Oh... this and that
I have no idea where my weekend vanishes. Damn!
Just saw some pathetic quizzing on TV. And that too when the participants were from what are considered the good b-schools in the country. Not infrequently it happened that none of the teams could answer and Harsha Bhogle (the quiz master) didn't refrain from making his jibes at the stupidity of the people. I don't blame him. One of the questions was what a software product called Ranger developed by Subex Systems did. Note - software product. Someone answered: "something to do with GPRS" and was promptly asked to be more specific to which he says: "Global Positioning System" ! GPRS - GPS - eh? Another chap said "It's those blinking lights to mark the borders of the road". Heh. What part of *software* did he not get? And these are supposed to be the best minds from IIFT, IIT Delhi, MDI and one other.
I read Freakonomics last week. It's very easy to see why it is a best-seller. It's fast paced with theories which seem out-of-the-box. But at the end of the book I felt as if the authors were trying to pull a fast one. Sometimes I think people force themselves to think "out of the box" because it is the prescribed way to appear smart. I liked where they explained why crime in the US decreased in the 1990s although everyone was expecting to reach intolerable levels. But most of the other chapters seemed superfluous - comparing nylon stockings with crack cocaine, trying to figure out why drug dealers live with their parents. I don't see what they are getting at. Almost everything they say they support with one set of numbers and regression. And almost every they refute they refute using a set of numbers and regression. And at times they say things like a swimming pool is more dangerous for children than a gun because more children have died in a swimming pool than while playing with a gun. Umm... has anyone asked them how many children have access to a swimming pool and how many have access to a gun?
Saw a bunch of movies recently:
Vincent And I - is really meant for kids but very well made and almost like a fairy tale. It's about a little girl and her infatuation with Vincent Van Gogh.
The Pink Panter - Peter Sellers surpasses himself. The music (by Henri Mancini) is brilliant. And this movie set me off on a Peter Sellers spree!
The Party - Peter Sellers... is he always this good? There isn't much of a plot but Peter Sellers carries the movie playing an out of place Indian invited to a Hollywood party by mistake.
Dr. Strangelove - Check out the whole name. Peter Sellers again, although this is more a Stanley Kubrik movie than a Peter Sellers' one. It's a satire on the cold war and the arms' race and nuclear deterrents and a must watch.
Dog Day Afternoon - Al Pacino screwing up a bank robbery. The movie is all right; with classic Al Pacino action.
Update: I'm still laughing over Dr. Strangelove. It must have been funnier than what I make it out to be above. And watch out for Peter Sellers in more than one role!
Just saw some pathetic quizzing on TV. And that too when the participants were from what are considered the good b-schools in the country. Not infrequently it happened that none of the teams could answer and Harsha Bhogle (the quiz master) didn't refrain from making his jibes at the stupidity of the people. I don't blame him. One of the questions was what a software product called Ranger developed by Subex Systems did. Note - software product. Someone answered: "something to do with GPRS" and was promptly asked to be more specific to which he says: "Global Positioning System" ! GPRS - GPS - eh? Another chap said "It's those blinking lights to mark the borders of the road". Heh. What part of *software* did he not get? And these are supposed to be the best minds from IIFT, IIT Delhi, MDI and one other.
I read Freakonomics last week. It's very easy to see why it is a best-seller. It's fast paced with theories which seem out-of-the-box. But at the end of the book I felt as if the authors were trying to pull a fast one. Sometimes I think people force themselves to think "out of the box" because it is the prescribed way to appear smart. I liked where they explained why crime in the US decreased in the 1990s although everyone was expecting to reach intolerable levels. But most of the other chapters seemed superfluous - comparing nylon stockings with crack cocaine, trying to figure out why drug dealers live with their parents. I don't see what they are getting at. Almost everything they say they support with one set of numbers and regression. And almost every they refute they refute using a set of numbers and regression. And at times they say things like a swimming pool is more dangerous for children than a gun because more children have died in a swimming pool than while playing with a gun. Umm... has anyone asked them how many children have access to a swimming pool and how many have access to a gun?
Saw a bunch of movies recently:
Vincent And I - is really meant for kids but very well made and almost like a fairy tale. It's about a little girl and her infatuation with Vincent Van Gogh.
The Pink Panter - Peter Sellers surpasses himself. The music (by Henri Mancini) is brilliant. And this movie set me off on a Peter Sellers spree!
The Party - Peter Sellers... is he always this good? There isn't much of a plot but Peter Sellers carries the movie playing an out of place Indian invited to a Hollywood party by mistake.
Dr. Strangelove - Check out the whole name. Peter Sellers again, although this is more a Stanley Kubrik movie than a Peter Sellers' one. It's a satire on the cold war and the arms' race and nuclear deterrents and a must watch.
Dog Day Afternoon - Al Pacino screwing up a bank robbery. The movie is all right; with classic Al Pacino action.
Update: I'm still laughing over Dr. Strangelove. It must have been funnier than what I make it out to be above. And watch out for Peter Sellers in more than one role!