Through the Lens of Destruction

A few weeks ago, I’d written about robots registering on websites. I couldn’t for the life of me imagine that these robots were created specifically for the purpose of registering on websites, and therefore hinted at the possibility of robots having developed artificial intelligence and using the same to register on various websites. However, thanks to Subarna, who surprisingly turned out to be quite an authority on this subject, it turns out that I was wrong. These robots were in fact created specifically for the purpose of registering on websites!

Naturally, this would make you question the direction in which technology seems to be headed - I mean, robots that can register on websites isn’t exactly up there with ‘man on the moon’ and the ‘television’ when it comes to scientific progress. However, it makes much more sense when viewed in light of the fact that the real purpose behind these robots registering on websites was to destroy other websites (i.e. cause them to crash) by registering en masse and bringing the system crashing down. Mankind creating robots to register on websites does not seem to make much sense, but mankind creating robots to destroy their competitors’ websites sounds perfectly plausible. The sad truth is that many of our scientific breakthroughs do not seem to make much sense until viewed through the lens of destruction.

“Hmmm...seems like a good all-terrain vehicle, but a bit extreme, I’d reckon. Yes, the roads are dangerous and accidents happen, but is this level of armour-plating really required? And what about parking? Would be a hell of a task parking it, don’t you think – particularly in cities?” This is how the Generals would’ve first reacted to the battle tank, until they were told that it wasn’t just a transport vehicle but had the capability to blow entire battalions to pieces. Similarly, Enrico Fermi and the scientist bunch were probably yelled at by the government funding agencies to ‘stop fooling around with them nuclei and do something constructive (or destructive!)’, until the government chaps were made aware of the tremendous destructive potential of nuclear reactions.  At which point it was promptly hailed as the biggest scientific breakthrough since the printing press! And yes, who can forget the person who first invented the missile. At the grand unveiling he must’ve been greeted by a wave of snickering and hushed comments about whether this was his way of compensating for something he lacked; as opposed to the feeling of awe that a missile would inspire among today’s generals.

But coming back to the robots, I was seriously impressed with this bit of information. A parallel online world where vicious wars are being fought by robots employed by companies to hack into their rivals' websites, and I didn't have a clue about it! Why didn't they have this kind of stuff in the papers, instead of the usual "Manmohan called Advani a hate-mongering mosque destroyer; Advani called him a wuss in reply" sort of headlines? Imagine - we could have cool news items like "Wipro's robot army foils the Infosys robot army's bid to hack their website in a bitter online battle. 22 robots suffered irregular shutdowns during the all-out conflict." 

And how come such stuff doesn't show up on the company balance sheets, under the expenses column: "Maintenance of robot army that acts as the protector of our website and hacks into competitor websites"? There could even be an arms race of an altogether different kind – instead of the Americans and Russians stockpiling nuclear weapons that can destroy the world a hundred times over, we could have Wipro and Infosys stockpiling the latest robots (that can destroy the online world a hundred times over) with ultra-advanced hacking and registration capabilities, and a new arms trade market can open up dealing in integrated circuits, alloy wires, etc for robots. [A quick digression – why didn’t the Americans or the Russians just stop when they had enough nuclear weapons to destroy the earth once? What’s the point of spending billions more so that you can destroy the earth TWICE over or a HUNDRED TIMES over; isn’t it the same as destroying it once?]

Now, you might think that I’m getting overly imaginative and indulging in hyperbole here – that the whole robot business will never really assume such dramatic proportions. I’m willing to bet that this was exactly the kind of complacent attitude the Americans must’ve had during the Afghan War when a bearded old Saudi billionaire approached them asking for a Stinger and expressing his desire to ‘join the cause against the commie infidels’ – and look at what’s happened now!

This is what the companies would need to guard against as far as their robots are concerned – if they start destroying schools and order their females to stay indoors, the warning signs should not go unnoticed. Turning a blind eye and adopting an attitude of “Well, as long as they’re destroying the competitor websites, we can overlook this” is just the recipe for invoking disaster upon oneself. Before you knew it, the robots would bomb coffee machines and launch suicide attacks on senior management (although many would view the latter as a positive development), and things would rapidly go downhill from there.

Except for Hollywood, which would capitalise on this money-making opportunity by coming up with a few more “Stallone/Bruce Willis/any other action hero saves the world” kind of movies where they fight the evil robots and save humanity from complete destruction!

Market Crashes Every Second Day, And Is Frankly Pretty Tired Of It!

A lot has been said about Economists generally being pessimistic, especially with the recession dominating the headlines these days. I, for one, do not believe that this is true– one of the fundamental assumptions on which the entire field of economics is based is that people always act in a rational manner. In the face of overwhelming evidence that suggests otherwise (politics, stock markets, fashion, hip-hop, Paris Hilton), Economists choose to cling on to this notion. If that is not optimistic, I don’t know what is!

Take the stock markets, for example. I can understand that the market would crash if the CEO of one of the biggest companies admits that the $100 million of profits that the company made last year, on closer inspection, turned out to be zero. The markets, however, seem to be only too willing to crash, no matter what the reason is. Every second day you would come across a headline such as -

Bloodbath on the Bourses!!!

The Sensex crashed by 730 points today as jittery investors offloaded their shares in a state of panic after it was announced that the International Astronomers Union (IAU) had revoked the planetary status of Pluto.

I can understand Pluto going hysterical when it heard of such a thing. It would’ve been happily hanging around the Kuiper Belt thinking that it was just another day in an obscenely long year, when it got that fateful call from the IAU. “Sir, can we please take 2 minutes of your time...yadda yadda yadda...really sorry about this, but you’re only a dwarf planet now...yadda yadda yadda...no no no, nothing to do with the fact that you’re a cartoon dog, I mean, c’mon, we even named a planet Uranus!” WTF???

But I fail to fathom why the investors would get jittery about an announcement such as this, or countless other such announcements. Moreover, many of these financial institutions are the same lot responsible for the subprime crisis, when they did not find anything at all suspicious when hobos turned up at their offices, barefoot and unshaven, seeking a housing loan. “Hmmm, let’s see now...It says here that your annual income is about a hundred dollars, and you’ve defaulted on every single loan you’ve taken. Looks good enough to me! Here’s your loan. Have a nice day, Sir.”

So what is it that turns these adventurous purveyors of risk, willing to throw money into ventures where the likelihood of return is about as much as Jean Claude Van Damme starring in a chick flick, into such a bundle of nerves at the stock markets? This probably explains why just about every second number in the Sensex is a psychological barrier of some sort or the other, so that you keep reading news items such as “In the euphoria over North Korea’s missile launch, the Sensex crossed the psychological 12,654-point barrier” or “For the first time in three months, the Sensex fell below the psychological 8,943-point barrier as the G-20 summit failed to decide whether the global economy is in a recession or a depression.” 

One of the few pluses of the recession, however, has been the fact that it has ensured that you always have something to talk about to total strangers, or to people whom you would otherwise be at a loss to start a conversation with. Unless you’re in Sales, there are bound to be occasions when you don’t really have anything much to say to the other person. These awkward-silence moments can now be filled up with the question “So how’s the recession affected your job/industry?” Of course, in an Indian context, there is always cricket and Bollywood to discuss, but the recession question comes in particularly handy at business meetings, where you can’t really tell a client “In conclusion, we recommend that you segment your TA...yadda yadda yadda...in order to garner greater wallet share...yadda yadda yadda...add significantly to your bottom line. So do you reckon Asin is dating Salman Khan, or do you think even Salman cannot be that stupid as to leave Katrina?”

Another plus is that the smart-alecky investment banking whiz who was your classmate is now earning only 8 times your salary instead of the earlier 10. Even this, however, might not really be the case given the latest furore over the AIG bonuses. After announcing $60 billion in losses and receiving $170 billion as bail-out from the US government, AIG decided that the time was right to award bonuses worth $165 million to its senior management. Apparently the explanation given was that these payments were necessary to retain these well-trained and highly-skilled employees. Why, of course! These are highly gifted people – you and I could not lose $60 billion in a lifetime, try as hard as we might...and here are people who can lose that sum in a year! Obviously they need to be retained!

As a consolation, these companies could then send out letters to their stakeholders “You may have read reports in the media about your hard-earned money being squandered away in risky ventures by greedy, foolhardy and amoral executives. We would like to assure you that this is furthest from the truth. You hard-earned money has in fact been squandered by well-trained, highly-qualified professionals with degrees from top management and finance institutes.”

Remember, though – the next time you think that bringing an economy crashing down is not exactly your cup of tea, all you need to do is saunter in to the stock exchange, pick out a jittery(any) investor and whisper into his ear “Did you hear about the Finance Secretary being embroiled in a sex scandal? News is that he’s planning to hike the prime lending rate by 2% to deflect attention from the scandal.”

The Adam Sandler Syndrome

Sometime last year, Adam Sandler acted in a movie called Reign Over Me. This is a story about grief, family, healing, male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. WTF? Adam Sandler??? Yes, that was exactly my reaction when I heard about this. Over the years, we have seen Adam Sandler in a wide variety of inane comedies and can recognise an Adam Sandler movie even if we see it for half a minute and Adam Sandler is not in the scene. For instance, the following are perfectly valid scenarios for an Adam Sandler movie:

·         Adam Sandler falls in love with a woman. It then turns out that she is actually a salmon. This, however, does not deter Adam Sandler. In the beginning a lot of funny stuff happens, then sad stuff happens and it looks like all is lost, but Piscean love finally prevails in a typically romantic-comedy ending.

·         Adam Sandler is heir to a billion-dollar empire, which scares his dad for obvious reasons (would you trust Adam Sandler with your billions?). So Adam Sandler has to prove himself. So he sets up a competition with the evil management-type guy who wants his money – they have to race against electric eels in a gigantic aquarium. Expectedly the evil management-type guy employs all methods of devious trickery to cheat his way to victory, but ends up losing.

·         Adam Sandler is a good-hearted chap but has the IQ of a turnip. So the cruel world is quick to take advantage of this fact and everyone generally picks on him. Only his mother supports him through thick and thin, but mainly because she’s a bit thick. Some sort of disaster strikes the town and somehow Adam Sandler contrives to make himself the town saviour in his inimitable, comically-inept manner. The town siren falls for him in the middle of it all and they live happily ever after.

The following, however, are NOT scenarios you would associate with an Adam Sandler movie:

·         Set in the Iron Curtain in the 50s, Adam Sandler is an American diplomat whose daughter has been kidnapped by KGB agents. In a gripping saga of cold war intrigue, politics and back-stabbing, Adam Sandler does not know whom to trust as he goes about trying to negotiate the release of his daughter.

·         In this emotionally-charged movie about finding oneself and having the courage to stand up for it, Adam Sandler brings to screen the powerful persona of gay rights activist William Scott Fitzgerald. From his traumatic childhood to facing the hostility of narrow-minded adults, Adam Sandler puts in a powerhouse performance as he battles for the rights of his people.

·         In this adaptation of the classic Jane Austen novel, Adam Sandler brings to life the role of the nobleman Edward Pigeonhole, who resides in his big country home in Gloucestershire, takes an hour to dress up in his fancy nobleman clothes, plays bridge all the time and says things like “Why, Miss Pennyworth! I fear that you have misread my intentions. Indeed, I must make it clear that I’m perfectly happy being betrothed to Miss Elizabeth.”

So it came as no surprise that people did not really take Adam Sandler seriously in the movie Reign Over Me, even though some critics proclaimed that it was a gritty portrayal that captured the trauma of loss and longing. The sad fact simply is that no one can EVER takes Adam Sandler seriously. This is often referred to as the Adam Sandler Syndrome, and it occurs when people stop taking something seriously. I shall now proceed to cite some more examples of situations where the Adam Sandler syndrome has struck.

Car Awards

Invariably, as soon as a new car is launched in the Indian market, it already seems to have won a host of awards. The launch ads always have proclamations such as “Voted Car of the Year, 2009 - AutoCar”, “Best B-Segment Car, 2009 – Overdrive” and “Best Manual Gearbox - B-Segment Cars, 2009 – Motor India”. Either there are too many awards being handed out, or too many car magazines being sponsored by car manufacturers. I cannot think of a single car launched recently that had not already won a clutch of awards, even though it is just getting launched. Hence no one takes these awards seriously anymore, they’re like Adam Sandler.

Film Awards

The same goes for film awards. There was once a time when film awards meant something, and only when you really won something worthwhile such as “SEVEN Academy Award Nominations” would you put it up on the DVD cover. Today, every second DVD you pick up would have a bunch of awards listed on top - “Runner-up, Sundance Film Festival”, “Winner, Best Motion Picture (Drama), Teheran Film Festival”, “Silver Balloon, Foreign Film Category, Festival D’Or, Cannes” and so on. I’m sure even an Adam Sandler movie must’ve picked up an award; no wonder people don’t take it seriously any longer!

When someone is travelling and gives a time estimate

This has happened to most of us at one point or another; and at times we’ve resorted to it ourselves. Say you have to meet a friend at 2. It’s 2.15 and there’s still no sign of that person, so you give them a call. Even though you can hear the tap running in the background and know that the friend has still not left home, they’ll tell you “Yea yea, I’m on my way. Almost there, will reach in ten minutes.” Or they’ll say they’re mid-way when they’ve just left home, and you can’t even make out because the traffic sounds the same everywhere. Like the way one would treat Adam Sandler, I’ve stopped taking these time estimates seriously.

Swipe In/Swipe Out

This is a novel method that, by most accounts, seems to have its origins in the IT industry. It allows employees the luxury of officially being in office without actually being physically present. For instance, an employee going for a morning jog can go and swipe in, and then continue with his jog, go home, have breakfast and freshen up, while the records show that he’s been in office the whole time. Again, if an employee feels like going shopping or for a movie while also being in the office at the same time, he can go out, come back and then swipe out in the evening. No one takes it seriously anymore, although in the early years carrying the swipe card around was a cool thing because it meant that you were working in a modern, new-age company. Now it’s suffering from the Adam Sandler Syndrome – nobody takes it seriously anymore.

Book Praises on the Back-Cover

“A thoroughly entertaining and magnificently written book – reminds me of Calvino in his prime!” – The New York Herald

“Brilliant. Inspired. Once you read this book, you won’t look at the world through the same eyes!” – The Washington Post

“His best work yet – enthralling, engrossing and mysterious in equal measure.” – The New Era Sun Times Herald Post

Every book that you pick up these days tends to have these kinds of sentences screaming at you. I know it’s the sales copy section and you’re supposed to lure the buyer into purchasing this book, but overdoing it has meant that people just do not care anymore as the Adam Sandler Syndrome kicks in.

I’m quite sure there are many more such cases wherein the Adam Sandler Syndrome has kicked in or is at the risk of kicking in. I invite all of you to chip in with your examples, if any. Each valid example would fetch that person a bunch of bonus points. Of course, in the spirit of things, the bonus points are a joke, like Adam Sandler!

Politics, Careers and The Lord!

There are people and companies that make a living by forecasting fads and advising their clients on how to exploit the fad and make money out of it. However, I’m quite sure that none of these companies would have seen the whole shoe-hurling fad coming. I don’t suppose ‘Trend Forecasters Founded by People Who Always Claim to Have Correctly Predicted Events AFTER They Happen’ Inc would’ve made a presentation to Nike saying “Over the next few months, hurling shoes at politicians would be the in-thing. People all over the world would be indulging in it, so perhaps you could market a special line of shoes that have been tested for target practice at firing ranges, in order to ensure maximum accuracy while hurling.”

What’s interesting to note, though, is the contrasting ways in which the shoes were hurled, and the reactions to the same, which probably give a good indication of the respective cultures of the countries where the incident occurred. To illustrate this point, let us consider the first case in Iraq and the latest Indian case.

In the Iraqi case, even though the journalist was a good 20-30 feet away from the target, he still fancied his chances and HURLED the shoe with all his might. Only an unexpectedly agile Bush ensured that the journalist missed his target. In footballing terms, this would be equivalent to someone unleashing a fierce thirty-yard shot from outside the penalty area, forcing the goalkeeper into a save at full-stretch. In the Indian case, the journalist was sitting BARELY 2 metres from his target. Yet, all he could manage was a gentle, UNDERARM (yes, he actually threw the shoe underarm, if you see the footage!) throw which harmlessly floated past the target. While doing this, he mumbled “I protest.”  This is like a striker having an open goal at his mercy from 2 yards out, but he doesn’t even force the goalkeeper into a save, instead side-footing the ball gently beyond the post.

In Iraq, the journalist was immediately pounced upon by security, bundled to the ground, handcuffed and dragged away. Apparently he was even tortured while in prison. If it was the Taliban, he probably would’ve been whipped or stoned in public. If it was any other country, he would’ve at least been detained for a while. In the US he would’ve even been forced to appear on talk shows. In India, however, the journalist was ‘forgiven’ and offered cash rewards and a ticket to contest for Parliament! In fact, even while he was escorted out, security was instructed to be ‘gentle’. Talk about being hospitable and forgiving!

Apart from politics, though, there have been a lot of profound and fundamental questions that I’ve been grappling with: does God exist; what is the point of our existence; and what happens if you’re seeing a guy called Jesus. Apparently Madonna is seeing this chap called Jesus; I wonder if that would earn her some brownie points with God. You know, when she’s up there at the pearly gates and St Peter tells her that he didn’t particularly care for “Papa Don’t Preach” and asks her to give some justification as to why she should be allowed into heaven, she can always say “Look, I loved Jesus, honest! I let Jesus into my life.”

It turns out that the goalkeeper of the Spanish hockey team is also named Jesus. This raises interesting possibilities – the Bible always tells you that Jesus Saves. But in this case, that could well change to Jesus saves, but the rebound fell to an opponent striker and he scored. And what happens to his teammates, when Jesus allows an easy goal? Do they still tell him “F%#k you, Jesus!”?

Since I don’t have any more Jesus jokes, I shall now move on to the more serious topic of jobs. It’s fascinating how the profession you’re in has such a great effect on the way you speak. An MBA would try and use words like synergy and out-of-the-box thinking in most of their sentences. A hip-hop artiste would say things like “Ahm goann’ whip yo’ ass”. A politician would use the sentences “But how does this help the poor?” and “We shall stand united against the forces of communalism” in each and every argument.  A call centre employee would always tell you “We’ll look into it, Sir. It’ll take five working days to address your complaint”. A sales person would always be extra-friendly and act like your best friend and tell you things like “Between the two of us...” or “I don’t do this with any of my other customers, but because it’s you...”

But what I don’t get is why commercial pilots speak the way they do. It’s not as if they’re a VJ or a boxing match announcer or a vegetable seller that they need to speak in a particular way. Yet all commercial pilots always speak in that same tone “Uhhh...welcome to Kingfisher Airlines. Uhhh...umm...the weather today is mostly clear skies. We uhhh...ummm...shall be flying at a height of 35,000 feet above sea level. Ummm...there might be a bit of turbulence during the flight....but, ahhh...umm...my crew is there in case you require any...uhh...assistance. On behalf of my co-pilot and ummm...crew, this is ahhh...umm...your captain wishing you all a...uhhh...pleasant flight. Thank you.” Do they actually talk like that even when they’re not on the job? “Honey, I uhhh...ummm...prepared breakfast for you today. You might...ahh..umm...want to steer clear of the kitchen for a while. Also...ahh...we’re out of eggs and milk...so...umm...I ordered some from the nearby store.”

Perhaps instead of having career aptitude tests and career counselling sessions, schools should just look at the way students speak and decide what job would be right for them; this would greatly simplify matters -

Always talks about the sad and dark aspects of life? Poet (Or Economist)

Extra-friendly and talkative (and has just convinced you sell your car and invest the proceeds in the Nicaraguan bonds market)? Sales (Or Management)

Always uses ahhh, ummm...and generally pauses a lot while speaking? Commercial Pilot (Or Management)

Keeps using phrases like “I know exactly what you mean?” Psychologist (Or Management – HR)

Always pretends to understand what you’ve told them without having a clue? Customer Service (Or Management)

Never answers your question but instead gives a totally irrelevant and long answer hoping that it would deter you from asking further questions? Politician (Or Management)

Can always lie to you while giving you the impression of complete honesty? Lawyer (Or Management)

From the above list, it’s pretty clear that just about anyone can get into management, as long as you’re willing to make your negative traits a basis for a career.