Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Phased out addiction faces facebook
I thought that my profile posting spree has phased out after a decline in orkuting interest. It had only until my friend initiated my facebook craze. With wasting time as the most integral part of my life, I remain.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Al Gore wins peace prize
Al Gore was awareded the Nobel peace prize. It was for global warming.
My initial reaction was that he would not have got it had he not been a politician. May be I was wrong.
Being a liberal in thought and all for science and eco-friendliness, I ought to be happy that this is a significant step or atleast feel happy for Gore.
But something never fit in even before reasoning.
What is the Nobel peace prize?
This is what it is. Alfred Nobel's Dynamite did not cause the best of impacts on the world. As a means of making up for what he had done this Nobel prizes were created. This constituted acknowledgement of contributions in various fields in science, medicine, economics and peace.
Gore got a prize for peace. What did he do for the peace? He got it for his contributions to global warming. The concept of global warming itself is controversial. But that is not my argument and I am not getting into that.
My question was, what does global warming got ot do with peace? This to me is the missing piece.
Even if it does, is he the one who has worked the most on global warming or contributed to fighting global warming on the face of this earth? More than the scientists who struggle in those temperatures in the field. I am surprised.
This to me takes me to the next question.
What exactly did he do towards the cause.
Wondered what global warming has got to do with peace?
My initial reaction was that he would not have got it had he not been a politician. May be I was wrong.
Being a liberal in thought and all for science and eco-friendliness, I ought to be happy that this is a significant step or atleast feel happy for Gore.
But something never fit in even before reasoning.
What is the Nobel peace prize?
This is what it is. Alfred Nobel's Dynamite did not cause the best of impacts on the world. As a means of making up for what he had done this Nobel prizes were created. This constituted acknowledgement of contributions in various fields in science, medicine, economics and peace.
Gore got a prize for peace. What did he do for the peace? He got it for his contributions to global warming. The concept of global warming itself is controversial. But that is not my argument and I am not getting into that.
My question was, what does global warming got ot do with peace? This to me is the missing piece.
Even if it does, is he the one who has worked the most on global warming or contributed to fighting global warming on the face of this earth? More than the scientists who struggle in those temperatures in the field. I am surprised.
This to me takes me to the next question.
What exactly did he do towards the cause.
Wondered what global warming has got to do with peace?
Monday, September 24, 2007
Ten out of ten on Twenty20
I was surprised by the performace that the Indian team put up in the Twenty20. With no big guns and a new and inexperienced captain, the team set off on a voyage to perform a format they never knew of. Emerging victorious they explored themselves to be the greatest find in the history of Indian cricket for quite some time.
Gone are the big guns on whom the other water pistols and tpy guns depended. This is a team with a good armory to defend attacks and enough ammo to blast the best of their enemy camps.
This just makes me wonder what had gone wrong all these days in Indian cricket. We had great players Sachin, Sourav, Dravid, Kumble etc but never really won anything apart from hypes and mammoth individual records.
Words from Aussie opener Hayden that the Indian batsmen played for individual records filled us with dislike for the sayer rather than the dislike of the fact. We did not wake up let alone see the point.
Poor fielding, bad running between wickets and individual records and place in the field kept pulling the team down when we relished the batting records of individuals.
Now its a different story. No big gun fired today but all small guns turned big. No individual record was created but a team record was. Even if an individual record was created it was a mere side product of the team's cause.
India for once stood strong amidst impediments, fighting adversaries and words with hits, demoralising the demolishers, denying oxygen to the chokers, keeping jinxes alive by nerve wrecking the ones with nerve.
We out thought, out fought and out performed every other team to lift the cup. We may never win again with the team spiralling back to the spoils of Indian cricket. But the fact remains that this is a big jem by the little jems.
Gone are the big guns on whom the other water pistols and tpy guns depended. This is a team with a good armory to defend attacks and enough ammo to blast the best of their enemy camps.
This just makes me wonder what had gone wrong all these days in Indian cricket. We had great players Sachin, Sourav, Dravid, Kumble etc but never really won anything apart from hypes and mammoth individual records.
Words from Aussie opener Hayden that the Indian batsmen played for individual records filled us with dislike for the sayer rather than the dislike of the fact. We did not wake up let alone see the point.
Poor fielding, bad running between wickets and individual records and place in the field kept pulling the team down when we relished the batting records of individuals.
Now its a different story. No big gun fired today but all small guns turned big. No individual record was created but a team record was. Even if an individual record was created it was a mere side product of the team's cause.
India for once stood strong amidst impediments, fighting adversaries and words with hits, demoralising the demolishers, denying oxygen to the chokers, keeping jinxes alive by nerve wrecking the ones with nerve.
We out thought, out fought and out performed every other team to lift the cup. We may never win again with the team spiralling back to the spoils of Indian cricket. But the fact remains that this is a big jem by the little jems.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Elite LA cab drivers!!!
Cab drivers are in LA are interesting characters. Each one is interesting in his own right. Firstly they are more often 'non-californian' than not. They seldom miss out on asking me where I am from and almost never answer that they are from the US.
I rode with a movie geek from Ethiopia. He knew more than me about Indian movies than me. For the records I am East Indian.
One Russian guy had cassettes of international music of almost all well known countries and could play any countries music when we asked them. He also has a laminated menu of the music that he has for the customer to choose from.
Finding out the best from everywhere and developing a liking for the same is refined thought not practiced even by the ones who are considered elite. Secondly, whatever job one does, there is nothing stopping the person from doing it in style.
The other one was one of the brainiest people I met in Los Angeles. If he entered a quiz competition on National Geographic he could give a run for top contenders. I paled in conversation with him on many topics of general knowledge. The traffic jam on I-10 ensured that the conversation was long. He made me wonder what he was doing driving a cab?
I have seen highly regarded and educated professionals who suck in all the categories. Its not their expertise that I am talking about. It is their general knowledge of being informed about the world around and outside their system.
Now you know whom I meant by elite. The ones who ride may be fruits, nuts and flakes but the ones who drive are their converse.
Irrespective of all that their driving still sucks!!!
I rode with a movie geek from Ethiopia. He knew more than me about Indian movies than me. For the records I am East Indian.
One Russian guy had cassettes of international music of almost all well known countries and could play any countries music when we asked them. He also has a laminated menu of the music that he has for the customer to choose from.
Finding out the best from everywhere and developing a liking for the same is refined thought not practiced even by the ones who are considered elite. Secondly, whatever job one does, there is nothing stopping the person from doing it in style.
The other one was one of the brainiest people I met in Los Angeles. If he entered a quiz competition on National Geographic he could give a run for top contenders. I paled in conversation with him on many topics of general knowledge. The traffic jam on I-10 ensured that the conversation was long. He made me wonder what he was doing driving a cab?
I have seen highly regarded and educated professionals who suck in all the categories. Its not their expertise that I am talking about. It is their general knowledge of being informed about the world around and outside their system.
Now you know whom I meant by elite. The ones who ride may be fruits, nuts and flakes but the ones who drive are their converse.
Irrespective of all that their driving still sucks!!!
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Wife leaves war veteran
I was speaking to a war veteran who was teling us how he was greeted by his family on his return home—by not being home. He found out that his loving wife had left him along with his children for another man . He is now paying alimony and barely manages to meet his two kids once a week. The reason sighted was that he was not there by her side but somewhere else fighting.
That was one heck of a greet to a war hero. It reminded me of another poem I was enthrusted upon in childhood.
Here it is. What a contrast!!!!
Home They Brought Her Warrior Dead
Home they brought her warrior dead:
She nor swooned, nor uttered cry:
All her maidens, watching, said,
‘She must weep or she will die.’
Then they praised him, soft and low,
Called him worthy to be loved,
Truest friend and noblest foe;
Yet she neither spoke nor moved.
Stole a maiden from her place,
Lightly to the warrior stepped,
Took the face-cloth from the face;
Yet she neither moved nor wept.
Rose a nurse of ninety years,
Set his child upon her knee—
Like summer tempest came her tears—
‘Sweet my child, I live for thee.’
That was one heck of a greet to a war hero. It reminded me of another poem I was enthrusted upon in childhood.
Here it is. What a contrast!!!!
Home They Brought Her Warrior Dead
Home they brought her warrior dead:
She nor swooned, nor uttered cry:
All her maidens, watching, said,
‘She must weep or she will die.’
Then they praised him, soft and low,
Called him worthy to be loved,
Truest friend and noblest foe;
Yet she neither spoke nor moved.
Stole a maiden from her place,
Lightly to the warrior stepped,
Took the face-cloth from the face;
Yet she neither moved nor wept.
Rose a nurse of ninety years,
Set his child upon her knee—
Like summer tempest came her tears—
‘Sweet my child, I live for thee.’
Alfred Lord Tennyson
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Paradigm Shift from "Serve us" to Service
Paradigm shifts because ...even if you are on the right track you would get runover if you sit there...
...For even the son of man did not come to be served but to serve and to give...
I got a coupon from a popular fast food restaurant for dining there the previous day. It said just answer a survey over the phone and get a sandwich free. Sandwiches are not great motivators but the interest about what they wanted to know from such surveys prompted me to call. The voice of the chairman of the company said, we value your opinion and care to make a difference. Then went on the survey asking questions about the restaurant, its location, timeliness, temperature & quality of the food, easiness in placing order, neatness of the people, the customer service and the neatness of the restaurant and even the rest rooms. This is because of the heavy competition from the food industry and one can loose a customer even if ones service fails for once!!!!!! Quality is staying up to the mark every time. It was clear they strive for continuous improvement and innovation in service. But their underlying driving force was service to others to serve themselves better.
Technology has grown to drastic heights and is at present readily available to one and all—at least more than what it used to be some time back. Everyone can deliver the goods in the line of requirement. But how good can one get to satisfy the customer? How can a customer settle down on one source when almost everyone is equally good and one is not able to find the minute technical edge of one over the others??? They sail by the wind that serves them better. Hence for the organizations only route to destination success is service.
Several years ago Chuck Colson made the observation that, when the Communists took over Russia in 1917, they did not make Christianity illegal. Their constitution, in fact, did guarantee freedom to religion. But what they made illegal was for the church to do any "good works". No longer could the church fulfill its historic role in feeding the hungry, welcoming the stranger, housing the orphan, educating the children or caring for the sick. What was the result? 70 years later the church was totally irrelevant to the communities in which it dwelt. What Lenin did by diabolic design, most churches have done by default. But result is identical. Church is irrelevant to most people. Failure to serve was failure to survive!!!!
Now it becomes clear why, like a renaissance of its own, service organizations have mushroomed up and spread like fungus. Service has attracted clients from all over the world as the word globalization becomes more and more pronounced in all prominent sectors of business.
In the above paragraphs we have seen only about the shifted side of the paradigm that is prevalent at present. What was it at the past??? And what led to this???
Before there were money lenders and pawn brokers who never went about searching for people to borrow money from them. The ones who needed them came to them for money. The nationalized banks in certain developing countries followed the same strategy. Getting loans and operating accounts in those banks were not made easy. As a result many eligible customers who could have utilized the banks were reluctant to use them. The people suffered marginally but the ones who missed out the most were the banks who failed to capitalize on the market. It seemed as though the customers had to serve them by coming to them because they were kings. But that was how it was previously and it seemed to work that way for a long time. A system, a paradigm. It was as strong as the feudal system in the medieval period of Europe. That of course is the other example.
The feudal system had an hierarchy where the ones in the bottom of the pyramid served the ones at the top. The ones in the top were the kings and the nobles and the ones in the bottom were the peasants and workers. A system, a paradigm.
But that was the medieval period and everything has changed with renaissance and other events like the French and Russian revolution, not forgetting the war of independence of the big democracies of today. Common man has become more important than ever. A paradigm shift in the area of serving has taken place.
Mentioning the system of democracy, it has stormed into most major countries. The people want to choose the ones ruling them, and to rule them the rulers have to serve them, and not just serve them but serve them the best.
Now there are private sectors and the private banks. Their infrastructure was no where comparable to the government sectors. But they won over those public sectors and banks that were already prevailing.
But how? From "serve us" to service. There was pull marketing and push marketing, searching from databases for all prospective customers and keeping proposals to them offering amiable service. The result was evident. They are the most successful bankers because of their inclination to serve. People nowadays do not even mind to pay service charges for being served. Of course how many on this planet, honestly, do not like being served???
Computers are now easily accessible to common man because of the user-friendly operating systems with pictures and animations, not to mention their optimal cost. The outcome is that more computers are sold as common man has started buying it. This service oriented approach has paid off in a huge way. It has made the owners of these companies the most successful businessmen monetarily.
All the above instances on fast-foods, democracy, banks, computers and the failure of churches in Russia project the same point.
ONE 'serve to stay served the best'.
The other is nothing but its converse—'failure in service is failure to suceed and even survive'.
There can be an endless list of such citations if once can start thinking of it. It would be insane not to site Walmart and Microsoft on these lines. serving common man wih low prices and user friendlines respectively has taken them along way.
So it is apparent for the ones who are acquainted enough to find that the most successful figures in this modern world are the ones who have the inclination to serve and the ability to serve the best. Moreover these are the ones who are successful and governing the world indirectly but serving everyone on the outside.
This means that, when they say, their motive is service their concealed motto is to serve themselves much more by serving their customers. The rulers rule this world of today staying concealed, by successfully serving the public, the masses.
In short in this information age, and in computer language, if you are in the domain of business and if your login name is success then your password is service. This was never the case before. The ones who were ruling got served.
Therefore the paradigm that was present in the yester years till the medieval age was the people at the top getting served by the masses who were under them. But alas!!!! Nothing lasts for ever!!! Change alone is not subject to change; everything else in this universe is subject to it... The served found out for themselves that they need to serve the ones at the bottom to even stay at the top, leave alone reaching the apex!!!!! We are now in this paradigm wondering if it will change. Who knows when it will change? But it might change too. In time, with time.
There have been many paradigm shifts ever since man came into existence. These were in the fields of science, events, systems and organizations. But one of the biggest shifts is the shift in the approach of man to survive. That is because its impact is on anything and everything. Hence this paradigm shift of "serve us" to service assumes importance. I am not sure if it was identified before but I am convinced that it deserves to be.
...For even the son of man did not come to be served but to serve and to give...
I got a coupon from a popular fast food restaurant for dining there the previous day. It said just answer a survey over the phone and get a sandwich free. Sandwiches are not great motivators but the interest about what they wanted to know from such surveys prompted me to call. The voice of the chairman of the company said, we value your opinion and care to make a difference. Then went on the survey asking questions about the restaurant, its location, timeliness, temperature & quality of the food, easiness in placing order, neatness of the people, the customer service and the neatness of the restaurant and even the rest rooms. This is because of the heavy competition from the food industry and one can loose a customer even if ones service fails for once!!!!!! Quality is staying up to the mark every time. It was clear they strive for continuous improvement and innovation in service. But their underlying driving force was service to others to serve themselves better.
Technology has grown to drastic heights and is at present readily available to one and all—at least more than what it used to be some time back. Everyone can deliver the goods in the line of requirement. But how good can one get to satisfy the customer? How can a customer settle down on one source when almost everyone is equally good and one is not able to find the minute technical edge of one over the others??? They sail by the wind that serves them better. Hence for the organizations only route to destination success is service.
Several years ago Chuck Colson made the observation that, when the Communists took over Russia in 1917, they did not make Christianity illegal. Their constitution, in fact, did guarantee freedom to religion. But what they made illegal was for the church to do any "good works". No longer could the church fulfill its historic role in feeding the hungry, welcoming the stranger, housing the orphan, educating the children or caring for the sick. What was the result? 70 years later the church was totally irrelevant to the communities in which it dwelt. What Lenin did by diabolic design, most churches have done by default. But result is identical. Church is irrelevant to most people. Failure to serve was failure to survive!!!!
Now it becomes clear why, like a renaissance of its own, service organizations have mushroomed up and spread like fungus. Service has attracted clients from all over the world as the word globalization becomes more and more pronounced in all prominent sectors of business.
In the above paragraphs we have seen only about the shifted side of the paradigm that is prevalent at present. What was it at the past??? And what led to this???
Before there were money lenders and pawn brokers who never went about searching for people to borrow money from them. The ones who needed them came to them for money. The nationalized banks in certain developing countries followed the same strategy. Getting loans and operating accounts in those banks were not made easy. As a result many eligible customers who could have utilized the banks were reluctant to use them. The people suffered marginally but the ones who missed out the most were the banks who failed to capitalize on the market. It seemed as though the customers had to serve them by coming to them because they were kings. But that was how it was previously and it seemed to work that way for a long time. A system, a paradigm. It was as strong as the feudal system in the medieval period of Europe. That of course is the other example.
The feudal system had an hierarchy where the ones in the bottom of the pyramid served the ones at the top. The ones in the top were the kings and the nobles and the ones in the bottom were the peasants and workers. A system, a paradigm.
But that was the medieval period and everything has changed with renaissance and other events like the French and Russian revolution, not forgetting the war of independence of the big democracies of today. Common man has become more important than ever. A paradigm shift in the area of serving has taken place.
Mentioning the system of democracy, it has stormed into most major countries. The people want to choose the ones ruling them, and to rule them the rulers have to serve them, and not just serve them but serve them the best.
Now there are private sectors and the private banks. Their infrastructure was no where comparable to the government sectors. But they won over those public sectors and banks that were already prevailing.
But how? From "serve us" to service. There was pull marketing and push marketing, searching from databases for all prospective customers and keeping proposals to them offering amiable service. The result was evident. They are the most successful bankers because of their inclination to serve. People nowadays do not even mind to pay service charges for being served. Of course how many on this planet, honestly, do not like being served???
Computers are now easily accessible to common man because of the user-friendly operating systems with pictures and animations, not to mention their optimal cost. The outcome is that more computers are sold as common man has started buying it. This service oriented approach has paid off in a huge way. It has made the owners of these companies the most successful businessmen monetarily.
All the above instances on fast-foods, democracy, banks, computers and the failure of churches in Russia project the same point.
ONE 'serve to stay served the best'.
The other is nothing but its converse—'failure in service is failure to suceed and even survive'.
There can be an endless list of such citations if once can start thinking of it. It would be insane not to site Walmart and Microsoft on these lines. serving common man wih low prices and user friendlines respectively has taken them along way.
So it is apparent for the ones who are acquainted enough to find that the most successful figures in this modern world are the ones who have the inclination to serve and the ability to serve the best. Moreover these are the ones who are successful and governing the world indirectly but serving everyone on the outside.
This means that, when they say, their motive is service their concealed motto is to serve themselves much more by serving their customers. The rulers rule this world of today staying concealed, by successfully serving the public, the masses.
In short in this information age, and in computer language, if you are in the domain of business and if your login name is success then your password is service. This was never the case before. The ones who were ruling got served.
Therefore the paradigm that was present in the yester years till the medieval age was the people at the top getting served by the masses who were under them. But alas!!!! Nothing lasts for ever!!! Change alone is not subject to change; everything else in this universe is subject to it... The served found out for themselves that they need to serve the ones at the bottom to even stay at the top, leave alone reaching the apex!!!!! We are now in this paradigm wondering if it will change. Who knows when it will change? But it might change too. In time, with time.
There have been many paradigm shifts ever since man came into existence. These were in the fields of science, events, systems and organizations. But one of the biggest shifts is the shift in the approach of man to survive. That is because its impact is on anything and everything. Hence this paradigm shift of "serve us" to service assumes importance. I am not sure if it was identified before but I am convinced that it deserves to be.
Thursday, August 2, 2007
My turn to turn thirty
It was my turn to turn thirty
Turning back, I miss my thirteen.
With time, I have only grown wise
And found it unwise to grow likewise.
Sailed in thoughts to those days I read
A poem I had from memorizing fled
D'int see the meaning back then and there
Do'nt like its facts now being fair and square.
Forgive my agonising poetic ineffeciency. This is the poem..
Over the Sea to Skye
Sing me a song of a lad that is gone, Say, could that lad be I?
Merry of soul, he sailed on a day Over the sea to Skye
Mull was astern, Rum was on port,Eigg on the starboard bow.
Glory of youth glowed in his soul,Where is that glory now?
Give me again all that was there,Give me the sun that shone.
Give me the eyes, give me the soul,Give me the lad that's gone.
Billow and breeze, islands and seas, Mountains of rain and sun;
All that was good, all that was fair, All that was me is gone. (my favurite line)
Turning back, I miss my thirteen.
With time, I have only grown wise
And found it unwise to grow likewise.
Sailed in thoughts to those days I read
A poem I had from memorizing fled
D'int see the meaning back then and there
Do'nt like its facts now being fair and square.
Forgive my agonising poetic ineffeciency. This is the poem..
Over the Sea to Skye
Sing me a song of a lad that is gone, Say, could that lad be I?
Merry of soul, he sailed on a day Over the sea to Skye
Mull was astern, Rum was on port,Eigg on the starboard bow.
Glory of youth glowed in his soul,Where is that glory now?
Give me again all that was there,Give me the sun that shone.
Give me the eyes, give me the soul,Give me the lad that's gone.
Billow and breeze, islands and seas, Mountains of rain and sun;
All that was good, all that was fair, All that was me is gone. (my favurite line)
by Robert Louis Stevenson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)