To be in love, in a relationship, is to expose oneself to the risks of deep hurting. We pretty much give the other person the power to hurt us badly.
The sad truth is that there is nobody in the world perfect enough to never hurt us. That kind of person simply does not exist. We can only hope for someone who will hurt us the least and whose love will make up for all the hurtful times.
The only thing we can do is try not to hurt those who love us. And on the occasions when we are hurt, try not to retaliate or do something that will escalate the hurt and cause more damage. Of course, we also have the option of breaking the love, the relationship and leaving for good.
It's a sucky deal for sure!
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Monday, November 06, 2006
Hacking Democracy on Google Video
Last night I watched a remarkable documentary on Google Video, called Hacking Democracy. The documentary was telecast on HBO on Nov 2nd 2006, and here's the HBO Synopsis. You can play the documentary in the Google Video Player embedded above, or you can watch it here.
The United States of America is perhaps the country which sees the highest usage of newer computer technologies - software & hardware - at all levels, be it personal, private, public or government. It is not surprising that America would resort to new technology in its election process to record and tally thousands of millions of votes.
What is truly surprising, almost unbelievable, is the rotten system America uses to run its elections. A mix of hardware and software systems which suck big time, and an inefficient and corrupted bureaucracy which does not strictly follow due processes and regulations, have truly hijacked the 'greatest democracy in the world'. This kind of rot in any other aspect of American life, especially if it involved money, would have resulted in quick and highly publicized prosecutions. The responsible people would have been held accountable, heads would have rolled and asses would have been hauled off to prisons for very long stays. Most importantly, the system would have been reformed to put sufficient checks and balances in place to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. This is the America we have read about, come to know and respect. The America which is exposed by this documentary is a country where the most important and sacred democratic process, namely the election, has been corrupted quite blatantly and absurdly.
It all starts simply enough : a 'grandmother' (the documentary mentions this more than once) and writer named Bev Harris from Seattle, sets out to find out why her county acquired electronic touch screen voting machines and if they are reliable enough. When she is not satisfied by the answers she gets from the officials, she tries to find out more. From there, through the course of the documentary, she manages to uncover a rot which spreads across the country, from coast to coast. But the remarkable thing is that, the story remains consistently simple through the entire 80 minutes of the documentary. There is no evil mastermind bad guy at work, there is no clever and complex conspiracy which is hard to detect, there is no ingenius and daring moves by the good guys to catch and expose the bad guys. There is not even the terrorism and violence that goes with election corruption and hijacking in some countries.
It is all so absurdly simple and silly : Bev Harris is not some lady James Bond or a hot-shot investigative journalist. She is just a regular lady from next door, who is running around the country, with a camera following her, asking questions and accepting help from whoever offers to help. All she has to do is search the Net to find the "secret" software code behind the voting systems, the code which is not even shared with the government, and is discovered to have a lot of security holes in it; all she has to do is dig through the garbage of election officials to discover how they are not following the processes and the regulations as they are supposed to; all she has to do is let loose a couple of techies on the new voting systems which were bought by the government for millions of dollars, and within a few minutes they show honkin' huge holes in the systems. Some of these systems do not even have password protection to the databases which store the count of votes. They show the most basic bugs and simplest hacks by which election results could be completely manipulated and changed. All this is done right in front of our eyes, on film. And this is the silly system which is used to elect local politicians to national ones, including the US President himself. This is the system which influences the fate of an entire nation, nay, nations, and changes the course of history itself!
It is amazing! I have spent the entire 10 years of my career taking care of software systems for American companies, systems which process people's monies, which do hundreds of thousands of financial transactions involving thousands of millions of dollars. I have seen how these systems account for every single cent of the thousands of millions of dollars they process. The transactions can be anything from simple arithmetic to complex billing and accounting, but not a single cent is lost. The only money that is usually lost in these systems is the money not paid by customers who go bankrupt or cannot be traced. Even this money is not technically lost. It is well-accounted for upto the last cent, collection actions are initiated and it is written-off only when it is deemed to be unrecoverable. These software systems are built by relatively modest teams, in the IT departments of American companies, and the vendors from whom they source their software systems and services. Countless such systems are used by banks and businesses across the country, quietly and efficiently processing mind-boggling amounts daily. I find it to be truly amazing that the world's greatest democracy is not able to get sufficiently robust and reliable systems to do the simple yet most important task of recording and tallying its votes.
The last two presidential elections in the US were controversial because of this very reason. There are many people who believe that George W Bush never truly won either election. Despite the questions and controversies hanging over the election of the president himself, not much has been done to improve the voting situation. As this documentary shows clearly, the system continues to be rotten. Is it because of corruption or the lack of political will? Or the fact that the general public is not very savvy about the whole issue? It is very important that every American watche this documentary and take action to ensure that his/her vote is recorded and counted right, and does not get thrown in the garbage or lost in the holes of half-baked computer systems.
Related link: Blackboxvoting.org, the non-profit organization started by Bev Harris.
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Bengalooru! Bengalooru! Bengalooru!
Today, November 1st, is the Golden Jubilee of the formation of Karnataka state. This occasion is marked by the move to universally spell and pronounce the name of Karnataka's capital city Bangalore, as Bengalooru.
This has sparked a lot of comments and debates across the world and the cyberworld. On this occasion, I am presenting below some of the popular myths and realities surrounding this issue.
Myth: Bangalore to Bengalooru is a name change similar to Madras to Chennai or Bombay to Mumbai.
Reality: It is not really a name change like Bombay to Mumbai and Madras to Chennai. It is more of a spelling change to reflect the correct pronunciation. It is just an adoption of a more Indian, less anglicized pronunciation of the name, and the corresponding spelling.
Myth: This is a new idea which came from politicians and ministers, who are just out to gain political mileage.
Reality: The city has always been known as Bengalooru in all Kannada publications and in everyday talks among Kannadigas. The idea of universally using the pronounciation and spelling Bengalooru, starting from the golden jubilee anniversary of Karnataka state's formation, came from the well-known literary personality, Jnanapeetha award-winner, Dr U R Ananthamurthy. The idea became popular among the general Kannadiga public, and then was taken up by the government and politicians.
Myth: There is popular sentiment among most people against the "name change".
Reality: Among the grass-roots, "person on the street" Kannadigas in Bangalore and rest of the Karnataka state, this idea is very popular. Even among non-Kannadigas who were born and brought up in Bangalore, this idea is popular. Most of the people who oppose, especially the most vocal ones, are usually immigrant non-Kannadigas, who have little or nothing invested emotionally and culturally in Bangalore.
Myth: The "name change" costs a lot of money. Money which can be used to improve the infrastructure of Bangalore.
Reality: Any costs involved are one time only. The costs can be further minimized by continuing to use existing stationery until they are exhausted and using the new spelling only on new stationery. The money needed for this change is much less, compared to the costs of maintaining/improving the infrastructure of a city. For people who claim otherwise, here is a comparison: cost of stationery used in your house vs the cost of building, maintaining the infrastructure of your house. Understand the difference?
Myth: Bangalore is an international-sounding word. Bengalooru sounds "local", and so it is not good. So, 'changing over' will be awkward and difficult.
Reality: This is another illogical argument which sounds at first like it is logical. Bangalore is not an international word by itself. The city became internationally popular, mostly in just the past two decades - there is not a long history and attachment internationally to that name. For the true foreigners, especially people who just get to know the place, Bangalore is as strange and foreign-sounding as Bengalooru. It is relatively easy to change the pronunciation and spelling, especially because Bengalooru is pretty close to Bangalore. Even the international airport code BLR, need not be changed. When the world has adapted relatively easily to Mumbai, changing over to Bengalooru is no big deal.
Myth: Bangalore is a global brand. Changing the name now will adversely affect the brand.
Reality: This is another statement which seems to make sense, but really doesn't carry a lot of weight. Name changes happen as frequently in commercial branding as in other areas of life, and in business, they happen more ruthlessly. For me, AT&T is a name with history, known all over the world, for a very long time. I had never heard of Cingular. I am sure this is true of many more people. Yet, when Cingular took over AT&T's mobile phone business, the name change was immediately all-pervasive and very effective. Did that name change adversely affect the brand and the business? There are no signs which indicate that. For people who are already familiar with Bangalore, it will be business as usual in the future Bengalooru. They will continue to get the same advantage and benefits from the city, which made them go there for business in the first place. And for people who don't know the city yet, and who are future business prospects, it makes no difference at all. Future business deals will not be made or broken based on whether the city is called Bangalore or Bengalooru. Anyone who suggests otherwise is an idiot.
Myth: This is a big change, a big deal, a big issue. And it is all for nothing. It won't improve the infrastructure or conditions of the city.
Reality: NO! This is not a big change, as I have mentioned enough times already. Nor is it a big deal or a big issue. The expenses are relatively low and one time. Any awkwardness and inconvenience is also merely passing. Taking the longer perspective of time, after this small change, future generations will know the city as Bengalooru for decades and centuries to come. The past few decades of mispronunciation, starting from the British times, will just seem to be a passing phase compared to the longer history of the city. I think for the benefit of having my city's name pronounced properly for decades and centuries to come, by people around the world, it is all worth it. Imagine that you correct some foreigner when s/he mispronounces your name. Suppose s/he quips back, "Pronouncing your name correctly does not change the way you look or make you richer". Will that make any sense?
Myth: Blah! Blah! Blah!
Reality: Bengalooru! Bengalooru! Bengalooru!
Related post: Bangalore Vs Bengaluru
This has sparked a lot of comments and debates across the world and the cyberworld. On this occasion, I am presenting below some of the popular myths and realities surrounding this issue.
Myth: Bangalore to Bengalooru is a name change similar to Madras to Chennai or Bombay to Mumbai.
Reality: It is not really a name change like Bombay to Mumbai and Madras to Chennai. It is more of a spelling change to reflect the correct pronunciation. It is just an adoption of a more Indian, less anglicized pronunciation of the name, and the corresponding spelling.
Myth: This is a new idea which came from politicians and ministers, who are just out to gain political mileage.
Reality: The city has always been known as Bengalooru in all Kannada publications and in everyday talks among Kannadigas. The idea of universally using the pronounciation and spelling Bengalooru, starting from the golden jubilee anniversary of Karnataka state's formation, came from the well-known literary personality, Jnanapeetha award-winner, Dr U R Ananthamurthy. The idea became popular among the general Kannadiga public, and then was taken up by the government and politicians.
Myth: There is popular sentiment among most people against the "name change".
Reality: Among the grass-roots, "person on the street" Kannadigas in Bangalore and rest of the Karnataka state, this idea is very popular. Even among non-Kannadigas who were born and brought up in Bangalore, this idea is popular. Most of the people who oppose, especially the most vocal ones, are usually immigrant non-Kannadigas, who have little or nothing invested emotionally and culturally in Bangalore.
Myth: The "name change" costs a lot of money. Money which can be used to improve the infrastructure of Bangalore.
Reality: Any costs involved are one time only. The costs can be further minimized by continuing to use existing stationery until they are exhausted and using the new spelling only on new stationery. The money needed for this change is much less, compared to the costs of maintaining/improving the infrastructure of a city. For people who claim otherwise, here is a comparison: cost of stationery used in your house vs the cost of building, maintaining the infrastructure of your house. Understand the difference?
Myth: Bangalore is an international-sounding word. Bengalooru sounds "local", and so it is not good. So, 'changing over' will be awkward and difficult.
Reality: This is another illogical argument which sounds at first like it is logical. Bangalore is not an international word by itself. The city became internationally popular, mostly in just the past two decades - there is not a long history and attachment internationally to that name. For the true foreigners, especially people who just get to know the place, Bangalore is as strange and foreign-sounding as Bengalooru. It is relatively easy to change the pronunciation and spelling, especially because Bengalooru is pretty close to Bangalore. Even the international airport code BLR, need not be changed. When the world has adapted relatively easily to Mumbai, changing over to Bengalooru is no big deal.
Myth: Bangalore is a global brand. Changing the name now will adversely affect the brand.
Reality: This is another statement which seems to make sense, but really doesn't carry a lot of weight. Name changes happen as frequently in commercial branding as in other areas of life, and in business, they happen more ruthlessly. For me, AT&T is a name with history, known all over the world, for a very long time. I had never heard of Cingular. I am sure this is true of many more people. Yet, when Cingular took over AT&T's mobile phone business, the name change was immediately all-pervasive and very effective. Did that name change adversely affect the brand and the business? There are no signs which indicate that. For people who are already familiar with Bangalore, it will be business as usual in the future Bengalooru. They will continue to get the same advantage and benefits from the city, which made them go there for business in the first place. And for people who don't know the city yet, and who are future business prospects, it makes no difference at all. Future business deals will not be made or broken based on whether the city is called Bangalore or Bengalooru. Anyone who suggests otherwise is an idiot.
Myth: This is a big change, a big deal, a big issue. And it is all for nothing. It won't improve the infrastructure or conditions of the city.
Reality: NO! This is not a big change, as I have mentioned enough times already. Nor is it a big deal or a big issue. The expenses are relatively low and one time. Any awkwardness and inconvenience is also merely passing. Taking the longer perspective of time, after this small change, future generations will know the city as Bengalooru for decades and centuries to come. The past few decades of mispronunciation, starting from the British times, will just seem to be a passing phase compared to the longer history of the city. I think for the benefit of having my city's name pronounced properly for decades and centuries to come, by people around the world, it is all worth it. Imagine that you correct some foreigner when s/he mispronounces your name. Suppose s/he quips back, "Pronouncing your name correctly does not change the way you look or make you richer". Will that make any sense?
Myth: Blah! Blah! Blah!
Reality: Bengalooru! Bengalooru! Bengalooru!
Related post: Bangalore Vs Bengaluru
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
