Hi,
I doubt you'll read this, but it must be written. Here are some notes that should help the next time you take a viva:
1. Why don't people use Pentium 5, Pentium 6 etc?
Probably because they don't exist. That must be most of the reason.
2. Today's processors don't follow Moore's law.
Yes, they do. Your insistence that they don't does not change reality.
3. Dual core processors are the latest innovation - released 1-2 years ago.
No. There have been dual core processors at least since 2001.
4. Shrinking the manufacturing process increases total power consumption.
This is just stupid. It increases idle power consumption, not total.
5. Process shrinks are the only way to increase performance.
It's one way. There are many others.
6. Dual core processors exist because it's impossible to increase the clocks on a single core beyond a limit.
It can be done, refer Pentium 4. Dual cores exist because they're better at handling multitasking.
7. Pentium 4 dual core is the latest processor from Intel.
The only thing good about this is that you haven't seen Intel's garbage advertisements for the '2010 Core Processor Family'. You know what's bad? You don't read newspapers, or watch TV.
If you do read this, at least you will know that the world's changed since Ray-Bhurchandi was published. Just sayin'
Monday, 29 November 2010
Tuesday, 2 November 2010
Self help
I saddens me greatly that there are people in this world who have read self help books, or spiritual types of books, and not read The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Everyone knows that H2G2 has the biggest self help gyaan in the galaxy - 'Don't Panic' (in large, friendly letters, no less). What greater spiritual meaning can there be than 42, the answer to life, the universe and everything?
If you are a member of this group of people, please, please, remedy the situation by reading H2G2 as soon as possible. It's the best self help you could possibly get!
If you are a member of this group of people, please, please, remedy the situation by reading H2G2 as soon as possible. It's the best self help you could possibly get!
Sunday, 3 October 2010
(Dis)Belief
The Ayodhya verdict has come, and I've finally been able to have a decent look at it. I like the fact that the court wants an amicable solution that does not hurt any particular religion. There is one thing that riles me - the fact that the HC seems to have implicitly accepted (if not declared) that the Babri Masjid dome was the birthplace of Ram.
Too many questions come to mind here. But basically, how can anyone prove beyond doubt that Ram was born at that exact location? Does some scripture mention exact geographic co-ordinates? Just because people believe something doesn't mean it's true. If that's how the judgement is going to work, let me stake a claim too.
I claim, nay, I believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster was born at the exact same location that is the claimed birthplace of Ram. Further, my scriptures say that FSM was born there before Ram. That is where his noodly appendage first touched man. I therefore stake claim to the disputed land.
The land must be handed over to the Church of Pastafarianism and we must be allowed to build a monument (probably spaghetti and meatballs) to FSM. According to the HC, this belief is all I need to 'prove' that FSM was indeed born there. I have not furnished a shred of evidence (because FSM was born thousands of years ago, before Ram), but my claim is as valid as the claim for a Temple there. Ridiculous.
There is documented proof of a Mosque there. There is specious evidence (?), if any, of a temple or of anyone being born there. So lets go by the evidence - build a Mosque there. Build a temple adjacent to it. And lets live peacefully ever after, not letting idiot politicians divide us again.
Too many questions come to mind here. But basically, how can anyone prove beyond doubt that Ram was born at that exact location? Does some scripture mention exact geographic co-ordinates? Just because people believe something doesn't mean it's true. If that's how the judgement is going to work, let me stake a claim too.
I claim, nay, I believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster was born at the exact same location that is the claimed birthplace of Ram. Further, my scriptures say that FSM was born there before Ram. That is where his noodly appendage first touched man. I therefore stake claim to the disputed land.
The land must be handed over to the Church of Pastafarianism and we must be allowed to build a monument (probably spaghetti and meatballs) to FSM. According to the HC, this belief is all I need to 'prove' that FSM was indeed born there. I have not furnished a shred of evidence (because FSM was born thousands of years ago, before Ram), but my claim is as valid as the claim for a Temple there. Ridiculous.
There is documented proof of a Mosque there. There is specious evidence (?), if any, of a temple or of anyone being born there. So lets go by the evidence - build a Mosque there. Build a temple adjacent to it. And lets live peacefully ever after, not letting idiot politicians divide us again.
Sunday, 19 September 2010
All wrong!
I was searching google for the term 'books'. Google's collection of Related Searches includes 'Twilight books'.
This is wrong! Books and twilight are not related, except by the loosest definition of the word book.
This is wrong! Books and twilight are not related, except by the loosest definition of the word book.
Thursday, 16 September 2010
Owned!
Cutting sarcasm is a way of life. Circuitous speech is the only way I can talk any more. It's almost like I've forgotten how to talk 'normally'. The only rule is that if you're going dish it out, you should also be willing to take it in spirit.
I'm sitting in the car with my mum, she's driving. It's drizzling, and a film of mist begins to develop on the windscreen. She turns on the air conditioner to get rid of that mist. A few minutes later, the mist begins to develop again.
Me: You should turn up the AC, that should fix it.
Mum: The mist is on the outside, not the inside.
Me: Yeah, right. Just turn up the AC, you'll see.
Mum:
Then she flicks the wiper switch, and the mist gets cleaned up in one swipe of the wiper blades.
Now I'm silenced. Well play, mum!
I'm sitting in the car with my mum, she's driving. It's drizzling, and a film of mist begins to develop on the windscreen. She turns on the air conditioner to get rid of that mist. A few minutes later, the mist begins to develop again.
Me: You should turn up the AC, that should fix it.
Mum: The mist is on the outside, not the inside.
Me: Yeah, right. Just turn up the AC, you'll see.
Mum:
Then she flicks the wiper switch, and the mist gets cleaned up in one swipe of the wiper blades.
Now I'm silenced. Well play, mum!
Monday, 6 September 2010
Saturday, 4 September 2010
Procreation
This is a response to this blog post:
Existence
Please give that a read before you continue reading this.
(No, seriously!)
Now that you've read it, a little recap - Abhishek asks why people want to have children. I present my response to this question:
1. Because: They like children
Individual choice stands for a lot, and people like many things that make no sense to other people. There will also be people who must be in a relationship. Others will find that confounding. People want to have children, so they will.
2. Because: The BPL argument
A history teacher once put forward this argument to explain why you tend to see really poor people have large families. Poor people think that raising more children means there will be more people to support the family, and themselves. The said teacher had also, quite rightly pointed out - if there must be x number of children born every day, let them be born into a family that can support the children. The BPL argument is inherently flawed, but it is true.
3. Because: Cogito Ergo Sum
Man thinks, therefore he is. I like to believe that one of the most fundamental needs of the human race is the desire to gain knowledge. Knowledge comes from new ideas. New ideas cannot come about from an ageing, dying race of people. New ideas need new people - a new generation.
4. Because: Legacy
Another fundamental desire of the human race is to leave behind a legacy. Everyone wants to die knowing that someone, somewhere will remember them. For great luminaries of any generation, this is easy - their acts leave behind a legacy that will remind future generations of them. An ordinary person (by virtue of being ordinary) does not have access to this sort of legacy. Procreation is another way of being remembered. Your children will remember you. It's not as great a legacy as that left behind by a great scientist, but it's better than none.
5. Because: Anarchy
One of the reasons that the world at least attempts to control its excesses is so that something maybe left behind for the future generations. If the whole world were to go completely, and irreversibly sterile - it would be worse for the planet than it is now. Today you try to minimise using a fuel guzzling SUV because you want to limit the harm you cause to the planet. If there is no future, you might as well trash the planet as you go. And make no mistake - that is exactly what will happen. 2000 years of (recent) history point out that humanity is not a race well suited to compromise and agreement.
6. Because: It makes no difference if Humanity dies out
If the human race dies out, you only buy the planet a few million years. It's a seemingly long time, but not very long when compared to the age of the earth. A new dominant species will rise, and will eventually behave the same as we do now.
7. Because: Natural Selection
Natural selection is the reason why we're all here today. Natural selection exists on simple principles - the race must go one, and only the best of the race must go on. Consider a situation where the six billion people of the world have agreed to not reproduce. There will be people who will circumvent this agreement- let us say 2 million people, giving birth to a million babies. You can act all hurt about these people breaking the pact, but it will actually be Natural Selection acting in its best interests- the genes of those unfit to carry on the race, the 5.998 billion who abstained, are eliminated from the gene pool. The remaining million face possibly the best quality of life in modern history.
Finally - Abhishek says, "We exist, therefore, we protect existence." This is not a unique thought. It's just a rewording of natural selection. Every species exists to protect its own existence. There is nothing special about humans in this respect - it is a part of the instinct that every animal shares.
Those are some reasons for people to have babies. I don't agree with all of them, just some of them.
Existence
Please give that a read before you continue reading this.
(No, seriously!)
Now that you've read it, a little recap - Abhishek asks why people want to have children. I present my response to this question:
1. Because: They like children
Individual choice stands for a lot, and people like many things that make no sense to other people. There will also be people who must be in a relationship. Others will find that confounding. People want to have children, so they will.
2. Because: The BPL argument
A history teacher once put forward this argument to explain why you tend to see really poor people have large families. Poor people think that raising more children means there will be more people to support the family, and themselves. The said teacher had also, quite rightly pointed out - if there must be x number of children born every day, let them be born into a family that can support the children. The BPL argument is inherently flawed, but it is true.
3. Because: Cogito Ergo Sum
Man thinks, therefore he is. I like to believe that one of the most fundamental needs of the human race is the desire to gain knowledge. Knowledge comes from new ideas. New ideas cannot come about from an ageing, dying race of people. New ideas need new people - a new generation.
4. Because: Legacy
Another fundamental desire of the human race is to leave behind a legacy. Everyone wants to die knowing that someone, somewhere will remember them. For great luminaries of any generation, this is easy - their acts leave behind a legacy that will remind future generations of them. An ordinary person (by virtue of being ordinary) does not have access to this sort of legacy. Procreation is another way of being remembered. Your children will remember you. It's not as great a legacy as that left behind by a great scientist, but it's better than none.
5. Because: Anarchy
One of the reasons that the world at least attempts to control its excesses is so that something maybe left behind for the future generations. If the whole world were to go completely, and irreversibly sterile - it would be worse for the planet than it is now. Today you try to minimise using a fuel guzzling SUV because you want to limit the harm you cause to the planet. If there is no future, you might as well trash the planet as you go. And make no mistake - that is exactly what will happen. 2000 years of (recent) history point out that humanity is not a race well suited to compromise and agreement.
6. Because: It makes no difference if Humanity dies out
If the human race dies out, you only buy the planet a few million years. It's a seemingly long time, but not very long when compared to the age of the earth. A new dominant species will rise, and will eventually behave the same as we do now.
7. Because: Natural Selection
Natural selection is the reason why we're all here today. Natural selection exists on simple principles - the race must go one, and only the best of the race must go on. Consider a situation where the six billion people of the world have agreed to not reproduce. There will be people who will circumvent this agreement- let us say 2 million people, giving birth to a million babies. You can act all hurt about these people breaking the pact, but it will actually be Natural Selection acting in its best interests- the genes of those unfit to carry on the race, the 5.998 billion who abstained, are eliminated from the gene pool. The remaining million face possibly the best quality of life in modern history.
Finally - Abhishek says, "We exist, therefore, we protect existence." This is not a unique thought. It's just a rewording of natural selection. Every species exists to protect its own existence. There is nothing special about humans in this respect - it is a part of the instinct that every animal shares.
Those are some reasons for people to have babies. I don't agree with all of them, just some of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)