Affirmative (F)Action

The topic of student's outrage sweeping the nation is related to forcing more people to chase fewer opportunities, just like my attempts to get into the local train to get to work. One of the toughest lessons that I try to learn is to never let myself be led by the 'scarcity theory' - that all things that are good must therefore be limited and scarce.

In relation to this, some random suggestions crossed my mind today:
1) All should benefit from education - unilaterally. The only way to ensure no discrimination is to start making syllabi, notes, textbooks available online and in bookshops, quite similar to the MIT approach.

2) Create and sponsor multiple programs in partnerships with various universities, schools etc. at multiple levels, leaving the core program intact.

3) Offer more reservations, not less, and do not limit to merely caste but also expand to accomodate gender, age, economic status etc. Offer tailor-made programs for people of varying abilities.

4) Publish criteria for selection for each program - don't make it a mystery. Ensure that both candidates and recruiters have this information alike. Leave them to make their decisions.

5) Elongate the program to have special courses for special students based on progressive performances

6) To avoid interference, rely on corporate aid to the extent possible, and seek appraisals from international authorities on the quality of education.

7) Accept the fact that affirmative action is likely to stay for several years, despite the fact that it is a myth and is proven to fail elsewhere. Partner with one and all, to grow in size and reduce a problem's relative size.

1+1=?

Bonds guy, with nose pointing to the sky:
"Inflation-adjusted, with the latest unemployment numbers in, looking at the yield on Japanese Government Securities, the answer is two point zero zero zero zero"

Derivatives guy, with nose in martini:
"You can hedge your position by going long on a call with strike price at Two"

Equities guy, with nose couple of inches from television:
"At current levels of PE multiples, seven to seven-half. But people are talking about a possible re-rating taking it down to five. But I see this being backed by strong fundamentals. So I look at a buy at around six levels."

Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen.

Who needs longevity?

Seeking longevity of products seems to be an increasingly risky approach when the world is shifting to a portfolio / service based approach. In other words, we will stick with what works and toss out what doesn't work. The longevity of what worked may provide insights into future design, but designing for longevity will become increasingly less likely to work. Designing for open standards compliance is a safer approach, unless you belong to the league of Oracles and Microsofts!

Recent examples of Database Management companies depreciating existing products fully before releasing future products has led to their downfall. On the other hand, successful companies remain those that cannibalize their own product portfolio by releasing products that will meet customer demand, even if it means competing against sales of other products by the same company. Look at the Chip manufacturing companies as an example.

This seems to indicate that the traditional approach of managing 'Product Life Cycles' might be heading towards extinction. But that is a more tepid conclusion. To me, the more pertinent development is that once a product is released, the company should find ways of destroying it. After all, if somebody is going to do it sooner or later, the company should take a lead in initiating its own demise!

Conquerors and Monks

If you control an identity, you control the person behind that identity. One of the control points is a person's belief systems. Conquerors know that.

Sometime back, I wrote that a successful conquest requires that you create a person's identity - one that depends on you.

Chances are that a land conquered will not be immediately prosperous. So, there is quite a likelihood that kids would grow up hating you because they are still poor. So you can give out alms; that would make life easier for one and all. Perhaps you could raise alms through taxes. By the time the kids grow up to hate the “old ways”, the original conqueror is long gone. What is now in place is an institutionalized political system that is on the verge of collapse. The belief system will now spiral out of control as there are no more reference points.

Which is precisely why the art of conflict and politics is inherently short-lived, no matter what the original intent.

Drops

Drops of your essence
Raining on me constantly
Obeying noone

Words

Biochemical
storms in my mind are dispelled
by an angel, you