We are made up of layers of lies told by ourselves, to convince ourselves about how good life is for ourselves at the moment.
Our mind warps us in a space where we we have to add a new layer each time we encounter reality. Sadly, the reality check happens only we encounter a bump in the path taken. The layer we add circumvents this bump and alters the path to smoothen the ride, until we hit another bump. In the end the long and winding road taken is no longer to the destination we started out for.
The layer shields us from facing our own true conscience. We mask the truth in order to get by. To live another day without having to endure the pain of being true to ourselves. We are ready to veer off a goal only because a larger ulterior motive exists that doesn’t want us to suffer. We end up defining a perimeter that includes wealth, health, family, status, comfort and security. We derive happiness out of all these and feel proud to have achieved it. We may or may not have realized some compromises we made along the way building this fence. Like: we probably gave up on a goal or two, we sacrificed going after perfection, we stopped risking failure, we shutdown going on a new mental expedition, we avoided being at the cross roads, we shun our ego, we stopped defining our destiny, we lost the innocence to experiment, we killed our curiosity, and we slipped into a comfort zone that sucks us like a black hole.
In the end we pretend and live with a borrowed happiness for a future we no longer care. We are numb due to the thick layers that cushions us from our own guilt and helps us forget of what it was to be raw and exposed. Unfortunately aging and maturing adds to this misery (if you want to call it that). To really *defy* age is not to beat its physiological phenomenon but to overcome its mental decay. To never concede to the mind when it has a new layer ready.
Start peeling a layer today…
P.S: Most definitely inspired by the song “Sad but true” from Metallica.
There is no dearth of information on why software patents are harmful as well cripple innovation. Even the big players don’t shy of being slimy about it.
Are they evil? I guess yes, if used by trolls. Are they necessary? I think so. The fundamental need for invention/innovation is a guarantee that the idea succeeds and is rewarded. The rewards are usually monetary gains. The problem has been that there have been way too many frivolous patents that have been granted. Things that are known prior art or that have been in common use are patented. It seems at the center of all this mayhem is an incompetent patent office. What makes it hard for the patent office is legalese speak that lawyers use to confuse the triviality of an idea. Similar concepts have been patented multiple times, because the wordings on the filing are different! Hopefully Machine Learning can be employed to find similar patents and weed out duplicates one or not grant new ones. Sadly, the willingness to change the scheme of things has gone missing in USoA today. The call to change how software patents has been going on for a while now. Paul Graham wrote a nice essay on it and Martin Fowler has some opinions on it as well.
An idea that had in mind revolves around how open source has revolutionized software creation. Open source is work usually by a collective mass of interested people, dedicating their time freely. In the end it is a very compelling alternative to paid software. In fact, where open source has shined is in creating plethora of *small, utilitarian, reusable* libraries and frameworks. Today there is usually more than one readymade way to implement a problem, and all of them are likely open source. The point is that the collective, free effort has paved a way for others to build on with minimal cost. (The licensing issues with open source is itself another Meta issue). The parallel to draw here is to create a pool of *Open Source Patents*. What this means is that current patent holders who have no interest in monetizing/incentivizing their IP should open source their patent. This means, anyone is free to use the concept implemented by the patent and not worry about infringements. Companies can contribute their stock pile of older patents that they no longer care or troll after. The copyright/owner of the patent still lies with the one who files, but it is available for use with right attribution.
People should aggressively patent but add it to the open source pool. The idea is that a troll doesn’t patent it earlier. In fact once a large base of open patents have been collected a movement towards challenging current patents used by trolls can be made. The patent office can revoke or disallow cases where an existing patent in the open source pool covers it. In fact the new patents can be checked against the open source pool for *equivalency* and not granted.
Unfortunately the premise of this movement requires that the creator give up monetary gains. The success of the patent is still very much plausible. Such altruism is obviously very hard to expect from someone who might have poured in 18hours a day, 7 days a week for years. But then, when open source started people were thinking the same way. Who would contribute their personal time for free? Things changed when passionate people wanted to create thing and see them realized and in action. A similar trend can start where a collective mass want to put a concept in practice and patent it and release it open source pool. The cost of filing, lawyering up etc are still very much a problem, but then we can hope that some companies can come forward to bear this cost in the interest of public. I’d imagine Google might want to help in this front. The start for this trend is going to be hard, but I am convinced that once in motion this can gain very quick momentum through the collective power.
To be honest, the goal is NOT not-to-reward the one who patents, but to weed out the trolls. Someone who patents an idea with and has a product/software out in the market, there is nothing wrong with it. Open Source patents can support this as well. Others are welcome to use this person’s patent but maybe with a small royalty. I like Paul Graham’s patent pledge to be used here. The only criteria that this patent is accepted as an Open Source patent is that there is a working implementation of the idea “at all times”. Think of this as the cost open source software have for premier support (usually a company). So say for example I patent an idea and have a product that goes along with it in the market (the product has to be marketed/supported etc). I can open source my patent, but can expect to charge a small fee for enterprises/companies wanting to use it. I can expect a royalty only if my own product is out there competing. This is to vindicate that I am actually putting my IP to use and not trolling. Of course I risk going out of business or my product might not have traction, in which case the open source community can claim the patent to be completely free.
I see that there is an initiative around open patents here. But it still feels restrictive and not free as in free beer. I like their idea though - “Things can be owned, but ideas can be freed”.
Is the first step towards *excelling in anything* actually demanding excellence from everyone else around?
We know of the trait that perfectionists show - expect others to be perfect. They cannot accept mediocrity, because they have set the bar very high for themselves and others. I am making a fundamental connection here that perfection leads to excellence or in fact perfection is excellence. Lets go with that assumption.
What about someone like me, who cannot excel in anything and have no track record of being perfect? Can I change that by a mere change of my own perception? What if instead of trying to become a perfectionist on my own, I instead demand others to be perfect around me? This weird thought has some truth to it. Consider these:
Now the reality of an absurd idea like this is that the universe you can influence and expect to become perfect is either significantly small or doesn’t exist. It could be your spouse, parents, partners, co-founders, coworkers, close friends or whoever in the vicinity of influence at the moment. This universe actually exists if you look carefully. How much you can influence is hard to judge.
Another of my weird complementing theory to this is that, even if we are not able to exert any influence on this little universe of ours, we will still make progress towards becoming a perfectionist.
Here is why I believe that - by being rejected by our universe, we are constantly irritated and annoyed at how neglected perfection is. It would start to bother us that no one cares to look at the stars! It will eat us alive that what we believe is not being practiced, so we would want to do it ourselves *better*. We would come to loathe the very mediocrity that surrounds us and that is enough for us to not be part of it. Now, it is easy for someone (actually most) to just give up and suck up to what is around, but a few can change by practicing this technique. They will have to be disciplined to get there.
Go demand excellence from others, you deserve it…
An interesting event occurred that had me wondering about trust that humans have and build.
There is a stray cat that visits our home occasionally. The cat is familiar with the neighborhood and probably even aware of the people around. In fact it knows my home quite well, as it is sometimes fed by the people who stay below our home (my home is on the 2nd floor). I have seen it occasionally ramble around the home and the terrace. When it sees someone it doesn’t run away as it is domesticated by nature (even though not really having a master). In fact it tries to use its seductive cat calls to get some food from us. In the last few weeks that I have been around, I have encouraged it by patting it. Recently, I started giving it food - milk & rice - the staple diet of the household pets in India. It familiarized itself very quickly with respect to the time and frequency of feeding. Within a couple of days it became very friendly and wandered around us often, even while not wanting food. Then this remarkable thing happened. On the third day of feeding, it ate a bit of the food and then went away. It came back in a few mins and it brought along a tiny kitten (capable of walking on its own, but still very young). It wanted the baby to have the food and get familiar with the surroundings and the people. All along, none of us were aware it had a little kitten, which it had safely hidden at another part of the neighborhood. The kitten was apprehensive at first to be around people, but its mother encouraged it. The kitten understood the instincts the mother was showing and trusted people around. It was still shy to be pet, but gradually after consuming the meal it was comfortable to let some of us stroke it. The mother was purring and cajoling all along.
I found this event remarkable on so many levels:
This type of trust building is not known to happen between humans. We take a long time to trust another person. We get along better with a few quickly, but we rarely put our lives or our lil ones’ lives with others. We grumble at times for actually becoming close to others (I do, I prefer isolation). Let alone trusting another person, very few of us trust ourselves. We fear and don’t take that leap of faith in what we believe in. We are afraid of failures and take half measures. We are sometimes too reasoned out. The part that strikes me most is that, in becoming the intelligent, rational, thinking, superior, sophisticated, unlike-an-animal, civil and *ethical* species of the planet, we humans have lost a trait to trust oneself and one-another better.
I guess it is a bit of an exaggeration and the comparisons aren’t apples-to-apples. For example a cat might not trust another cat and humans to humans trust is in the same vein. We trust a dog or cow sooner over people. Yet, I feel the act that this animal showed is something that man at the top of the pyramid fails to grasp better. I guess to get to the top, it was via dog-eat-dog which is so ironical.
To be an animal at times…
Why is there such a big divide between people who are quantifiably intelligent and those who aren’t? An example of what I call quantifiably intelligent is say the professor teaching the Stanford’s AI course - Sebastian Thrun and for someone not, is the person who delivers my flipkart orders. Clearly professor Thrun has a proven track record with a mastery over math, whereas the flipkart delivery man, while knows how to add numbers, collect orders, ensure quality of delivery, and manage several cash-on-delivery a day will struggle at the idea of math. [No offense intended here, just a mere observation. For the record my ability in math lies closer to the flipkart delivery man.]
Is this because prof. Thrun is extremely brilliant, where as Flipkart delivery man isn’t? Or is it prof. Thrun has mastered his subject via hardwork and dedication? My dismal intelligence tells me its a combination of both. By the way, there is no certain way to prove that prof, Thrun is smart in every which way compared to my flipkart man. For example, hypothetically the flipkart man could outsmart prof. Thrun in a street smart contest of driving a two-wheeler using the most optimal path (note: hypothetical). But going by the academic and proven track record we will have to accept prof. Thrun as clearly better.
What makes prof. Thrun outstanding? Where does his intelligence originate from? Does having an IQ that is at least 50 points more than the flipkart man good enough? Can intelligence be cultivated? Can a combination of hard-work, dedication, focus, *taking risks* and *start thinking* get us there? If so, how late in life can one start? Is it skill building in one (or related) specific area that guarantees this?
There are many questions and no good answers. Just my speculation that the combination of “hard-work, dedication, focus, *taking risks*, * starting to think*” and passion, even after half the useful life has elapsed (30 years and counting) can take me somewhere. It may never end on a high note, as what prof. Thrun has been able to achieve, but it can certainly go some distance. I have to admit that the cost of the lost opportunity for not doing something at the *right time* can be a HUGE setback. Hopefully it is a lesson to remember.
Here’s to a better half of life…
This is wonderful news from youtube. Streaming over internet will be the distribution technique of the future. Television might still exist, but they would just be *smart* terminals plugged to the internet (hint: apple television?). It is eventual and will force the content creators to monetize differently. Heck, even BCCI gets it! (take note NFL, BCCI has made it free)
Some advantages that streaming presents to the end consumer:
Well, some of the above have already been implemented (streaming by bcci, cable channels on ipad/android etc), but there hasn’t been a significant push towards this. Unfortunately there is still a lot of money to make in cable advertising and it is still the primary means of consumption. It is going to change in the next 5-10 years though - because the generation that has grown up with internet would prefer consuming over internet, and also because the trend to monetize over internet will be established. Youtube is clearly leading the way on that front.
Another key aspect that I think would become an enabler is allow home users to also become content creators. Right now, the content creators are largely studios/television networks. The apetite to consume from home users isn’t there. Youtube lets users upload their videos/movies but the desire to consume *indie* content is minimal. A trend could be born that helps people create and share their private channels right from their home with minimal effort. The home user as a content creator could also be a *redistributer* of content. Probably even open the door for micro-transactions. The convergence of capable home computers and good software could be the genesis of this trend. Imagine watching a private channel of a friend’s wedding video over the internet with some interactivity, or a movie/video that is shared exclusively with you, customized for you. Ubiquitous media generation - could be the beginning of the future.
I am betting on it…
What is a right mix of inspiration and perspiration for doing something well? Thomas Alva Edison said “Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration”. What is it, if it doesn’t have to be for a genius? For example lets say, to be above mediocrity. To be in that band that lies between good and great (== genius). To be an A/A+ player but not an A++ (== genius) player. Can just-below-genius person take the luxury be inspired more?
Being a genius is no ordinary task. Usually they are probably the most hard working. They set standards for themselves that even they struggle to meet, but in the end they manage to meet them, unlike non-geniuses. They can disrupt their field of excellence with innovations/inventions that the rest can only observe.
Here is an oxymoron for the non-geniuses (if you want to treat it as one) - clearly they need to be inspired *more than* a genius in order to find that extra motivation, if they need to achieve what a genius can. But, not being a genius they need to work even harder to hone their skills. In my opinion though, not being a genius only means you need to work harder. If you (non-genius) start loving what you do, motivation can come easy and this motivation is a direct inspiration to succeed. So I’d like to rephrase that quote for us non-geniuses: To be amongst a genius is point-one percent inspiration and ninety-nine-point-nine percent perspiration.
A case in point for this I’d like to use (I feel this is very relevant for so many aspects of life) is Novak Djokovic’s 2011 success in Tennis. Djoker achieved pure perfection in 2011, that helped him win 3 grand-slams and several other titles. All along he beat the residing geniuses: Federer and Nadal consistently. I’d like to believe Djoker is not a genius. He is fantastic and an A+ player as well, but sometimes when Federer or Nadal are in the mood, they play a game that can be described only by poetry that Djoker doesn’t have an answer for. But, what Djoker has proved is that maniacal hard work can match genius and probably even beat a genius. He has gone on to vindicate that All you need is love to work that hard sprinkled with enough failure at the hands of genius to be a non-genius achiever.
To be, or not be, a non-genius…
Gone are my days of prodigal, endless, unconditional and unchecked internet addiction. One thing for sure that USA has going for it is that their ISPs haven’t forced a hard limit[1] on *affordable* internet usage.
While it is possible to get an unlimited bandwidth connection in India, it is either at absurd throttled speeds (512 kbps, which in reality could be < 100 kbps) or only on a premium leased/dedicated line which costs an arm and both legs. To endure the low speeds, I would expect the ISPs to pay me to see me suffer.
The limits placed by the Indian ISPs makes me feel they got their zeros in gigabytes wrong. The average consumption of data during the last few months of my stay in USA was around 75-90 GB p.m. It included simple pleasures like:
On an average that is roughly 3GB per day. The plans in India offer between 8GB to 15GB p.m for broadband users and past that it is either nickel and dimed or throttled to make one miserable. Just like everything else here, there is a constraint on the resource.
It appears I am an exception wanting this byte-hash. People have learnt to live in their means in India, or better put they are teetotalers. Companies gape at me when I demand more. They don’t fathom how I can blow through billions of bits. Sadly there haven’t been too many spoilt brats around here.
And so, I have to surrender my temptations and find ways cut down my addiction to junk. I will have to milk every bit that flows through the wires. It is like serving time in a prison camp with no outlets for air.[2] Wonder whose betting on the ‘Netflix’ of India.
Waiting for Indians to become purposeless zombies…
[1] - The US ISPs are known to throttle the speeds after a certain soft limit like 150/250GB p.m. The limit is still high, and they don’t nickel and dime after that. Though, recently there have been reports of them sending notices for disconnecting.
[2] - As a reformed optimist, I am compelled to find something good out of this situation. While I can pretend that this allows me to stay focussed on only things that matter, in all honesty it just feels like getting skinned alive while getting tickled on my tummy.
A home is where you feel safe, secure, welcome and snug. A home doesn’t let you feel stressed, tired, exhausted or euphoric at 3am. It comforts you and implores you to retire for the day. It doesn’t let you fall down and feel the pain for taxing your body. It lets you take the easy way out. Its just too benign.
A garage keeps your mind from wandering and thinking about that safety net. It numbs you from seeking repose. It eliminates a *need*. It lets you focus. It negates the quintessential characteristic of mankind - *to NOT endure*.
Today marks my first day in a ‘garage’. My place for tinkering, my well that shields me from welcoming arms, my enclosure that guarantees my isolation and above all, it makes me feel belonged.
Hoping that something comes out of my garage…
What are the chances that Ekalavya could have gone on to achieve things that could have rewritten parts of Mahabharata? While Drona (the guru) betrayed mankind by crippling Ekalavya, the fact that Ekalavya was the better pupil (with respect to Arjuna) is a well known *mythological* fact. Theoretically, chances are that Ekalavya could have gone on to become the best known archer in the Dvapara yuga. The remarkable part about Ekalavya’s probable success, was that he was self-taught, but having observed and learnt from Drona from a distance. He was never coached directly, but he learnt the lessons by staying obscured. He practiced and built his skills tirelessly each day. While his work ethics were key for his mastery, his intent to learn and observe a teacher was equally important.
Back in this future, what are the things one can learn and then practice from the success of companies like Apple and Google? While Apple and Google aren’t necessarily the only place where success brews, the fact that they have the most number of Dronas is a given fact. Since not everyone can make the cut to work there, I think there is so much one can observe and learn from them. Whether we take it to practice is our mental disciplining. Standing on the shoulders of giants, has long proven to be a formula for success.
This phase of my life, I am inspired by many Dronas, who might never know me, and to whom I might never have to give my thumb, but I am hoping that I can at least achieve a part of what Ekalavya could accomplish.
Time to discipline myself…
I believe that focus is a fundamental need for improvement and perfection.
It is remarkable how being focussed is a function of weeding out noise. Nothing new here, but it is sometimes hard to realize what the noise could be.
I have realized in a very short time - my ability to remain focussed on a task that *I love*, is significantly better when I don’t have to worry about going back to a day job. Having quit a full time job to work on an idea (with a cofounder), something that I love doing, there is no *latent* tension/worries about having to wake up to a job that agonizes. The heaviest weight (noise)- not-doing-what-I-love for a good 1/3rd (8+ hours a day) of my life can bring down the energy for doing something-I-love. The best part about removing this noise, is that I am able to find time for other things that I want to be better at (80-20 rule). Even things like - learning new things, a weekend hobby and even maybe fitness are things I can enjoy doing, not having to worry about tomorrow.
Go find your loudest noise…
Everyone in India is at ease to use ‘an’ excuse for not keeping up a commitment. I feel this trait is deep rooted in our society. It starts at school with teachers giving excuses for not being on time. Students, in turn pick up the habit of taking the easy way out. At home, parents opine their lack of participation. Kids take it for granted that there is always a way out and that is by finding something else to blame on.
A day in the life can be filled with hearing excuses: The electricity is not there because there is a strike in another state; the will be no water because road construction broke the pipe; the garbage is not picked because everyone is on a vacation; the phones will not work because the rains damaged the poles; the furnitures will not be delivered because they suddenly went out of stock; the internet installation will take more time because the salesperson forgot to place the order… Like reasons stacked one on top of each other.
The reasons are actually genuine. There are so many problems that actually do intervene in one to carry out their job. But, the problem I feel is that, the society accepts this as an ‘OK’ state. Everybody pardons these excuses. Most seem to ignore the fundamental problem - “why is it ok to accept an excuse?”.
An outcome of this nature of the society is that everyone is very ‘adjusting’. People have the patience to put up with uncertainty. They are willing to work around the problems, finding inconvenient alternatives. There are no law suits just because someone did not get their internet on time. There is way too much pardoning.
In my opinion, this is a cancer in the society. While we make extremely good travelers and settlers in foreign lands, we never seek perfection. We constantly find excuses for our poor state. We will never achieve an efficiency that humans are capable of.
A lot of generalizations made here. There are, as always outliers to this and many in India and from India who have stepped up and set their bar very high. This is very heartening. It vindicates the fact that not accepting an excuse is a trait of an individual. If one can take a stand to not agree the status quo, there is a hope for change. To all those who are walking this path - I salute you.
I am amazed at how accurate and clear Steve Jobs was about his eventuality. To be able to predict your own end and to maximize your living time in order to pour all of it into what you love the most, is in the realm of black magic. That level of precision in life is what it takes to play the game at his level.
~All things are ephemeral, except how they inspire~
A few quick observations trying to stream/watch video over a low bandwidth channel -
Bandwidth capacity ~ 3.1 Mbps (reliance netconnect in India)
Reception speed ~ 500-800 kbps
Uplink speed ~ 300 kbps
Browsers tested on: Chrome 14.x, Safari 5.1, Firefox 7.x
Platform: Mac
VPN: Strong VPN - Needed to be on VPN to have a US IP for Netflix
All videos viewed had very similar frame rates as well as dimensions. The source of video for #1 and #3 below were from the same provider/domain (apple.com), while source for #2 was Netflix.
1) Progressive download in HTML5 - The progressive download of the video was clearly slower than the ‘playing rate’. Hence the video used to pause until further data was downloaded. A very annoying behavior all browsers demonstrated was that the video would never resume after the point it hung, even after additional data was downloaded. I had to manually seek the video to a few keyframes/points prior to the current position.
2) Netflix’s smooth streaming using Silverlight plugin - Netflix uses Microsoft’s Silverlight sdk to stream videos. The smooth streaming is a type of live streaming, that adapts to variability in the bandwidth. I haven’t traced the changes in the bitrate that silverstream likely applied during streaming. Anyway, it looked like Netflix stuttered after an initial play of around 120s. Netflix usually computes several things prior to the loading of the video. Once loaded the video played for around 5-10mins. After that it stuttered and hung. Netflix then loads a loading screen, that is likely recomputing the new bitrate to use. Unfortunately this loading screen was talking an eternity to complete (I ran out of patience).
In my opinion, Netflix’s smooth streaming wasn’t good enough to quickly adapt to the bandwidth changes. Either that or Silverstream SDK’s implementation isn’t the best. This needs more testing.
3) HTTP live streaming (apple’s live streaming) using Quicktime plugin- The http live streaming (apple’s suggested alternative) uses the quicktime plugin for working with apple’s http livestreaming data. The video played flawlessly, without a fuss. The streaming of short chunks of data (with multiple repeated fetch) managed to work the best on low bandwidth. Even the seek to a future cue point in the video, did not take too long to start streaming. Clearly, this was a big winner amongst the three.
A deeper analysis will have to be performed on similar datasets using the above three techniques. Hopefully I can blog about it some time in the distant future ;-). I would also add the flash live streaming to this list as well.
