The recent bill passed in the Parliament that allows 51% FDI in multi-brand retail has created controversy in the political space. The opposition parties are threatening to stall the Winter Session, at a time when Parliament cannot afford to miss the session. Although it is the nature of Opposition to vehemently oppose every move taken by the ruling party, this particular discussion has aroused my interest.
The Congress believes that entry of global players into multi-brand retail space will enhance the entire chain and ultimately benefit the “aam aadmi” in multiple ways, by creating many jobs, by easing prices via supply strengthening, and creating an excellent farmer-to-market infrastructure. The government has ensured this by restricting companies to invest at least $100 million and 50% of it in building back-end infrastructure. Given these rules, there is no doubt that there are going to be positive effects of the decision.
These global players were eagerly waiting to tap the potential India has. They have at least 20 years of experience in building end-to-end infrastructure, and flattening the entire retail process. The kind of technology Wal-Mart offers in retailing is second to none. It has such command over its supply chain management that it is bound to create a technology that will amaze customers. In such an age when India is considered to be one of the fastest growing economies in the world, why should India be bereft of witnessing such a transformation in technology?
The most prominent argument that the Opposition is riding on is that entry of such global players in the retail arena will kick out small retailers and famous “kirana stores”. This argument is baseless as I can think of one comparison that will make this clear. Entry of four wheelers into the market does not kick out the two wheeler market. This may sound a very crude comparison, but this is how I justify it. Big retailers and small retailers are entirely different concepts, and they both cater to different markets. People buying from malls also buy from kirana stores, the main reason being they are fundamentally different concepts of retailing.
Shopping in big malls is considered to be a one-time thing, with urban families going once every weekend or fortnight to buy essential and “non-essential” items. Yes, non-essential items, because a trip to a retail mall always brings in many extraneous items along with the essential ones (accept many families). These trips sometimes are also considered an outing or an experience rather than an absolute necessity. While the kirana stores offer customer satisfaction by giving a personal touch, they also offer home delivery, and offer credit facilities also. They are considered a necessity while malls are not, no one would like to drive 2-3 miles just to buy a loaf of bread. Kirana stores deliver items when urgency is a criterion. Also, in such busy professional life, every one would like to buy things on the way home. In such a scenario, kirana stores have still a long way to go.
One thing that amazes me is why don’t players like Big Baazar, D-Mart or Reliance oppose this move. Because they cater to the same market the big foreign players cater to. If Wal-Mart or Tesco or Carrefour enter Indian market, these are the ones who would be sharing the markets. Any customer after deciding he wants to buy a car would choose between Toyota Etios or Maruti Swift but he definitely won’t be making a choice between Bajaj Pulsar and Maruti Swift. In the same way, whenever a customer wants to go shopping in a mall, he will choose between Wal-Mart or Reliance Mart, creating competition to the big Indian players already present in the market. It is surprising to see why no politician is addressing this issue, perhaps because by addressing small retailers they want to win the votes of those people who think their logic is correct.
Either I am missing some issue on this point, or either the whole economy is shrouded by political debates alone. In my opinion, no market should be restricted, Darwin’s theory of struggle also applies to this space. Let the toughest player survive. Opening the market in 1991 has transformed the entire economy, and this is one thing we should thank Congress for - opening up the market. It is trying to do the same thing now. In such economy when inflation is not easing despite million efforts by RBI, why not give a little chance to these players as well. It won’t in any way harm the current prices, that is for sure. Lets all take one step ahead, together.
Showing posts with label my thoughts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label my thoughts. Show all posts
Tuesday, 29 November 2011
One Step Ahead towards Retail
Friday, 28 October 2011
Are Great people really Great?
Scores of people have come upon this earth and have contributed a lot to mankind, and we remember them as heroes or saints. Their simple acts have had profound effects on the way this world lives and breathes. These people are remembered for their good qualities, selfless nature, extraordinary intelligence, problem solving capabilities and what not. But, one question that comes to my mind is that - what will happen if people come to the know that dark side of these people? Would their opinion change? Should their opinion change?
The recent death of Steve Jobs created a wave of sadness in this world. Everyone hailed the great master and innovator of technology. We all know that without him, we wouldn’t have the digital world at our hands. PCs, iPods, smartphones, tablets - he brought a revolution, followed by millions of other similar products, leading to a price war that ultimately lead to affordability for the mass. He brought the technology of the sci-fi to the hands of the common people. Undoubtedly, in the words of Thomas Friedman, he made the world flatter. But, do we know the dark side of his persona. As the stories are revealed, there are many aspects of his personality that completely changes our perspective towards him. For example, he demanded perfection from every one of his employees. If an employee had worked all night and his work was not good, he would just tell him “what the hell did you do. you are useless”. He didn’t value hard work, he valued only innovation and perfection. And he was also notorious for firing employees in the corridor, when everyone was watching, just to humiliate the employee for his bad work. He also minced foul words for Bill Gates, Larry Page only because he did not like their work. He was selfish, and obsessive about only Apple’s progress.
Take another example, of one person that is near God to every Indian - Mahatma Gandhi. He gave us independence, gave us new weapons like Civil Disobedience, Non-Cooperation, and Satyagraha. He was an icon with a frail body but determination that no one could shake. But, he was not a good family-man. As we dig deeper inside the story of his life, we come to know that he was neither a good husband, nor a good father. He never cared for his wife nor his children. He was so preoccupied in the fight for his nation that he never had time for his family. His sons had always said “He was the father of our nation, but he could not be our father. We had to pay the price”. There are also speculations that he had left Kasturba in South Africa to live with Kallenbach, an architect. Gandhi was deeply overtaken by Kallenbach’s personality. There are also some speculations that Gandhi had slept with some of her nieces. Some people has gone so far as to call Gandhi “a very dangerous, semi-repressed sex maniac”.
Should these facts change our perspective towards Steve or Gandhi? Do these facts diminish the fact that they contributed a lot to the society? The answer is: No. These facts do not change what they gave to the world. But when such people are made icons, the negative facts are purposefully ignored or forgotten. And when such facts are revealed, it leads to protests and furor. The reason for this is that there is negativity in everyone. But people see such icons as epitome of goodness. They try to ignore the negativeness in icons because they get inspired from them. If they are told about the dark side of these personalities, they feel they possess some of that dark side too. And people can never accept their dark side. They think that “if these people can be bad, what about us? So, they cannot be bad”. They cannot accept the fact that someone so famous can have a dark side too. It is absolute denial.
And this was the only reason Dan Brown’s “Da Vinci Code” created such a controversy, because he tried to expose some facts which tarnished the image of Jesus. Great writers, poets, novelists write for one reason - to inspire people to do good from the good of other people. But there are other writers too - who are interested in telling people the dark side also. It is up to us to know both the sides, and follow the good side. The dark side of these personalities simply tells us one thing - there is good and bad everywhere. But what made the people famous and iconic is not the bad thing, but the good thing. And the good things were enough to shadow the bad things into a little corner which everyone ignores. Embrace the truth, and follow the good. That way, everyone will be happy and aware.
The recent death of Steve Jobs created a wave of sadness in this world. Everyone hailed the great master and innovator of technology. We all know that without him, we wouldn’t have the digital world at our hands. PCs, iPods, smartphones, tablets - he brought a revolution, followed by millions of other similar products, leading to a price war that ultimately lead to affordability for the mass. He brought the technology of the sci-fi to the hands of the common people. Undoubtedly, in the words of Thomas Friedman, he made the world flatter. But, do we know the dark side of his persona. As the stories are revealed, there are many aspects of his personality that completely changes our perspective towards him. For example, he demanded perfection from every one of his employees. If an employee had worked all night and his work was not good, he would just tell him “what the hell did you do. you are useless”. He didn’t value hard work, he valued only innovation and perfection. And he was also notorious for firing employees in the corridor, when everyone was watching, just to humiliate the employee for his bad work. He also minced foul words for Bill Gates, Larry Page only because he did not like their work. He was selfish, and obsessive about only Apple’s progress.
Take another example, of one person that is near God to every Indian - Mahatma Gandhi. He gave us independence, gave us new weapons like Civil Disobedience, Non-Cooperation, and Satyagraha. He was an icon with a frail body but determination that no one could shake. But, he was not a good family-man. As we dig deeper inside the story of his life, we come to know that he was neither a good husband, nor a good father. He never cared for his wife nor his children. He was so preoccupied in the fight for his nation that he never had time for his family. His sons had always said “He was the father of our nation, but he could not be our father. We had to pay the price”. There are also speculations that he had left Kasturba in South Africa to live with Kallenbach, an architect. Gandhi was deeply overtaken by Kallenbach’s personality. There are also some speculations that Gandhi had slept with some of her nieces. Some people has gone so far as to call Gandhi “a very dangerous, semi-repressed sex maniac”.
Should these facts change our perspective towards Steve or Gandhi? Do these facts diminish the fact that they contributed a lot to the society? The answer is: No. These facts do not change what they gave to the world. But when such people are made icons, the negative facts are purposefully ignored or forgotten. And when such facts are revealed, it leads to protests and furor. The reason for this is that there is negativity in everyone. But people see such icons as epitome of goodness. They try to ignore the negativeness in icons because they get inspired from them. If they are told about the dark side of these personalities, they feel they possess some of that dark side too. And people can never accept their dark side. They think that “if these people can be bad, what about us? So, they cannot be bad”. They cannot accept the fact that someone so famous can have a dark side too. It is absolute denial.
And this was the only reason Dan Brown’s “Da Vinci Code” created such a controversy, because he tried to expose some facts which tarnished the image of Jesus. Great writers, poets, novelists write for one reason - to inspire people to do good from the good of other people. But there are other writers too - who are interested in telling people the dark side also. It is up to us to know both the sides, and follow the good side. The dark side of these personalities simply tells us one thing - there is good and bad everywhere. But what made the people famous and iconic is not the bad thing, but the good thing. And the good things were enough to shadow the bad things into a little corner which everyone ignores. Embrace the truth, and follow the good. That way, everyone will be happy and aware.
Wednesday, 12 October 2011
Steve's Legacy
A Legendary person has left us: Steve Jobs, the pioneer of many technologies we use today, that have changed our lives altogether. Who would have imagined, that one day the research of Steve duo - Jobs and Wozniak, would transform the world and usher in an era of Personal Computing. Yes, I am talking about Apple II - the Mac that changed the world. It is amusing to imagine that someone without a formal college education can do something so wonderful. For normal people like us, its just impossible to imagine the way Steve would have thought.
He was great not only as an innovator, but also an excellent entrepreneur. Under his tenure, Apple grew. Without him, Apple fell. He switched his field to that of Animation, and transformed it too. There is no single person who does not know what Pixar is. Wherever he went, he had one thing in him - his passion for things. In his famous lecture at Harvard, he had told “When I left Apple, it was the best thing that could happen to me. It was like taking a break from all the fame and starting again as a beginner”. This attitude really helps - the world has always an opportunity to grab, just have a vision for it.
iTunes replaced CDs and DVDs, and iPod replaced the players. Bag on the back, earphones plugged and iPod in the pocket became a symbol of modern youth. Music was being “shuffled” on the fingertips. The previous generation can laugh at themselves waiting for their favorite song to come on Doordarshan or on Aakashvani. iPod signified freedom to the youth. It is really inspiring to see that a technological product such as an iPod, can have not only a technological impact, but social and cultural impact as well. iTunes brought the world closer. It just helped making the world flatter.
iPhone is world’s first touch smartphone, and till date, it is the best. Like Apple II introduced the concept of Personal Computers and GUI, iPhone was the foundation for touchscreen technology. Before iPhone, touchscreen was a sci-fi concept, but after iPhone, we never cared when that child sitting on the next seat used touchscreen technology. iPhone was not only a smartphone and a mobile - it was a concept all together. And just when we were coming out of that shock, we suddenly had iPad and iPad 2. And today we have every mom and pop company making tablets suiting to every market.
What is common between Apple II, iPod, iPhone and iPad? Answer: the reaction that followed. Every competitor followed the suit. After Mac introduced type-face font and a rich GUI, Windows followed it. And today, we have no computer that does not use a GUI. After iPod? Every company in the world came up with their own MP3 players. But still, iPods stand above the crowd. Similarly, after iPhone and iPad, every company started making their own smartphones and tablets. Even Google, the company which is known for some of the best brains in the world - had to bow down to Apple. Many companies launch products, few companies start a revolution. And Apple started revolution not once, twice or even thrice - but four times. That is a rare feat. Steve was really awesome.
He was a real Phoenix - he rose from his ashes every time he fell. He kept going on. Although, there is some part of Steve that doesn’t make us want to respect him. He abused is employees, fired them in the corridor, and he disowned his daughter born in a wedlock. But, everyone has some yin and yang. The world wasn’t affected by his firing a few employees or disowning his daughter, but it was surely affected by his innovation. And we will always remember him for that.
He was great not only as an innovator, but also an excellent entrepreneur. Under his tenure, Apple grew. Without him, Apple fell. He switched his field to that of Animation, and transformed it too. There is no single person who does not know what Pixar is. Wherever he went, he had one thing in him - his passion for things. In his famous lecture at Harvard, he had told “When I left Apple, it was the best thing that could happen to me. It was like taking a break from all the fame and starting again as a beginner”. This attitude really helps - the world has always an opportunity to grab, just have a vision for it.
iTunes replaced CDs and DVDs, and iPod replaced the players. Bag on the back, earphones plugged and iPod in the pocket became a symbol of modern youth. Music was being “shuffled” on the fingertips. The previous generation can laugh at themselves waiting for their favorite song to come on Doordarshan or on Aakashvani. iPod signified freedom to the youth. It is really inspiring to see that a technological product such as an iPod, can have not only a technological impact, but social and cultural impact as well. iTunes brought the world closer. It just helped making the world flatter.
iPhone is world’s first touch smartphone, and till date, it is the best. Like Apple II introduced the concept of Personal Computers and GUI, iPhone was the foundation for touchscreen technology. Before iPhone, touchscreen was a sci-fi concept, but after iPhone, we never cared when that child sitting on the next seat used touchscreen technology. iPhone was not only a smartphone and a mobile - it was a concept all together. And just when we were coming out of that shock, we suddenly had iPad and iPad 2. And today we have every mom and pop company making tablets suiting to every market.
What is common between Apple II, iPod, iPhone and iPad? Answer: the reaction that followed. Every competitor followed the suit. After Mac introduced type-face font and a rich GUI, Windows followed it. And today, we have no computer that does not use a GUI. After iPod? Every company in the world came up with their own MP3 players. But still, iPods stand above the crowd. Similarly, after iPhone and iPad, every company started making their own smartphones and tablets. Even Google, the company which is known for some of the best brains in the world - had to bow down to Apple. Many companies launch products, few companies start a revolution. And Apple started revolution not once, twice or even thrice - but four times. That is a rare feat. Steve was really awesome.
He was a real Phoenix - he rose from his ashes every time he fell. He kept going on. Although, there is some part of Steve that doesn’t make us want to respect him. He abused is employees, fired them in the corridor, and he disowned his daughter born in a wedlock. But, everyone has some yin and yang. The world wasn’t affected by his firing a few employees or disowning his daughter, but it was surely affected by his innovation. And we will always remember him for that.
Tuesday, 27 September 2011
Piracy: is it really bad?
Piracy is highly condemned everywhere. It is the terrorism of software. It eats away the profit of all the developers and makes their efforts useless. The fact that piracy is wicked is even supported by the people who share stuff on torrent, who write that “If you like this game/movie, please buy it. Support the devs man”. It is really disheartening to see that after all the effort one has put into a product, someone just copies it and sells it for free.
Piracy is more of an ethical issue rather than a technological one. For every mind that protects the products from getting copied, there are ten others who have much sharper mind [probably their own co-workers] who want to get the product out for free. According to me, half of the pirated products are the efforts of the employees working on it who can do a little ding-dong and screw their company’s profits. It wouldn’t come as a surprise to me if I’d see a Microsoft employee selling pirated Windows to his neighbor.
In short, its bad. But after giving it much thought [as per what limited knowledge I have], I have found that piracy can help - if tackled like a necessary evil. In a market like India or China, I think piracy has helped Microsoft in the long term. [I’ll use Microsoft Windows to discuss the case because “its obvious”]
In a market like India, when computers were considered magical artifacts and when a Pentium I would cost you nearly Rs. 50,000, a free OS helped a lot. And at that time (the 90s era), Microsoft was slowly gaining popularity as the best OS around, because it had kicked in the concept of GUI. As a result, computer revolution began in India with a PC having Windows. At that time, India had no laws to tackle piracy. [Well, even if it had, I don’t think it would have made much difference].
The result was the rapid expansion of the market with just Windows as the concept of an OS. Pirated versions of Windows 95, 98, 2000, NT and XP [the decade of 1995-2005] did the miraculous work of making Indian people believe that Windows is part of a computer and that a PC and Windows are one and the same. Schools, colleges, universities, cyber cafes - everywhere and everyone - used pirated Windows. No one knew what Unix was. [what if it was like, 100 times better and was developed 20 years prior to Windows].
The result - today with the advent of laptops, the price of Windows is bundled with the laptop. There are many laptops with Unix as the OS, but those are rare. 95% of the laptops sold in India are shipped with the Windows OS. And in the coming years, as long as laptops and branded PCs are to stay, Microsoft has its audience, and they will pay for it. [And believe me, PCs and laptopos are staying, no pesky tablet or smartphone can play Crysis, Call of Duty or World of Warcraft].
Two words that would help me over here are - market penetration and brand building - and piracy helped Microsoft do that, at least in India. And I don’t think it suffered losses in the decade. Now imagine the utopian concept, that Windows had no pirated versions. I don’t think anyone in India would have coughed up anything between Rs 3000-7000 for something they can get for free. The result would have been the emergence of Unix as the OS of choice, Microsoft getting beaten up as “something that charges money for what we get for free”. Because here in India, the concept of good is the concept of free.
Let us take the discussion to a more general perspective of piracy. Piracy helps companies by letting the audience adapt to their products. Once you see people clinging to your products like a pole in a storm, it is time to introduce the money concept, but even that should be done incrementally. For example, music piracy helps people get the song in their head, and when there is a concert of their favorite singer, they are going to cough up money for something that they already know.
In the gaming industry, (PC specifically), the companies shouldn’t battle their pirated version getting around if they want to build a brand in terms of the game. Personally, I would buy the next Call of Duty or Battlefield game if I cannot it pirated. The thing is - for urging people to buy your products, you should arouse their interests. People will pay only if they like it, and no one can like by seeing only the demo or the trailer of the game.
Companies should get one thing straight into their mind - no one will pay for a new thing. Instead of battling against piracy, which is inevitable, the strategy should be - getting people used to your products and charge when they have not alternate definition of the product you’re selling. And then, you are dominating. And I think Microsoft has been successful in many markets by following this endeavor. [Although what we need ponder upon is whether this market strategy was intentional or accidental, and that, is what we’ll never come to know].
Bottom line - even if piracy [or shall we say, free product] hurts you in the short term, cling to it, it may reap you profits in the long term. But as people get adapted to your free product, its the responsibility of the company to manage the brand in such a way that you know how to leverage your customers into paying what they consider best. A little thinking and market research - and piracy is the industry standard for launching their first product. [Now we’re talking about utopia].
P.S: We would never know if companies have already realized this, and that is the reason why pirated products are still floating in the market.
Piracy is more of an ethical issue rather than a technological one. For every mind that protects the products from getting copied, there are ten others who have much sharper mind [probably their own co-workers] who want to get the product out for free. According to me, half of the pirated products are the efforts of the employees working on it who can do a little ding-dong and screw their company’s profits. It wouldn’t come as a surprise to me if I’d see a Microsoft employee selling pirated Windows to his neighbor.
In short, its bad. But after giving it much thought [as per what limited knowledge I have], I have found that piracy can help - if tackled like a necessary evil. In a market like India or China, I think piracy has helped Microsoft in the long term. [I’ll use Microsoft Windows to discuss the case because “its obvious”]
In a market like India, when computers were considered magical artifacts and when a Pentium I would cost you nearly Rs. 50,000, a free OS helped a lot. And at that time (the 90s era), Microsoft was slowly gaining popularity as the best OS around, because it had kicked in the concept of GUI. As a result, computer revolution began in India with a PC having Windows. At that time, India had no laws to tackle piracy. [Well, even if it had, I don’t think it would have made much difference].
The result was the rapid expansion of the market with just Windows as the concept of an OS. Pirated versions of Windows 95, 98, 2000, NT and XP [the decade of 1995-2005] did the miraculous work of making Indian people believe that Windows is part of a computer and that a PC and Windows are one and the same. Schools, colleges, universities, cyber cafes - everywhere and everyone - used pirated Windows. No one knew what Unix was. [what if it was like, 100 times better and was developed 20 years prior to Windows].
The result - today with the advent of laptops, the price of Windows is bundled with the laptop. There are many laptops with Unix as the OS, but those are rare. 95% of the laptops sold in India are shipped with the Windows OS. And in the coming years, as long as laptops and branded PCs are to stay, Microsoft has its audience, and they will pay for it. [And believe me, PCs and laptopos are staying, no pesky tablet or smartphone can play Crysis, Call of Duty or World of Warcraft].
Two words that would help me over here are - market penetration and brand building - and piracy helped Microsoft do that, at least in India. And I don’t think it suffered losses in the decade. Now imagine the utopian concept, that Windows had no pirated versions. I don’t think anyone in India would have coughed up anything between Rs 3000-7000 for something they can get for free. The result would have been the emergence of Unix as the OS of choice, Microsoft getting beaten up as “something that charges money for what we get for free”. Because here in India, the concept of good is the concept of free.
Let us take the discussion to a more general perspective of piracy. Piracy helps companies by letting the audience adapt to their products. Once you see people clinging to your products like a pole in a storm, it is time to introduce the money concept, but even that should be done incrementally. For example, music piracy helps people get the song in their head, and when there is a concert of their favorite singer, they are going to cough up money for something that they already know.
In the gaming industry, (PC specifically), the companies shouldn’t battle their pirated version getting around if they want to build a brand in terms of the game. Personally, I would buy the next Call of Duty or Battlefield game if I cannot it pirated. The thing is - for urging people to buy your products, you should arouse their interests. People will pay only if they like it, and no one can like by seeing only the demo or the trailer of the game.
Companies should get one thing straight into their mind - no one will pay for a new thing. Instead of battling against piracy, which is inevitable, the strategy should be - getting people used to your products and charge when they have not alternate definition of the product you’re selling. And then, you are dominating. And I think Microsoft has been successful in many markets by following this endeavor. [Although what we need ponder upon is whether this market strategy was intentional or accidental, and that, is what we’ll never come to know].
Bottom line - even if piracy [or shall we say, free product] hurts you in the short term, cling to it, it may reap you profits in the long term. But as people get adapted to your free product, its the responsibility of the company to manage the brand in such a way that you know how to leverage your customers into paying what they consider best. A little thinking and market research - and piracy is the industry standard for launching their first product. [Now we’re talking about utopia].
P.S: We would never know if companies have already realized this, and that is the reason why pirated products are still floating in the market.
Sunday, 18 September 2011
Pakistan and Terrorism
On the 10th anniversary of 9/11 - the day that changed the future of this world - the Pakistan government did what was unthinkable - to advertise its support for the fight against terrorism. This incident is humorous for two reasons - the first reason being that no country has ever (in my knowledge) advertised its efforts for a holy cause, and the second and the most obvious reason is that it is the country which is the breeding site of most of the terrorist activities that are taking place today.
I would not blame today’s Pakistan government wholly for the situation there. Much what is there today is the result of the policies and practices of previous governments. The chief cause of the presence of terrorists on the soil of Pakistan is that it has been through many wars. The war of East Pakistan that lead to the formation of Bangladesh, three wars with India, and the Soviet-Afghan war. All these wars have led to the nurturing of so-called independent fighting groups by the government for achieving strategic goals. These groups are used for proxy wars and they are ideology driven self-sustained groups.
Pakistan has been long since obsessed with Kashmir. It occupies much of it illegally and considers it as its own part. No leader of Pakistan has considered Kashmir part of Indian territory. There have been numerous terrorist groups trained for the sole purpose of liberating Kashmir from India. General Pervez Musharraf had confessed that Pakistan Army used to train militant groups for fighting Indian fighters in Kashmir. The benefit of having such militant groups instead of the the Army is the deniability. If these militants are caught or killed, they cannot be associated with either with the government or the Army. Thus Pakistan gets a clean chit and the fight can continue.
The war of Afghanistan in 1991 also brought many religious extremists from all over the world to South Asia. Many of them have settled in Pakistan and have been operating since then. This has led to a mixture of terrorist groups, some home grown, some imported from Taliban in Afghanistan. And after 9/11, al-Qaeda leaders have also settled in Pakistan after US started war with Afghanistan.
Another reason for the violence in Pakistan is the sectarian and religious conflict, mainly between Shia and Sunni supporters. Few Islamist policies enacted by the previous governments have added fuel to the fire of religious conflicts. The result is the birth of highly influential religious leaders who can bend the crowd to their willing.
The violence in Pakistan today is the mixture of the home grown terrorist groups and religious leaders. There are instances when these two merge and give rise to a single terrorist group. The Pakistan intelligence group Inter Services Intelligence, or famously known as the ISI, still gives intelligence and arms support to terrorists who share a common ideology. The Pakistani government still recognizes some terrorist groups as religious bodies. And the idea of tackling terrorism is limited to having talks with these groups.
The lesson which the Pakistani government should now learn is that terrorism and violence have no demarcations. You cannot recognize one terrorist group and hope to dismantle the other. Terrorism has to be viewed from a single agenda. It has lost much in achieving its national goals via the road of terrorism. It is true that Pakistan has lost more people in terrorist attacks than any country ever. It is true that numerous political figures have become victim of this terrorism. It is true that Pakistan is fighting Al Qaeda terrorists since US has put pressure on it. But what is also true is that substantial amount of US aid for fighting terrorists has gone in nurturing those terrorist groups which it recognizes for fighting personal wars. No amount of justification can justify the use of training militants and using violence to achieve what they consider national goals.
The advertisement in Wall Street Journal dates 9/11 has drawn much flak in the US. The people have ridiculed Pakistan’s efforts of fighting terrorism. Any common man would ask only one question - how can a country that is sponsoring terrorism, fight terrorism? The answer is not so simple. The problem that Pakistan faces today is not easy to tackle. Even if Pakistan government stops sponsoring terrorist groups today, it has a long way in fighting terrorists.
If Pakistan stops giving support to the terrorist groups and starts fighting these militants, there is hope after all. It can not only save its own Security Forces and civilians, but it can send a blow to these terrorists and save many people of the world. Pakistan is currently not fighting for the safety of 7 billion people, but it can bring peace to these people if it wants. Yes, its true, only Pakistan can do it.
Saturday, 10 September 2011
A Decade After
A decade has passed by since 9/11 – an event that changed the face of this world. 9/11 was one attempt to shake the world leader position US had assumed for half a century. It was the reply of Afghan War in 1991 that hurt the sentiments of fundamentalists, who wanted to free themselves from the shackles of being under the US. 9/11 was not only a terrorist act; it was an act of liberation for millions of jihadis and fundamentalists who said that “We are still free”. Osama-bin Laden was their Pope and jihad was their Christianity.
The incident opened the eyes of US to a problem it had long since chosen to ignore – fundamentalist terrorism. It chose to ignore the snow boulder that had steadily grown since the 1991 Gulf War: al-Qaeda. And when it hurt, it hurt so much that it left such a deep scar that is probably never going to heal.
The reaction was almost immediate and expected from a world leader. It chose to strike back (something which is impossible – strategically and practically for India to do). Invasion of Iraq began barely a month later in 9/11 with war in Afghanistan. One and a half year later Saddam Hussein was toppled in 21 days into what US thought was “War on Terrorism”. Thousands of American troops fought along with British, French and German soldiers. Small amounts of contribution were even given by New Zealand, Austria and Poland. Everyone did what the leader told. They thought it was better to nip in the bud. Saddam was ousted; Iraq was restored to be a democracy, story over.
Had this been the end of the story, and US had pulled its troops out of Afghanistan, the scenario would have been different from what it is today. It would have put fear into the mind of terrorists about the brutality of American troops. But US chose to carry on the war in Afghanistan with the Taliban. That was the first mistake made by the US. Taliban was a threat, and Taliban’s support to al-Qaeda was the reason that brought at least NATO troops to the Afghan soil, majority of whom were American troops (90,000). Pakistan was strategically important to the US – and this is what fostered a long term partnership between US and Pakistan. Pakistan had US on its leverage, and Pakistan played to its weakness. This was the second mistake of the US.
Taliban fought a brave war in the US, while key elements of al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban found safe havens in a country which had its pocket money coming from US – Pakistan. US funded Pakistan government, the government funded the ISI, and the ISI with the strategic advantage of Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders – possibly Osama Bin Laden himself, strengthened the Laskar-e-Toiba and went along to fulfil its dream to terrorize India.
Thus, what happened in India can be thought as a consequence of US’s ‘three mistakes’, the third one being the decision to come out of the Afghan war by 2014 with what they suppose is their victory over the Taliban. Of course the third mistake was bound to happen, as it was a direct consequence of the first one.
One good thing that happened between all this was the killing of Osama bin Laden and that too from Pakistan. US got the much needed tangible proof that Pakistan had been playing to its interests. The finding of number 1 international terrorist near a heavily protected Military base makes any deniability impossible. Pakistan knew he was there, and Pakistan had always wanted to protect him. It was a symbiotic relationship, protection of Osama against its strategic advantage and long experience in terrorism. Although Pakistan did suffer a lot from its own home grown terrorism due to some steps it had to take to keep the money flowing, but it was much less price to pay compared to what it had in its basket.
But US has to understand one thing – terrorism a modern Raavan, it cannot be be-headed and killed. Whether it is Osama bin Laden, Illyas Kashmiri or Fazul Abdullah Muhammad, killing of leaders won’t kill the ideology. The NATO troops are losing its ground in Afghanistan, Pakistan continues to offer safe havens to terrorists, and US, though it may appear it is winning, is losing the war. The US knows it and the terrorists know it too. There is no way Afghanistan government can stop the country from becoming a terror ground once again.
For me, the primary concern is to see where the scenario is headed for India. HuJI, LeT, JuD remain active in India primarily from Kashmir and PoK. India continues to be terrorized. The terrorists are now home grown. It is high time the leaders sit together, and bring a solution to terrorism that will put a check on its powers to conduct attacks. Terrorism cannot be eradicated, at least not in our generation. The best we can do is tackling it using intelligence and strategy and not just force.
One day remains to the 10th anniversary of the event that changed the course of this world. The US has readied itself for an imminent “unconfirmed but credible” threat. Let’s hope it does not come to that. “Let us all pledge to resolve to end terrorism so that our future generations would not have to experience the bloodshed and brutality that has horrified us and shook our lives. God bless the souls who have become the target to this madness. Amen.
The incident opened the eyes of US to a problem it had long since chosen to ignore – fundamentalist terrorism. It chose to ignore the snow boulder that had steadily grown since the 1991 Gulf War: al-Qaeda. And when it hurt, it hurt so much that it left such a deep scar that is probably never going to heal.
The reaction was almost immediate and expected from a world leader. It chose to strike back (something which is impossible – strategically and practically for India to do). Invasion of Iraq began barely a month later in 9/11 with war in Afghanistan. One and a half year later Saddam Hussein was toppled in 21 days into what US thought was “War on Terrorism”. Thousands of American troops fought along with British, French and German soldiers. Small amounts of contribution were even given by New Zealand, Austria and Poland. Everyone did what the leader told. They thought it was better to nip in the bud. Saddam was ousted; Iraq was restored to be a democracy, story over.
Had this been the end of the story, and US had pulled its troops out of Afghanistan, the scenario would have been different from what it is today. It would have put fear into the mind of terrorists about the brutality of American troops. But US chose to carry on the war in Afghanistan with the Taliban. That was the first mistake made by the US. Taliban was a threat, and Taliban’s support to al-Qaeda was the reason that brought at least NATO troops to the Afghan soil, majority of whom were American troops (90,000). Pakistan was strategically important to the US – and this is what fostered a long term partnership between US and Pakistan. Pakistan had US on its leverage, and Pakistan played to its weakness. This was the second mistake of the US.
Taliban fought a brave war in the US, while key elements of al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban found safe havens in a country which had its pocket money coming from US – Pakistan. US funded Pakistan government, the government funded the ISI, and the ISI with the strategic advantage of Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders – possibly Osama Bin Laden himself, strengthened the Laskar-e-Toiba and went along to fulfil its dream to terrorize India.
Thus, what happened in India can be thought as a consequence of US’s ‘three mistakes’, the third one being the decision to come out of the Afghan war by 2014 with what they suppose is their victory over the Taliban. Of course the third mistake was bound to happen, as it was a direct consequence of the first one.
One good thing that happened between all this was the killing of Osama bin Laden and that too from Pakistan. US got the much needed tangible proof that Pakistan had been playing to its interests. The finding of number 1 international terrorist near a heavily protected Military base makes any deniability impossible. Pakistan knew he was there, and Pakistan had always wanted to protect him. It was a symbiotic relationship, protection of Osama against its strategic advantage and long experience in terrorism. Although Pakistan did suffer a lot from its own home grown terrorism due to some steps it had to take to keep the money flowing, but it was much less price to pay compared to what it had in its basket.
But US has to understand one thing – terrorism a modern Raavan, it cannot be be-headed and killed. Whether it is Osama bin Laden, Illyas Kashmiri or Fazul Abdullah Muhammad, killing of leaders won’t kill the ideology. The NATO troops are losing its ground in Afghanistan, Pakistan continues to offer safe havens to terrorists, and US, though it may appear it is winning, is losing the war. The US knows it and the terrorists know it too. There is no way Afghanistan government can stop the country from becoming a terror ground once again.
For me, the primary concern is to see where the scenario is headed for India. HuJI, LeT, JuD remain active in India primarily from Kashmir and PoK. India continues to be terrorized. The terrorists are now home grown. It is high time the leaders sit together, and bring a solution to terrorism that will put a check on its powers to conduct attacks. Terrorism cannot be eradicated, at least not in our generation. The best we can do is tackling it using intelligence and strategy and not just force.
One day remains to the 10th anniversary of the event that changed the course of this world. The US has readied itself for an imminent “unconfirmed but credible” threat. Let’s hope it does not come to that. “Let us all pledge to resolve to end terrorism so that our future generations would not have to experience the bloodshed and brutality that has horrified us and shook our lives. God bless the souls who have become the target to this madness. Amen.
Wednesday, 10 August 2011
Computer Engineering Myths
Being a Computer Engineer is not easy. No, I am not talking about the academics part, I am talking about some myths that the Indian society has about Computer Engineers. These myths are so perplexing that sometimes you need feel like banging your head to the wall. It is so frustrating when people miscalculate our skills in computers with our academics. And when stare at them – with blank expressions – wondering what to say next.
This understanding gap is because of the fact that in the previous generation, only a fraction of people knew what a computer was. Others had only heard about it, and wondering that it would take lot of skills and knowledge to operate it. The myth still lives on, and one can find it spread across the society. I do not blame them for the myths, but sometimes, they are really funny.
So, the following messages are for people who have some inherent myths about Computer Engineering. I have experienced some personally, some I have heard of happening to my friends, and some are just thought up based on my imagination. Please read this, and spread this message, so we can have an easy life.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to turn on and turn off a computer.
Never ever in those entire span 4 years, no one tells us. We just learn that, like a baby who learns to walk.
Studying Computer Engineering does not increase our typing speed.
Although 4 years of incessant code writing may increase our tying speed, but we do not practice “type” in our labs.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to fix or repair a computer.
This is by far the biggest myth that has troubled me. Every relative or friend comes up to me and said “My computer is not working. Can you please repair it?” Please people, we are not taught how to repair a computer, in fact, we are fined if we try to open one of the CPUs in the lab. Although I have some basic hardware knowledge, this is not what those college people have taught me, so don’t dare tell to anyone “You are a Computer Engineer. Can’t you repair a computer?” It infuriates me.
Computer Engineering does not teach us MS Office.
MS Office is the most widely used software for office applications, and has thus gained reputation among the masses. Some people tend to think that learning Word, Excel and PowerPoint is a rare feat and can only be performed by some people. Also, they tend to think that Computer Engineers know MS Office better than others, because, well, they are Computer Engineers. No, they don’t teach us MS Office, we have to learn it ourselves, just like others.
Computer Engineering does not teach us hacking.
Another myth associated with Computer Engineers is that they are those mean hackers who can steal your passwords and hack any account on the web. One of my friends comes to me and says “Please hack my ex-girlfriend’s Facebook account; I want to teach her a lesson”. They do not teach us hacking, it is something people learn by themselves, and not all Computer Engineers are hackers, so please stop viewing us with that look on the face.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to efficiently use Windows.
Many a times, people don’t know how to clean up a hard-disk drive, how to defragment a drive, how to make a zip file, how to create virtual drives, how to mount images, how to install complex programs, how to update an anti-virus etc. The list goes on. If I know it, it is because I have used it, and if I do not know something, it is because they do not teach us how to use things on Windows.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to make a computer/laptop.
Some people just ask me on my face “So, now you will make computers?” No, we do not make computers; they are made in a factory, just like a car, with millions of circuits being embedded on a single chip – a technology known as VLSI, and that doesn’t mean an Electronics engineer can make a computer too – its requires firmware and assembly coding and what not. In short, we cannot make a computer at our home.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to make robots.
This is a much less myth compared to others, but still I have found this myth present among the people. Robotics is a special field of study and all engineers – mechanical, electronics, and computers can take interest and learn it. Just because Computers and Robots both are machines that doesn’t mean at all that they teach us how to build robots. Not all Computer Engineers are robot programmers.
Computer Engineering does not teach us the specs of latest laptops in the market.
Some people come to me seeking advice in buying laptops. Ok, I appreciate it, and I help them too. But, what makes me angry is that they think we know this because we’re Computer Engineers. They do not teach us the specifications of latest laptops; we simply know it because we use it. A non-computer engineer can also know it, that doesn’t mean he should’ve taken Computer Engineering.
Computer Engineering does not entitle us to own a laptop.
This situation is frustrating for non-computer engineering folk. One of my cousins was arguing with his father about buying a laptop. He cited my example and said that he could use the laptop to read e-books, write a blog, read journals etc. His father said, he has a laptop because he is a Computer Engineer. No, being Computer Engineers does not entitle us to use a laptop, it can be used to watch movies, play games, surf the internet and what not, nothing among that is related to Computer Engineering.
Well then, the question must be, what do they teach us at Computer Engineering? They teach us Operating Systems, Database, Mobile Computing, Networks….aah leave it. It is useless to tell anyways.
Please don’t expect us to do things simply because we are Computer Engineers and please respect our skills and knowledge in Computers, don’t take it for granted simply because we are Computer Engineers. That is because they don’t teach us all this back there.
This understanding gap is because of the fact that in the previous generation, only a fraction of people knew what a computer was. Others had only heard about it, and wondering that it would take lot of skills and knowledge to operate it. The myth still lives on, and one can find it spread across the society. I do not blame them for the myths, but sometimes, they are really funny.
So, the following messages are for people who have some inherent myths about Computer Engineering. I have experienced some personally, some I have heard of happening to my friends, and some are just thought up based on my imagination. Please read this, and spread this message, so we can have an easy life.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to turn on and turn off a computer.
Never ever in those entire span 4 years, no one tells us. We just learn that, like a baby who learns to walk.
Studying Computer Engineering does not increase our typing speed.
Although 4 years of incessant code writing may increase our tying speed, but we do not practice “type” in our labs.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to fix or repair a computer.
This is by far the biggest myth that has troubled me. Every relative or friend comes up to me and said “My computer is not working. Can you please repair it?” Please people, we are not taught how to repair a computer, in fact, we are fined if we try to open one of the CPUs in the lab. Although I have some basic hardware knowledge, this is not what those college people have taught me, so don’t dare tell to anyone “You are a Computer Engineer. Can’t you repair a computer?” It infuriates me.
Computer Engineering does not teach us MS Office.
MS Office is the most widely used software for office applications, and has thus gained reputation among the masses. Some people tend to think that learning Word, Excel and PowerPoint is a rare feat and can only be performed by some people. Also, they tend to think that Computer Engineers know MS Office better than others, because, well, they are Computer Engineers. No, they don’t teach us MS Office, we have to learn it ourselves, just like others.
Computer Engineering does not teach us hacking.
Another myth associated with Computer Engineers is that they are those mean hackers who can steal your passwords and hack any account on the web. One of my friends comes to me and says “Please hack my ex-girlfriend’s Facebook account; I want to teach her a lesson”. They do not teach us hacking, it is something people learn by themselves, and not all Computer Engineers are hackers, so please stop viewing us with that look on the face.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to efficiently use Windows.
Many a times, people don’t know how to clean up a hard-disk drive, how to defragment a drive, how to make a zip file, how to create virtual drives, how to mount images, how to install complex programs, how to update an anti-virus etc. The list goes on. If I know it, it is because I have used it, and if I do not know something, it is because they do not teach us how to use things on Windows.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to make a computer/laptop.
Some people just ask me on my face “So, now you will make computers?” No, we do not make computers; they are made in a factory, just like a car, with millions of circuits being embedded on a single chip – a technology known as VLSI, and that doesn’t mean an Electronics engineer can make a computer too – its requires firmware and assembly coding and what not. In short, we cannot make a computer at our home.
Computer Engineering does not teach us how to make robots.
This is a much less myth compared to others, but still I have found this myth present among the people. Robotics is a special field of study and all engineers – mechanical, electronics, and computers can take interest and learn it. Just because Computers and Robots both are machines that doesn’t mean at all that they teach us how to build robots. Not all Computer Engineers are robot programmers.
Computer Engineering does not teach us the specs of latest laptops in the market.
Some people come to me seeking advice in buying laptops. Ok, I appreciate it, and I help them too. But, what makes me angry is that they think we know this because we’re Computer Engineers. They do not teach us the specifications of latest laptops; we simply know it because we use it. A non-computer engineer can also know it, that doesn’t mean he should’ve taken Computer Engineering.
Computer Engineering does not entitle us to own a laptop.
This situation is frustrating for non-computer engineering folk. One of my cousins was arguing with his father about buying a laptop. He cited my example and said that he could use the laptop to read e-books, write a blog, read journals etc. His father said, he has a laptop because he is a Computer Engineer. No, being Computer Engineers does not entitle us to use a laptop, it can be used to watch movies, play games, surf the internet and what not, nothing among that is related to Computer Engineering.
Well then, the question must be, what do they teach us at Computer Engineering? They teach us Operating Systems, Database, Mobile Computing, Networks….aah leave it. It is useless to tell anyways.
Please don’t expect us to do things simply because we are Computer Engineers and please respect our skills and knowledge in Computers, don’t take it for granted simply because we are Computer Engineers. That is because they don’t teach us all this back there.
Saturday, 27 February 2010
07bce_ _ _@nirmauni.ac.in - A Revolution in Itself
Thanks to NAAC !!! Atleast we got our Nirma Mail ids…..
You can, or lets say, you “will” definitely argue what is the advantage of having an extra mail id, if you have your own cool “youname_yourage_yourpassion_somecoolquote@gmail/yahoo/hotmail.com/co.in” thing, this thing sucks as its based on your roll number, which obviously you won’t be using to “represent” youselves.
As a matter of fact, if you didnt know, apart from your own name, there a few stupid things in this contemporary world that represents “you” and is considered as a part of your identity:
1. Phone Model (“oooohhhhhhh…..you have the Nokia 5 blah blah blah model thats cool” Every model is the same)
2. Phone Number (“oooohhhhhhh…..you have 3 9s and 4 7s in your number, so lucky” I never understood numerology, and hate it too)
3. SIM Operator (“oooohhhhhhh…..you use the Vodafone, the puppys sooo cute, BSNL sucks….but i have a girlfriend so I use Reliance” Whats puppy got to do with the usage, and ya BSNLs cheap and Reliance sucks)
4. Free Message Scheme (“oooohhhhhhh…..you have 10k messages for 100 bucks, i only have 5K messages for 50 bucks…..” DUDE ????)
5. Your Email (this one is not that much hyped….but i cant still find this thing a reason to represent your identity???)
6. Social Networking Sites Profile (NO COMMENTS)
So, not digressing further, this “thing” that a mere roll number represents us drives us crazy and brings out our long lost ego back to full fledge “HOW CAN A STUPID COLLEGE ROLL NUMBER BE OUR IDENTITY???”. But trust me, the pros far outweigh the cons.
1. The main advantage is, you are not drilled in labs for checking your emails. You can always tell your faculty “I am checking the assignments and class test results”. This is infact the best one…
2. YOU DONT NEED INTERNET IN THE LABS TO CHECK THIS OUT. Should’ve been in the first place, but, you know, the faculty issues. Any normal user will think you are a dumbass if you say you dont need internet for checking out mails, but since this service is available from a local server in Nirma, you can access internet from ALL LABS spanning the Entire Institute of Technology (or whole NU ??? PLZ CHECK). This rocks !!!
3. We dont need to remember the email addresses of our classmates/batchmates, a simple roll number or name would suffice. This is one of the most awesome features of this revolutionizing technology, everyone agrees remembering email addresses is a pain in the head, although we can save them, but, this one’s even better.
4. A Little Lazy Loophole - never have to do the practicals on your own (well actually 99% never do it), and you dont have to copy from others too, just open the practical list at some free time at home, and mail all the readymade programs from the internet on your account, and since there you can access it from any lab, well it gives you something to brag about…(if you are lazy enough to do that also…copying still is an option)
5. People can chat with each other across labs (Chatting through mails, too much exaggerated right ???)
Apart from these cool advantages, the overall pros about going B.Tech Online are:
1. Dont have to write the questions of assignments
2. Download ppts and material directly instead of begging it from the faculty in a pen drive
3. View test scores of everyone (go screwing around, have fun)
4. View test papers and solutions
5. View exam papers (solutions ???)
6. Share documents
So, I think apart from the Faculty, HODs, Peons, Toilet Cleaners, the Colosseum ‘10 team and a girls group who also took pain in the ass during the NAAC visit, I think the visit has made our life in Nirma a little more comfortable…….Finally we feel like “WE’VE GONE TECH”, Thanks NAAC !!! May you visit every year and add such new wonderful features to our college. Tally HO !!!
You can, or lets say, you “will” definitely argue what is the advantage of having an extra mail id, if you have your own cool “youname_yourage_yourpassion_somecoolquote@gmail/yahoo/hotmail.com/co.in” thing, this thing sucks as its based on your roll number, which obviously you won’t be using to “represent” youselves.
As a matter of fact, if you didnt know, apart from your own name, there a few stupid things in this contemporary world that represents “you” and is considered as a part of your identity:
1. Phone Model (“oooohhhhhhh…..you have the Nokia 5 blah blah blah model thats cool” Every model is the same)
2. Phone Number (“oooohhhhhhh…..you have 3 9s and 4 7s in your number, so lucky” I never understood numerology, and hate it too)
3. SIM Operator (“oooohhhhhhh…..you use the Vodafone, the puppys sooo cute, BSNL sucks….but i have a girlfriend so I use Reliance” Whats puppy got to do with the usage, and ya BSNLs cheap and Reliance sucks)
4. Free Message Scheme (“oooohhhhhhh…..you have 10k messages for 100 bucks, i only have 5K messages for 50 bucks…..” DUDE ????)
5. Your Email (this one is not that much hyped….but i cant still find this thing a reason to represent your identity???)
6. Social Networking Sites Profile (NO COMMENTS)
So, not digressing further, this “thing” that a mere roll number represents us drives us crazy and brings out our long lost ego back to full fledge “HOW CAN A STUPID COLLEGE ROLL NUMBER BE OUR IDENTITY???”. But trust me, the pros far outweigh the cons.
1. The main advantage is, you are not drilled in labs for checking your emails. You can always tell your faculty “I am checking the assignments and class test results”. This is infact the best one…
2. YOU DONT NEED INTERNET IN THE LABS TO CHECK THIS OUT. Should’ve been in the first place, but, you know, the faculty issues. Any normal user will think you are a dumbass if you say you dont need internet for checking out mails, but since this service is available from a local server in Nirma, you can access internet from ALL LABS spanning the Entire Institute of Technology (or whole NU ??? PLZ CHECK). This rocks !!!
3. We dont need to remember the email addresses of our classmates/batchmates, a simple roll number or name would suffice. This is one of the most awesome features of this revolutionizing technology, everyone agrees remembering email addresses is a pain in the head, although we can save them, but, this one’s even better.
4. A Little Lazy Loophole - never have to do the practicals on your own (well actually 99% never do it), and you dont have to copy from others too, just open the practical list at some free time at home, and mail all the readymade programs from the internet on your account, and since there you can access it from any lab, well it gives you something to brag about…(if you are lazy enough to do that also…copying still is an option)
5. People can chat with each other across labs (Chatting through mails, too much exaggerated right ???)
Apart from these cool advantages, the overall pros about going B.Tech Online are:
1. Dont have to write the questions of assignments
2. Download ppts and material directly instead of begging it from the faculty in a pen drive
3. View test scores of everyone (go screwing around, have fun)
4. View test papers and solutions
5. View exam papers (solutions ???)
6. Share documents
So, I think apart from the Faculty, HODs, Peons, Toilet Cleaners, the Colosseum ‘10 team and a girls group who also took pain in the ass during the NAAC visit, I think the visit has made our life in Nirma a little more comfortable…….Finally we feel like “WE’VE GONE TECH”, Thanks NAAC !!! May you visit every year and add such new wonderful features to our college. Tally HO !!!
Thursday, 25 February 2010
The Worst Subject - SE
SE (Software Engineering) is by far the most complicated theory subject i’ve ever come across, it is so bad that it is impossible to device a strategy to “mug it up”, let alone understand it. The facts are conquering one another in the realm of one’s understanding domain.
Its hard to distinguish between the chapters and the facts are published in a so subtle manner, one cannot tell whether he/she has already learned this previously or not, everything looks so afresh.
And the modelling chapter, OMG, all the models look the same to me, not even a slight shade of difference.
We dont even come closer to writing our self created fiction in the exams because everything is so technical, yet so stupid.
Taking a bunk today for learning SE will be one the greatest mistakes of my life…and I hope everyone who did the same thing will agree…
Its hard to distinguish between the chapters and the facts are published in a so subtle manner, one cannot tell whether he/she has already learned this previously or not, everything looks so afresh.
And the modelling chapter, OMG, all the models look the same to me, not even a slight shade of difference.
We dont even come closer to writing our self created fiction in the exams because everything is so technical, yet so stupid.
Taking a bunk today for learning SE will be one the greatest mistakes of my life…and I hope everyone who did the same thing will agree…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)