And you are here why?

In case anyone was wondering about exactly what they wanted to do with the $500 they had lying around, its here, right here. Wander over to the-glade and get yerself one of these. Its got TecSys! Its got Pockets! Its got WWII technology! W00t!!!

I know, somebody has thought of it before, but I don't particularly care. *I* thought of it today, and thats whats important. Basics are really simple. Everybody Works In Pairs. Yeah, yeah. XP did that. But XP slaps two people with *one* keyboard in front of *one* computer doing *one* thing. Me, I do it differently. One person writes whatever the heck he/she is writing, and the other writes the test harnesses. There Must Always Be Two. See, except for the real deep architectural stuff, virtually everything I write - modules, apis, accessors, database futzers, whatever - tends to consist of small chunklets. I almost *always* proceed to then unit-tests these like mad (maybe. ok, probably not), then writes some more, then realize that I only tested the stuff that I thought of, and not the stuff that *you* thought of but which turns out to be terribly important, and so on and so forth. In fact, when I really get down to it, around 50% of my writing literally consist...

Adjectives have no place in Data Analysis The papers are always full of it. And whats worse, i am not referring to just the news-papers. Scientific Journals can be just as bad (sometimes). "We are looking for a simple correlation between Poverty and Crime" - a nice statement to make, but the Simplicity is not up to you. You may (or may not!) be able to get a correlation between Poverty and Crime, but its Simplicity is going to be either present (if only in the eye of the beholder), or non-existent. All *you* can do is find the correlation - again, *if* it exists. Statements like these - avec adjectives, tend to drive me up a wall. They are everywhere! Mind you, I'm fine with adjectives used appropriately - heck, I have used 'em all over the place here - and any conversation about food or wine would be a non-starter without 'em, but in Data Analysis? So please, no more Simple Correlations!!! By the way, if you think *I'm* annoyed by these adject...

Care, Insurance, Doctor-Patient relationships, Malpractice, etc., etc. - in this entire discussion, there is one underlying issue that tends to be glossed over (by choice, or by happenstance : the difference pretty much defines your 'conspiracy theorist' level). Who is this supposed to benefit ? Deep pause, intake of breath, and sudden realization that the answer isn't that easy. Some answers are really easy. Take National Security for instance. The direct and immediate beneficiaries are the Citizens. Yes, defense contractors, military-industrial complex, etc, but in the end, it is the Citizens. Not quite convinced? Follow the money - the difference between mercenaries and an army is that one is for hire, and one isn't. As Shlock Mercenary tends to point out every now and then, just because you hired a bunch of mercenaries doesn't mean that they aren't - at the same time - also working for someone else! Follow the money indeed. Do you really want to ta...

Ok, I just figured out the perfect way to implement the stimulus, whilst simultaneously dealing with the Mortgage crisis and  resolving the credit crisis. Whats that you say?  This trifecta seems too good to be true? I Say Thee Nay! Heres the scoop. The gummint buys out - i.e., pays for - the mortgages of the 2,000,000 or so people out there who are currently at risk of defaulting on their mortgages. Before you start throwing stuff at the screen, here me out. Thats 2 Million people. At approximately $300,000 per head (on average) on a "What I can't pay on my mortgage" basis, that comes to $600 Billion. What we do is just pay it off.  Completely.  At one shot.  These people no longer owe  a mortgage. How does this help?  Bear with me on this.  Each of these 2  Million people now own - free and clear - their house.  That means they are free to go ahead and get home-equity loans on their houses to buy a new LCD TV, a Hummer H2, a new Astro-Turf backyard, or some other remark...

No, this isn't one of those I miss all the wacky fruits that one gets in Bangalore/Kanpur/All-Over-India posts.  Though, mind you, I do miss them - Jackfruit, Custard-Apples, Ramphal, Sitaphal, Sapote, Jamun, 72-Types-Of-Mangoes-And-Counting - the list goes on.  Half of these can't even be found on these-here shores. I actually just miss fruits that taste like fruits.  Not like the output of a Universal Cellulosic Composite Fruit Fabricator.  Its particularly bad when you realize that the average Pear tastes exactly  like the average Nectarine, which tastes almost  like the average Apple (not a red one.  Those are mealy!) which tastes almost  like a Plum (just slightly less astringent), and so on, and so forth.   Breeding fruits for shipping as compared to taste has gotten out of hand.  Waaay out of hand.  Heck, breeding them for looks has gotten so  out of hand that I've pretty much decided that anything that looks tasty is almost certainly going to actually be the result ...

Why should Prada have a government-backed monopoly (their Trademark/C/whatever) on their handbags? Instead of going after Chinese factories making knock-offs (cheap or otherwise), why not go the Microsoft route? Prada could create 'Certificates of Authenticity', with serial numbers, etc. If you buy a Prada bag, you go to their web-site, and register the unique ID associated with the bag. Heck, Prada could even watermark their bags with HINs (Handbag Identification Numbers). It certainly doesnt prevent people from creating imitation bags, but hey, even if the bag gets made in the same factory, and is virtually identical, it wont have the HIN, which means it isn't The Real Thing. Which does bring up the associated point - Why *do* people buy knockoffs? Maybe It makes people feel good about themselves. Great. In this case, they won't buy the knockoff anyhow It allows people to show off to others about what they have (and the others dont). In which case, if they need ...

You can always get a Good Beer. Really. There is probably some form of historical context associated with this, probably referring to Mankind's Transformation From Hunter-Gatherer To Agrarian , or some other equally relevant, esoteric, and verbose take on Society. There might even be a reference to the domestication of Wild Hops as a metaphor for Mans Quest For The Transcendent , or something equally ludicrous. The bottom line is, it doesn't matter where you are in the world, if you need a beer, you can get one. And, it will be Good.

Ok, maybe more than one specific  wine, but frankly, if you are floating around Indian and feel the urge to consume a decent glass of wine, your choices are Get a bottle of Sula Something, Grover SomethingElse, or Kinvha SomethingAltogetherDifferent, followed by a little bit of hoping for the best, and a lot of "Meh, it doesn't really suck" Get a bottle of Grover Viognier, Sula Chenin/Sauvignon Blanc, or Big Banyan Whatever, and actually not be disappointed. Buy a bottle of massively overpriced "imported" wine - typically australian - and think to yourself "I am paying $20 for this $7 bottle of wine, and heck, if I was in the U.S., I would not be paying $7 either" On second thoughts, skip the whole exercise, and get a bottle of chilled Kingfisher Beer instead.  Much easier on the palate, and actually quite good...