Is any one else bothered by all that is going on with the war and what not? Does any one care any more?
I was watching this movie, called "Lions for Lambs". It was a sundance movie directed by Robert Redford, who has been known to be openly opposed to many things government! But this was a very poignant look at the war, and even more troublesome-ly, a scathing look at the apathy of the common population! Of you and me.
The screen writer for this movie was horrified at his own behavior when he paused for a teenie bit while flipping through channels to hear the news of American soldiers killed by an explosion in Iraq. He felt, "Gee, that is bad!", and moved on to the next more interesting news item - potentially talking about the custody battle fought by a well known pop star or the live coverage of the funeral of a model, whose only claim to fame was that she was famous!
As I hear him say that, I was totally disenchanted, and could not but think, "That is me!". I don't care. I live on the edge of the burning fire, watch it burn and thankful that someone is fighting it. I don't believe in the cause, so I don't believe I should die for it, is the justification I give myself. What do these "lambs" know? The lambs who are leading the country; the lambs that are ordering the lions to fight for them! This is the central theme of the movie.
I was watching the movie, and was quite unsettled by how true the premise is. I wake up in the morning, and appreciate the fresh air, sip my coffee and write my blog while someone is fighting for a cause, that I don't care about enough to know enough about, or say something about. There are parents who lose their kids, husbands and wives who lose their spouses, little kids who lose their parents, and I don't care about it, because I don't think this war was justified in the first place. I wave the flag and appreciate the bravery, and talk in my small group of friends of the idiocy of the whole matter, and go back to my life. My life, that is so precious and something I have taken for granted, which is totally hanging by a thread in a strange land in constant jeopardy from misled and misanthropic terrorists! A life watching for the next bomb to explode, or seeing their mates die in their arms wondering if it could have been them, or when it will be their turn.
Coincidentally, there was another talk on National Public Radio this morning, where there was an author who invited her to be drafted. Yes, as outrageous as it may sound, she wanted the draft! Not because she believes in state-mandated bearing of arms, or the cause for which those who bear arms fight. She wants to be drafted, so she can care about when and what we fight for. So, we will be more picky as a population on battles we chose. We will care to educate ourselves about what is what in the world outside and actually question the wisdom of choice to go to war because, it is us, and our sons and daughters that we have to send to the battlefield! As extreme as it may sound, given the rampant apathy, why not?
As for me, I just hope, I don't stop with just ranting!
Monday, April 14, 2008
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Aren't they all the same or is it just me?
Who would have thought watching TV would become such a difficult task? Don't you just want to do that just to get away from it all. Isn't the idiot box supposed to be idiot proof? Apparently not. Not after I decided that watching TV is not good enough without my home theater. Now I have a receiver, a DVD player, a CD player, a cable box with DVR, and the array of equipment is still growing. With all that came remote controls. Yes, I, now need to remember that I have to use the cable remote to change channels, while I have to use the receiver remote to increase volume. But I can use the cable remote to select the video input, instead of the TV remote - how brilliant. Except I should remember that the select button is actually the right arrow! Are you kidding me? And lo and behold if I run out of batteries. The cable remote takes 3 AA bateries, while the receiver needs 4 AAA batteries. And there is the other thing that needs the square looking battery.
Have you looked at the battery aisle in Radio Shack? All those buttons and cylinders? When did this all become ok? Can't they all come up with a solution that will work across? Did any one not complain about this yet?
Oh, wait. They have devices that don't need batteries. Or at least not for a long time. They have chargers, instead! Eeeek! Chargers! That messy tangle of wires and unsavory looking plastic blobs that you are forced to carry around. Don't forget to pack your cell phone chargers, camera charger, IPOD charger, shaver charger, laptop charger, and that charger that can charge rechargeable batteries for those that don't need chargers! To add to that, in my infinite wisdom, I thought moving a toothbrush across my teeth was too much work and decided to get a toothbrush that will tickle my nose while vibrating in my mouth, apparently cleaning it, and would require - you guessed it - another charger!
Aren't they all the same? Can't they make a rule saying "thou shalt use this one charger for all equipment" or "thou shalt use only this type of battery"? Won't life be simpler if they all worked the same? Won't these things will be cheaper too?
Exactly. These things would be cheaper! So, the powers that be who are secretly laughing at the hapless consumers who are left to deal with this muddle are the ones that profit from it. Now, when you upgrade your cell phone, you are paying for the charger, too. If it is all standard, it just might be cheaper. They get less money, that is. Also, if it worked with all chargers then what is so exclusive about their product. Vendors like Apple have the nerve to not include the charger as part of the standard package for an IPOD and charge you extra for it. Accessorize, they say!
Makes me mad! May be if enough people get mad, there will be something done about it. But this or cure cancer, you say! I guess the decision is obvious.
Meanwhile, I have to go look for the car charger so I can charge my cell phone to call to order a spare charger for my laptop - so I can have a back up charger at home. Yes, I will watch the road while I drive!
Have you looked at the battery aisle in Radio Shack? All those buttons and cylinders? When did this all become ok? Can't they all come up with a solution that will work across? Did any one not complain about this yet?
Oh, wait. They have devices that don't need batteries. Or at least not for a long time. They have chargers, instead! Eeeek! Chargers! That messy tangle of wires and unsavory looking plastic blobs that you are forced to carry around. Don't forget to pack your cell phone chargers, camera charger, IPOD charger, shaver charger, laptop charger, and that charger that can charge rechargeable batteries for those that don't need chargers! To add to that, in my infinite wisdom, I thought moving a toothbrush across my teeth was too much work and decided to get a toothbrush that will tickle my nose while vibrating in my mouth, apparently cleaning it, and would require - you guessed it - another charger!
Aren't they all the same? Can't they make a rule saying "thou shalt use this one charger for all equipment" or "thou shalt use only this type of battery"? Won't life be simpler if they all worked the same? Won't these things will be cheaper too?
Exactly. These things would be cheaper! So, the powers that be who are secretly laughing at the hapless consumers who are left to deal with this muddle are the ones that profit from it. Now, when you upgrade your cell phone, you are paying for the charger, too. If it is all standard, it just might be cheaper. They get less money, that is. Also, if it worked with all chargers then what is so exclusive about their product. Vendors like Apple have the nerve to not include the charger as part of the standard package for an IPOD and charge you extra for it. Accessorize, they say!
Makes me mad! May be if enough people get mad, there will be something done about it. But this or cure cancer, you say! I guess the decision is obvious.
Meanwhile, I have to go look for the car charger so I can charge my cell phone to call to order a spare charger for my laptop - so I can have a back up charger at home. Yes, I will watch the road while I drive!
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Is it worth dying for?
What gives one human being the right to take the life of another? At what point do we say, we need to rid the society of this person? And above all, the question that is more important and compelling to me - How do we know we got the right person?
Prisons serve two main purposes. One, to remove the wrong-doers away from the society, punish, reform and get them ready to rejoin the society. Second, is the prohibitive value of it. Just the fear of going to such a treacherous place and be isolated from life as you know it, is supposed to be a deterrent for folks to keep from crime.
Death sentence, definitely does not serve the first purpose. There is no punishment. There is no rehabilitation. There is no rejoining the society. So, the obvious value of death sentence is to be a deterrent. Also, there is the additional benefit of the death sentence; the society is rid of this undesirable element and we don't have to pay for a lifetime of a prison for someone. Their life is of no worth to the rest of the society except - by being taken away - serve as an example to others. Though, a typical death sentence, ironically, does include time in prison prior to the execution. Further, there is the "eye-for-an-eye" motive, which is primitive and panders to the basic human tendency of revenge.
The horror of this is that it is predicated on a system that is not perfect. What if he/she was in the wrong place in the wrong time? I agree that the process is more rigorous and the system is not easy on doling out death sentences but there are still mistakes! With the advancement of technology, new type of evidence is exonerating folks who have been doomed to die bringing us to the inevitable question:
How many people who are already executed were innocent?
It makes me shudder to even think that the answer is very definite greater than zero. Imagine that! An innocent man, arrested, prosecuted, convicted, sentenced and killed. All for committing nothing. And there is nothing we can do now, because he is dead. It is irreversible. Where do you draw the line on the probability of error? How many lives are worth sacrificing to rid the society of these heinous criminals? Is it ok to be wrong once in a hundred times? Thousand times? Ten thousand? Even a million times? Would it be ok to have that one wrong person to be you?
Prisons serve two main purposes. One, to remove the wrong-doers away from the society, punish, reform and get them ready to rejoin the society. Second, is the prohibitive value of it. Just the fear of going to such a treacherous place and be isolated from life as you know it, is supposed to be a deterrent for folks to keep from crime.
Death sentence, definitely does not serve the first purpose. There is no punishment. There is no rehabilitation. There is no rejoining the society. So, the obvious value of death sentence is to be a deterrent. Also, there is the additional benefit of the death sentence; the society is rid of this undesirable element and we don't have to pay for a lifetime of a prison for someone. Their life is of no worth to the rest of the society except - by being taken away - serve as an example to others. Though, a typical death sentence, ironically, does include time in prison prior to the execution. Further, there is the "eye-for-an-eye" motive, which is primitive and panders to the basic human tendency of revenge.
The horror of this is that it is predicated on a system that is not perfect. What if he/she was in the wrong place in the wrong time? I agree that the process is more rigorous and the system is not easy on doling out death sentences but there are still mistakes! With the advancement of technology, new type of evidence is exonerating folks who have been doomed to die bringing us to the inevitable question:
How many people who are already executed were innocent?
It makes me shudder to even think that the answer is very definite greater than zero. Imagine that! An innocent man, arrested, prosecuted, convicted, sentenced and killed. All for committing nothing. And there is nothing we can do now, because he is dead. It is irreversible. Where do you draw the line on the probability of error? How many lives are worth sacrificing to rid the society of these heinous criminals? Is it ok to be wrong once in a hundred times? Thousand times? Ten thousand? Even a million times? Would it be ok to have that one wrong person to be you?
Monday, November 28, 2005
Crosswords for dummies
Ever since I first learnt to solve my first crossword, I have been fascinated with this little puzzle. They are a perfect mix of language play, analytical thinking, and general knowledge, all of which I relish. Solving crosswords is an exercise experts recommend to keep your brain fit - something like aerobics for the brain!
I got hooked to it, when the kids' section of our local newspaper (The Hindu), in the town where I grew up ran a section on crosswords in the that explained the different types of crossword clues, with a mini-crossword in tow. It piqued my interest, and I started solving those clues. When I could not get a clue, I diligently checked the answers next week and tried to figure out how it was worked out. They ran this series for a few weeks, before I got confident enough to try the main crossword meant for the grown ups!
So, in an effort to document what I know about solving crosswords, I am going to publish a post or a series of posts on "How to solve a cryptic crossword". I don't claim that I am an expert in anyway. This is just stuff I have picked up when I solve crosswords. I hope this is useful and makes a convert out of you, too! I have tried to use examples that I thought of or have come across in real crosswords to illustrate various clue types.
Now let's cross swords with crosswords!
Introduction
Crosswords are of two types - cryptic and non-cryptic. The non-cryptic ones would not warrant a series of posts on how to solve them. They usually have short straight clues which will lead to one or more answers. You use the number of letters in the clue, or the other letters you have already found on the grid based on solving other clues, to narrow down your answer.
For example, a simple clue might be:
Film's Spielberg (6)
The answer, quite simply is Steven, for Steven Spielberg.
There might be subtle word play in these, and some clues can be multi-word clues, without an idea of where the word's break. Let's see an example
Revenge (9)
This could be very tricky. One answer you can think of could be "Vengeance". It is a perfectly good answer. But imagine that you already have some letters in your grid for this answer. Let's assume, that the gaps in the grid are something like below:
T _ T F O _ T _T
Based on this, I could think of "Tit For Tat" as an answer. Notice that sometimes the clues don't give any idea that is multi-word. Some times, they might. I am sure, it would have been much easier, if the clue read:
Revenge(3,3,3)
The non-cryptic crosswords are typically bigger with a lot more open spaces, and the clue can lead to a few answers but then only one will fit in given the other words that will be intersecting it. The crossword setters make it interesting by identifying a theme and having clues that fall into this theme be the central answers - which typically span the entire width or height of the crossword grid.
While challenging in its own regard, to me, the non-cryptic ones are not as much fun as the cryptic ones, as they lack the analytical puzzle-solving aspect of it. That is all I have to say about non-cryptic crosswords.
I prefer and thrive on cryptic crosswords which will be the focus of the remainder of this post and many more to come.
The cryptic ones are the ones which lead you to a unique answer based on some puzzle, and meaning that appears in a clue. Each cryptic crossword clue has two main parts. The first part is the meaning of the answer, the second part is a puzzle by which we can get to the answer. There is no telling in what order these will occur in a clue. In some type of clues, there is also an indicator, that tells you what kind of puzzle it is. The challenge is to recognize where these parts are in a clue, then solve the puzzle to get the answer. Also, there is no specific order in which you have to go about solving it. You can solve the puzzle to get an answer and validate that with the meaning part of the clue, or in some cases, you can guess the meaning and try to validate that by solving the puzzle.
There are several types of puzzles that are employed by most crossword setters. The most common ones are:
In the coming posts, I will try and tackle each type one at a time.
I got hooked to it, when the kids' section of our local newspaper (The Hindu), in the town where I grew up ran a section on crosswords in the that explained the different types of crossword clues, with a mini-crossword in tow. It piqued my interest, and I started solving those clues. When I could not get a clue, I diligently checked the answers next week and tried to figure out how it was worked out. They ran this series for a few weeks, before I got confident enough to try the main crossword meant for the grown ups!
So, in an effort to document what I know about solving crosswords, I am going to publish a post or a series of posts on "How to solve a cryptic crossword". I don't claim that I am an expert in anyway. This is just stuff I have picked up when I solve crosswords. I hope this is useful and makes a convert out of you, too! I have tried to use examples that I thought of or have come across in real crosswords to illustrate various clue types.
Now let's cross swords with crosswords!
Introduction
Crosswords are of two types - cryptic and non-cryptic. The non-cryptic ones would not warrant a series of posts on how to solve them. They usually have short straight clues which will lead to one or more answers. You use the number of letters in the clue, or the other letters you have already found on the grid based on solving other clues, to narrow down your answer.
For example, a simple clue might be:
Film's Spielberg (6)
The answer, quite simply is Steven, for Steven Spielberg.
There might be subtle word play in these, and some clues can be multi-word clues, without an idea of where the word's break. Let's see an example
Revenge (9)
This could be very tricky. One answer you can think of could be "Vengeance". It is a perfectly good answer. But imagine that you already have some letters in your grid for this answer. Let's assume, that the gaps in the grid are something like below:
T _ T F O _ T _T
Based on this, I could think of "Tit For Tat" as an answer. Notice that sometimes the clues don't give any idea that is multi-word. Some times, they might. I am sure, it would have been much easier, if the clue read:
Revenge(3,3,3)
The non-cryptic crosswords are typically bigger with a lot more open spaces, and the clue can lead to a few answers but then only one will fit in given the other words that will be intersecting it. The crossword setters make it interesting by identifying a theme and having clues that fall into this theme be the central answers - which typically span the entire width or height of the crossword grid.
While challenging in its own regard, to me, the non-cryptic ones are not as much fun as the cryptic ones, as they lack the analytical puzzle-solving aspect of it. That is all I have to say about non-cryptic crosswords.
I prefer and thrive on cryptic crosswords which will be the focus of the remainder of this post and many more to come.
The cryptic ones are the ones which lead you to a unique answer based on some puzzle, and meaning that appears in a clue. Each cryptic crossword clue has two main parts. The first part is the meaning of the answer, the second part is a puzzle by which we can get to the answer. There is no telling in what order these will occur in a clue. In some type of clues, there is also an indicator, that tells you what kind of puzzle it is. The challenge is to recognize where these parts are in a clue, then solve the puzzle to get the answer. Also, there is no specific order in which you have to go about solving it. You can solve the puzzle to get an answer and validate that with the meaning part of the clue, or in some cases, you can guess the meaning and try to validate that by solving the puzzle.
There are several types of puzzles that are employed by most crossword setters. The most common ones are:
- Anagrams
- Homophones
- Homographs
- Word play
- Containment
- Construction
- Literal
In the coming posts, I will try and tackle each type one at a time.
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Spring Forward and Fall Back
A familiar expression by now, for all the folks who live in an area where day light savings is observed- "Spring Forward and Fall Back". Quite a useful mnemonic, when you try to remember which direction the clock's hands need to be moved. There are revellers, who spend that extra hour on the Saturday night in late October, and curse the Gods for the lost hour in April.
A bunch of friends and I, were taking advantage of that precise extra hour this past Saturday, and was wondering, how does it benefit? Why not have all days observe daylight savings? Why confuse folks? And if there are places that do not observe - that do just fine, why do we bother?
Well, all good questions, and it was quite shameful, that after 10 years of life in the United States, I did not have a clear answer for this. So, the curious cat in me went plodding for answers. Is "googling" officially a word yet?
Voila! It is all about conserving energy. The spring forward, essentially makes the sun set later, hence you get home late, and the time to bed from that point is shorter - by an hour to be precise - so you switch off your TVs, lights, etc., and hit the sack sooner! As simple as that.
There are some good links that gave a more detailed explanation and a history of daylight savings. One of them below:
http://www.timeanddate.com/time/aboutdst.html
As for me, my clock quickly adjusts to whatever time it is. I tell myself I should utilize this extra hour, to get to work early and make it a habit, but it has never worked. It is still a morning rush, as if nothing changed!
A bunch of friends and I, were taking advantage of that precise extra hour this past Saturday, and was wondering, how does it benefit? Why not have all days observe daylight savings? Why confuse folks? And if there are places that do not observe - that do just fine, why do we bother?
Well, all good questions, and it was quite shameful, that after 10 years of life in the United States, I did not have a clear answer for this. So, the curious cat in me went plodding for answers. Is "googling" officially a word yet?
Voila! It is all about conserving energy. The spring forward, essentially makes the sun set later, hence you get home late, and the time to bed from that point is shorter - by an hour to be precise - so you switch off your TVs, lights, etc., and hit the sack sooner! As simple as that.
There are some good links that gave a more detailed explanation and a history of daylight savings. One of them below:
http://www.timeanddate.com/time/aboutdst.html
As for me, my clock quickly adjusts to whatever time it is. I tell myself I should utilize this extra hour, to get to work early and make it a habit, but it has never worked. It is still a morning rush, as if nothing changed!
Thursday, October 27, 2005
What's in a name?
Finally, I have my blog!
Is this just about the most favorite opening statement in each blog? I wonder.
Anyway, I have moved mountains, crossed the seven seas, fought the dragon, and created my blog! What a pain to come up with a name for this darned thing. Ranging from wanderlust to edsblog, and from braindump to compasspointe - purely inspired by the name of a street near where I live - I had to go through a myriad in my head. How do I select a name that is cool yet not too silly, smart but not too nerdy, hip but not too weird? Oh well, what do I know? I can only babble, and it does not matter, anyway. Which is precisely what I will call my blog!
It makes me skeptical if this blog phenom will catch up in my confused, over-ambitious, perfectionist brain, given that I took so long to just come up with a name! Am I going to struggle with each and every line that I write, wondering if there is a better way to say what I did? Am I trying to impress others or myself? Are there even going to be others? Would I have corrected this posting many times before I posted this?
We'll see!
Is this just about the most favorite opening statement in each blog? I wonder.
Anyway, I have moved mountains, crossed the seven seas, fought the dragon, and created my blog! What a pain to come up with a name for this darned thing. Ranging from wanderlust to edsblog, and from braindump to compasspointe - purely inspired by the name of a street near where I live - I had to go through a myriad in my head. How do I select a name that is cool yet not too silly, smart but not too nerdy, hip but not too weird? Oh well, what do I know? I can only babble, and it does not matter, anyway. Which is precisely what I will call my blog!
It makes me skeptical if this blog phenom will catch up in my confused, over-ambitious, perfectionist brain, given that I took so long to just come up with a name! Am I going to struggle with each and every line that I write, wondering if there is a better way to say what I did? Am I trying to impress others or myself? Are there even going to be others? Would I have corrected this posting many times before I posted this?
We'll see!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)