

Who should be killed? What are the harsh realities of implementing capital punishment? And what is my single most important reason for retaining capital punishment? Let’s see that in the next post.