To program or kill is the question

Came across this interesting quiz that highlights the thin line that separates the "most wanted geeks" from the "most wanted".

Happy Memorial Day

Nice and poignant image that captures the essence of war.

Guns 'N Roses

Max Motors, a car dealership in Butler, Missouri, is offering a free handgun with every car purchase. The more disturbing fact is that sales have quadrupled thanks to the promotion. Owner Mark Muller "recommends a Kel-Tec .380 pistol, which he describes as 'a nice little handgun that fits in your pocket'."

Muller explains: "We did it because of Barack Obama. He said all those people in the Midwest, you've got to have compassion for them because they're clinging to their guns and their Bibles. I found that quite offensive. We all go to church on Sunday and we all carry guns."

Now that's one innovative way to increase the crime rate and the school shootings in this country.

Performance Enhancement in Sports (and Life)

Progress is the essence of life. Improvement is the key to progress. Motivation is the driving force behind improvement. But what motivates people? Success? Power? Money? All of the above? None of the above?

Regardless, (I almost typed irregardless) people are always looking for improvement and enhancement - a way to age gracefully, perform better and longer, and, vanquish that all time undefeated opponent known as aging. We do that by Botoxing our wrinkles, lifting our faces, reconstructing our noses, tucking our tummies, augmenting our breasts and taking a little pill, whose name rhymes with the the most famous waterfall in the world, to make sure we're ready when, you know, the right time presents itself.

Yet, when athletes take performance enhancing drugs (PEDs), they are vilified. Many a great athlete has fallen from the pedestal of greatness to the doldrums of darkness with a single confessional press conference or a single report that revealed it all. Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, Martina Hingis, Diego Maradona, Ben Johnson, Shoaib Akhtar - the list is as long as the Nile. Even average-Joes like myself take protein and vitamin supplements to maintain a balanced diet and control an ever expanding belly. The culture of personal physical enhancement has pushed the use of steroids and PEDs everywhere -- from Hollywood to the music industry to your next-door neighbor who wants to fight nature.Then, why the preferential scrutiny of athletes?

Athletic achievement is made to be measured and is available for instant analysis when performances improve, even incrementally. Athletes stand on pedestals, and pedestals are made to be toppled. A kind of moral ceiling hangs over sports, as degraded as that ceiling might've become in the 3,000 years since a bunch of Greeks began throwing javelins and racing chariots. Play by the rules. Play fair. Level playing field.

But what's happened is that many athletes have given performance enhancement a different meaning and a few of them have come, or have been forced out, of the closet to the extent that it is increasingly difficult to differentiate between excellent natural athleticism and drugs induced enhancement. Are the superstars of world sport truly great ones, or is it merely a matter of time before they fall from grace.

The truth is, sports do not define the culture -- they reflect it. Society's image of the ideal body is shaped largely by forces outside the chalked lines. And the belief that life can be improved, even extended, by drugs comes not from sports but from the burgeoning field known as medicine.

Sports bodies will soon have to decide whether to open the gates to PEDs and create a level playing field or continue to sweep things under the rug and play by the current rules. Either way, improvement and progress will continue to drive performance and life - natural or not.

Virtually Reality

One of the buzz terms in the 80's was "virtual reality", where a user interacted with computer simulated environments to experience the surreal, an experience so immaculately developed that it was infinitesimally close to reality. People could land on Mars and Mercury, scale Mt. Everest on the treadmill, save the world from aliens and even rescue beautiful princesses from tyrants and marry them! (Yes, I am talking about Prince of Persia). The .com boom in the 90's saw the emergence of Amazon and eBay that opened up virtual malls and window shopping was soon replaced by browsing on deals2buy.com or xpbargains.com. The last 5 years the web has seen yet another development that could have a much more seminal impact than any of the phenomenons discussed above - "virtual communities". MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, Orkut and the like, have changed the way people interact with each other, something that was not tampered with since the big bang theory (or the days of Adam and Eve, depending on your perspective).

Virtual Communities are slowly becoming the primary way people interact with each other, be it chat rooms in Yahoo, IMs in Google or scraps in Orkut . Members of these communities create Avatars (yet another Sanskrit word sneaking into the English lexicon after Yoga and Karma), which are essentially virtual clones of the users, and interact with other avatars. Blogs are in the process of replacing newspapers as the dominant source of information exchange, so much so that newspaper sites share the same technology as blogs and news reporters are increasingly indistinguishable from bloggers. Even job search and career changes are done through professional networks via LinkedIn or Doostang. Wikipedia has become the go-to site for information on anything, from Paris Hilton to the Hilton in Paris, replacing the big fat volumes that used to adorn our bookshelves.

So, what is news? What is opinion? How do we filter the facts from the subjective analyses? Who are our friends - the profiles and avatars that exist in Orkut and MySpace or the homosapiens that reside in realms of reality. What happened to god old fashioned meet-and-greet or phone-chats. In short, what is real? What is virtual? Have we tampered so much with 0's and 1's that all there exists is virtual reality?

Money for nothing and checks for free!

"Money for nothing and chicks for free" - crooned Mark Knopfler in 1985, to express his views on the music industry. With a single syllable change, it applies to the Indian Premier League (IPL), the newly conceived 20/20 cricket league set up in a franchise structure like the soccer leagues in Europe or the sports leagues in the US.

While the IPL might turn out to be the most defining development to happen to cricket since the Packer saga in 1978, and might take the salaries of players to be on par with those of soccer stars and NFL superstars, yet, when players like Manoj Tiwary, whom I saw in a recent game in Australia and wondered how he even got selected, and Ishant sharma, who despite being the star of the Australian tour was a virtual unknown a couple of months ago, fetched $675,000 and almost $1 MM respectively, the deal seems to have more holes than a sieve.

True that when business tycoons like Vijay Mallya, Ness Wadia, and Mukesh Ambani are rubbing wallets with Bollywoood stars like Preity Zinta and Shah Rukh Khan, there are bound to be excesses. After all, isn't this the marriage between the two biggest passions of a billion Indians - Cricket and Bollywood?.

Let's take a look behind all the glitter and analyze if there is gold.

First and foremost factor in the success of a venture is the product, in this case 20/20 cricket. There is no doubt that it is exciting and probably the best suited version to really bring people to the stadiums and have fun after a hard day's work. But beyond an exciting and serendipitously successful World Cup, there isn't a proof that the version is worth the millions of $$ in bets that are being placed - huge risk with uncertain return - an investment that would make me look like Ford betting on the Edsel.

Secondly, the HR, in this case cricketers, are an impressive lot - established players and upcoming ones with its share of have-beens; overall some of the best players in the World are on display.

Thirdly, the cost of hiring these cricketers - a mind boggling $633 MM - is where the logic behind all this looks as thin as soup in a college mess. Given that the people and the companies involved in the league are some of the biggest in the country and are proven winners this is definitely not a joke. One look at the salaries and more importantly the $$/hour, which is astronomical, it reveals the lack of common sense. E.g., M.S. Dhoni is expected to earn $1500/hour, which according to The Economic Times was higher than what Mukesh Ambani, ironically one of the team owners, earns. Then there are other operating costs that need to be taken into account like those of marketing, support staff, travel etc., that will ultimately make the figure fatter than the priest at my wedding.

I am a great believer in creating a market before creating a product and more importantly earning a few cents before betting millions. The IPL fails on both counts.

Hopefully the IPL will not suffer the same fate as that of the Indian stock market in April 1992, when blinded bullishness brought about the fall of many a millionaire, and Lalit Modi, the brain behind the IPL, will do better than Harshad Mehta.

Get Paid to get Interviewed - NotchUp!

I got an invitation from a friend of mine last week to join yet another exclusive, membership-by-invite-only, networking site called NotchUp. Having been an active member of LinkedIn, a successful and widely accepted business networking site, for the past 3 years I can vouch that it is very impressive when it comes to professional networking, job postings, referrals and forum discussions and I found it to be very useful when I was looking to change jobs last year. I have since gotten invites for similar sites like Doostang, Plaxo etc, but I am of the firm belief that when it comes to email addresses, credit cards, networking sites and girlfriends (or wives!), two is one too many to maintain!

NotchUp has a slightly unique selling point in that it is trying to replace pricey headhunters by actually paying people hundreds of dollars to interview. They are in a lot of ways the eBay of business networking, which seems to be the way entrepreneurs are going these days - adapt the successful eBay business model to various industries. Start-ups like Prosper are good examples of using an eBay-style P2P auction platform in financial credit services, rather successfully so far.

NotchUp is free to join, and you can even estimate how much you should ask for an interview with their calculator. For the type of professionals that they are targeting, I would actually say the price is about right. Since they seem to be different than the run of the mill networking site, I decided to sign up just to see how the model works.

From this article at NetworkWorld:

You say you wouldn’t interview with Company X if they paid you?

A startup called NotchUp is betting that’s a bluff.

Debuting this morning at Network World’s DEMO 08 in Palm Desert, Calif., NotchUp founders Jim Ambras and Rob Ellis tell me that 15,000 people a day are signing up for their new eBay-like employment service - based solely on word of mouth. The founders are convinced employers will pay hundreds of dollars directly to people they would like to interview — especially those not actively in the job market — because it will bring them better candidates faster.

So how does it work?

To get started, simply register, create a profile (which is similar to an online resume), and set an interview price. Your interview price is the price at which you’ll talk to prospective employers. Once you’ve created your profile, companies will search it and make you paid offers to interview if you have the skills and experience they’re looking for. Accept the offers you’re interested in, go to the interviews, and we’ll collect the money and transfer it to you.

Personally I feel, It’d be cool if this company merged with LinkedIn since this is complementary to what LinkedIn offers and it would definitely reduce the number of site memberships I have to maintain.

Hollywood's Dollies

The popular perception is that that Bollywood/Kollywood (I am just going to call it Indiewood to refer to our neck of the woods) is the only place where the same actor donned multiple roles, sometimes as flimsy as playing brothers (with and without mustache) or playing father and son (ala all Sarath Kumar movies). Though multiple roles in Hollywood may not be as regular as in Indiewood, Hollywood is definitely not immune to it.

Peter Sellers' 3 roles in Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (one of my all-time favorite movies), Mike Myers' 4 in Austin Powers movies and Eddie Murphy's uncountable roles in Nutty Professor spring to mind immediately. I was curious to find out if Hollywood was more prone to "cloning" than what meets the eye and below is a complete list that resulted out of a little digging. If not anything, it is worth a nice bite of trivia or an ice-breaker for that SuperBowl party this weekend.

• Rolf Leslie - 27 parts in the life story of Queen Victoria, Sixty Years a Queen (1913).
• Lupino Lane - 24 parts in Only Me (1929).
• Joseph Henabery - 14 characters in the Birth of a Nation (1915).
• Robert Hirsch - 12 roles in No Questions on Saturday (1964).
• Michael Ripper - 9 parts in What a Crazy World (1963).
• Sir Alec Guinness - 8 roles in Kind Hearts and Coronets (1949).
• Eddie Murphy - 8 characters in Nutty Professor II: The Klumps (2000) and 7 characters in The Nutty Professor (1996).
• Jerry Lewis - 7 characters in The Family Jewels (1965).
• Peter Sellers - 6 roles in Let's Go Crazy (1951), 6 roles in Soft Beds, Hard Battles (1974) and 3 roles in Dr. Strangelove (1964) and more.
• Scott Mosier 5 roles in Clerks
• Vincent Perrera 5 roles in Clerks
• Mike Myers - 4 roles in Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002).
• Terry Thomas - 3 parts in Arabella (1969).
• Red Skelton - 3 characters in Watch the Birdy (1930).
• Meg Ryan - 3 roles in "Joe Versus the Volcano" (1990)

It is noteworthy that Kamal Hassan's perfect 10 in Dasavatharam or Sivaji Ganesan's near-perfect 9 in Navarathri, though not at the top of the list are definitely in the top 5.

Super - Size it!

Downgrades are not good. It is true for all things including bonuses, stock values and airline seats and the only ones that have made me happy, until last week at least, are tax cuts. But when I fit snugly into "medium" sized sweaters for the first time in my life (after I became large, that is) it was one those "Aha!" moments, that I could have captured and framed for eternity in my living room; more so, since I have achieved this by running 100 miles per month (5 miles/day) for the last 3 months and not by liposuction as I had originally intended to do so!

I have always felt that the clothing companies should do to apparel, what Starbucks has done to coffee cups. The official Starbucks sizing scheme mixes pretentious use of Italian, and lies. The correlation goes roughly like this:

• "Tall", which in the context of a drink seems synonymous with "large",
• "Grande", which of course is Italian for "big", and
• "Venti", which means "twenty," the number of ounces.

They all mean - "a large cup of coffee".

Small, medium and large, in the context of clothes, on the other hand, are synonymous with "undernourished for an adult", "on the verge of obesity" and "obese", respectively. Other superlative extrapolations on either side, paradoxically, are not so superlative and only make things worse. In other words, no size is good.

One of my most embarrassing moments while shopping has always been when the girl at the showroom asks "What size are you, Sir?" and I reply "I am Large". Now, that just doesn't sound right. Also, why should a CSR be privy to the facts only my wife and doc know - that I am lazy, have lived in Wisconsin, and have a BMI of over 30?

So, here are my suggestions for clothes sizes:

• "Zippy", which means active or energetic
  
• "Zappy", which also means active or energetic, and
  
• "Zesty"; well, they all mean the same.

Now that's what I call super-sizing, a pretentious mix of English, and lies. More importantly, it makes anyone associated with these adjectives feel like they are on top of the world! Thats more than a good reason to go on a shopping spree.

Rajnikanth - Entertainer of the year 2007

"I am back", ala Arnold Schwarzenegger in Terminator II. It is finally nice to get back to blogging after a busy holiday season, travel, work, GMAT etc.

Came across this piece of news about Rajinikanth winning the NDTV Entertainer of the Year 2007 award from Dr. Manmohan Singh. Terrific speech in typical Rajni style, spiced up with questions from Shah Rukh Khan and Karan Johar. I loved his answer when cryptically asked "Is there anything Rajni kant do?"; he had the humor to respond with silence, which only he could have gotten away with it. Excellent viewing.

More importantly, it is the first time that a national level populist award (I am discounting National Awards since it is more to do with politics than anything else), usually the birthright of Bollywood, has been given to Kollywood. Nice trend indeed.