The Turing Test: Doggo version

If you know what the Turing test is, skip the next two paras.

AI - Artificial Intelligence - the phrase is thrown around a lot, and loads of sci-fi movies have come off it. I am very excited about intelligent machines too, ones that can learn to do stuff all by themselves without having to be precisely programmed (I'd then be jobless, but that wouldn't matter when the robots take over the world anyway). For some reason, a lot of people seem to be really interested in machines that can pretend to be human - screw the machine that can cure cancer, let's build one we can have a touchy-feely chat with. I'm not saying human-like robots are useless, I'm just saying that's not what we should focus on. Okay, I was just messing around. There are good reasons that people are interested in robots that think and act like us:
1) Human intelligence is the only kind of intelligence we know anything about,
2) If we want robots working with/for us, we need them to be able to understand us, and
3) If we can build robots that can think like us, then we learn a lot about our own intelligence and consciousness.

When there's a demand for something, we all know someone would start a pyramid scheme that scams people with a phony product. People want human-like robots, someone comes along and produces a chat-bot and claims it thinks like a person- when it doesn't, they say it thinks like a stupid person (or, only wise people can understand this robot- the emperor's clothes approach to scamming people). This raises an important question. How do we tell if a robot's really intelligent (human-like)? One popular test is the Turing test. The test involves two participants, a person and a supposedly intelligent computer, and an interrogator who has to identify the two. The interrogator has to do it from a simple Q&A session over a web chat (without video or audio). The human is honest and tries to convince the judge he's human, while the computer has to lie so the interrogator is convinced it's also human.

There are some issues with the Turing test though. The biggest one I have is, why anthromorphise intelligence? Why suppose that something has to think like a human for it to be intelligent? Suppose an alien species builds spaceships that can bring them to Earth. We make them take the Turing test for fun, and they fail it. Does that mean this species isn't intelligent, even after they mastered interstellar travel while we can barely explore our own solar system? No, that's stupid. The Turing test places too much emphasis on acting like a human.

I have been thinking about a different way to go at this. The doggo version. It's the same as the standard Turing test, except the computer now simulates the behaviour of dogs instead of people. Clearly, this can't be a Q&A thing. This is what I imagine the test should be:
There's two rooms behind two identical doors. One room has our participant computer which simulates the behaviour of dogs and renders it in video, while the other has a few dogs in it. The room with the dogs has enough stuff to keep the dogs entertained- toys to play with, furniture to destroy, food and water dispensers, and alarms and TVs to distract them. Of course, there's multiple dogs so they can also play. There's a bunch of cameras in the room that record what the dogs are doing. Outside the rooms, there's a control panel with a bunch of switches that control what goes on in the room- ring an alarm, dispense food, turn on water sprinklers, and so on. The interrogator outside the room, who is an expert dog-handler, has access to the control panel and the videos, and, as with the classic test, they have to figure out which one's the computer and which one's the dogs. Just to ensure that video quality doesn't influence the decisions, we let the video from the room with the dogs go through some software so that videos from both the rooms are of the same quality, graphics-wise.

And that is the doggo version of the Turing test. This version still tests for intelligence. Dogs are intelligent, I'm sure we can all agree on that. If a computer passes the test, it means it can successfully simulate intelligent behaviour, which, some would argue is indistinguishable from actual intelligence. This test would be superior to the standard test because it places the computer on equal footing to the interrogator. When the other participant is a human, there are a lot of subtle things about conversation that might just be social conditioning and have nothing to do with intelligence. With dogs, there isn't as much conditioning, at least not enough to throw off an intelligent computer.

Training Journal: October

October 6

I went for a morning session today. After staying away from cleans for the last two weeks, I decided to give it a shot again today. The wrist felt okay. Warmed up as usual with just two sets of complexes with the empty bar: 10 first pulls, 10 arm cleans, 10 military presses, 5 split jerks, 10 back squats. 

P.Clean+P.Jerk: 40kgx(5r+5r)x2s, 50kgx(3r,3r), 60x(2,2), 70x(1,1), 75x(1,1), 80x(1,1)x3s

The last time I did CnJ, I only hit 70kg, but I decided to go at 80 today. Mainly because I was quite embarrassed that I started worrying about 80, which I was P-Cleaning way back when I was in the U62kg class. I weigh 82kg now. Anyway, all three singles were solid standing cleans. The push jerks were too easy- they felt heavy, but still went up quite easy. 

B. Squat: 60kgx5rx2s, 80kgx3, 100x3, 110x2, 120x2rx3s

Added another 5kg to the squat today. As usual, it felt quite heavy. I could get up, but there was always a lingering feeling at the bottom that I might not make it. I guess I'm getting close to my current max. 

Military Press: 40kgx5, 50kgx3

Thought I'd train the shoulders today, since the P.Jerks aren't that effective, and I didn't do a lot of reps anyways. But I didn't. The arms felt a bit weak, and I decided to give up. 

Pull-ups: 4rx3s

The fourth in the first set was actually quite good today. In the second and third, it was as usual- could only get the bar to my forehead. 

No good mornings or BB rows today. I just didn't feel like lifting anymore. It could be because it was a morning session, or because it had already been more than an hour. Either way, I need to split my training sessions. I can't be hitting near-PR CnJs and Squats, and then go on to do lots of assistance work in the same session. 

Starting next week, I should hit the gym on at least one other day after the volleyball/badminton. Just some military/push presses, good mornings, BB rows, and bar dips should do. In the proper gym session, I'll stick to just the olympic lifts and squats, and some pull ups. 

Training journal: August/September 2016 (the comeback)

I decided to get back to Olympic lifting after a long break of three and a half years. The goal I set for my comeback is to hit 90kg Power Clean and Push Jerk in 10 weeks after the restart. Weightlifting is not my primary focus anymore, and I plan to train only about once a week. I will be logging in each of these sessions in this blog.

I shall be doing only compound lifts, all aimed at improving my power clean and jerk. Like I did during my lifting days, I'm ignoring all chest and biceps workouts. The routine I chose for the month is:
Power cleans, military presses/push presses, and front squats (complex)
Back squats
Upright barbell rows and Good mornings (super sets)
Bar dips and Bent over barbell rows (super sets)

August 31

First day back in the gym. I decided to not go for a conventional warm-up. I started with the 20kg barbell and did lots of deadlifts, arm-cleans, military presses, and front squats. Then I moved on to some snatch squats- these were scary, my balance was totally off and even the 20kg barbell felt a bit heavy. I started the actual routine. I'm only recording the max sets.

P.Cleans+M.Press- 30kg x (5,5) - 2 sets
P.Cleans+P.Press  - 50kg x (3,3) - 2 sets
Hang cleans were much easier than cleans from the ground. My grip started to give out at 50kg. Hook-grip felt too strange to use today. The gym doesn't allow using chalk, so that sucks. I also have a minor pain from playing badminton last week, and this made the cleans quite uncomfortable, especially the resting part- my flexibility is totally gone now, need to work on that.

Back squats- 70kg x 5 - 3 sets
The old injury in my left knee seems to have resurfaced in the first few reps. It disappeared when I got up in one particular way though, I don't know what this means to my form. The weight did feel a bit heavy, but I could still squat with some good speed. The balance was a bit off though.

I tried to do some pull-ups. Did a set of 5 and then a set of 3, my wrist completely gave out in the last rep, felt like I'd fall to the floor.

Upright barbell rows, Good mornings: 20kg x 8, 20kg x 8  for 3 sets
No issues here.

Bar-dips, Bent over barbell rows: 5, 40kg x 5 for 3 sets
Went for 8 reps in the first set of bar-dips, that was a bad idea. Barbell rows were peaceful though.

And that was the end. I didn't stretch after the training. Tomorrow should be fun.

September 1

I was bored at work today, and my muscles were sore from yesterday, so decided to get a workout today too. Started without a conventional warm-up, with some cleans, squats, presses, and split jerks with 20kg for a couple of sets. I decided to add split jerks into the mix so I'd be ready if I decide to do some classical CnJ- started some sitting cleans too.

P.Cleans+M.Press+S.Jerk+F.Squat: 30 x (3,3,2,3) - 3 sets  
P.Cleans+P.Press  +S.Jerk+F.Squat: 40 x (3,3,1,3) - 2 sets
                                                              50 x (3,3,0,0) - 2 sets
My right wrist was still uncomfortable. The front squats were no fun either, my left rhomboid was especially under stress (old injury resurfacing?). The knee didn't hurt, but I could feel some pain in the my glutes. Thought I should call it a day after the first set of 50; didn't want to waste the warm-up, so went through with the rest of the workout. Avoided the split jerks because I started worrying about hitting my chin; my wrists and my balance weren't ready for the jerks either. All in good time.

P.Cleans+P.Jerk+F.Squat: 60 x (1,2,2) - 2 sets

Clean pulls: 75kg x 2
Got some decent height in the first two. Attempted a third, grip gave out during the first pull. I have to figure out something for the grip. My arms seem to be pretty weak right now, but no-chalk and the worn-out threads on the bar aren't helping either. It could be a good thing though since I don't seem to have to worry about calluses. Maybe do all the cleans with wraps, and do some deadlifts to build grip strength?

Back squats: 70 x 3 -  2 sets
                       80 x 3 -  2 sets
Started with 70kg straight away. Felt pretty light today, I could even focus on getting some speed on the way up. 100kg should be fine for next week.

Bar dips + Bent over barbell rows: 5 + 40 x 5 - 3 sets
Pretty peaceful, especially the bar dips. After the first set of 8 yesterday, later sets were hard. Not today.

Good mornings + Upright barbell rows: 20 x (5,5) - 2 sets
                                                                     30 x (5,5) - 2 sets
Good mornings were fine, I'm not aiming to go heavy on them anyway. Upright rows weren't bad either, but felt a bit awkward at the end with the wrist. I can never get a proper grip for these ones.

Did a little bit of stretching towards the end. Over all, it was a good workout, although there were a few times I thought I should just call it a day.

September 15

I was playing everyday since my last training sessions, so couldn't go to the gym. Good thing is, I'm getting used to training/playing everyday without burning out (today was my 19th day without a break). Bad thing is, I'm not allowing my wrist to heal. There were a few days when I only played with my left hand, I'm using less wrist power in Badminton, and am using crepe bandage whenever I play/train, but I still haven't rested it properly. 

Anyway, despite the non-stop activity, I could progress with the lifts today. As usual, the warm-up was just two complex sets with the empty barbell- 10 first pulls, 10 arm cleans, 10 military presses, 5 split jerks, and 10 front squats. Today I rested the bar on just three fingers in the rack position, took away some strain from the wrists. Then the sets went

P.Clean + M.Press + F. Squat: 30x(3,3,3) - 2 sets

P.Clean + P.Press  +  F.Squat:  40x(3,3,3) , 50 x (3,3,3)

P.Clean + P.Jerk: 60 x (1,2) - 3 sets

P.Clean: 65x2rx2s, 70x1rx2s

P.Jerk: 60x2rx2s, 70x2reps

Wanted to do a second set with 70kg for push jerk, but I was a bit scared about the wrist. 

Clean pulls (with straps): 70x3reps, 80x3repsx2sets

Deadlifts: 100x2r

The plan was to use deadlifts to improve grip strength with 2 sets of 5 reps each at 100kg. Grip started to give out in the third rep, so dismissed. Clean pulls with the straps felt good, although I was slacking off quite a bit in the second pull. I got the jump and the bar reached my chest, but it was way too slow for 80kg. I can't imagine power-cleaning 90kg with that sorta pull. 

B. Squats: 70x3rx2s,  80x2r,  90x2r, 100x3rx2s

The 100kg reps were quite slow. It didn't feel like I wouldn't make it, but they were slow enough to feel crappy about. I should have gone for some drop sets to get train for some speed.

Next was supposed to be two super-sets: Bar Dips+ Bent BB rows, and Good Mornings + Upright rows. Again, was scared for the wrist to do the bar dips, and I never felt comfortable with upright rows, so I ditched the two and went for 

Good Mornings + Bent BB Rows: (40x5r+ 50x5r)x3s

I finished with a bit of stretching. The glutes felt a bit uncomfortable during the heavier power cleans, but it went away. It felt good to stretch the glutes and the hamstrings. But when I stretched my calves, I found that I didn't work them AT ALL. I always knew my calves were pretty weak, but I never realized I worked them so little in the gym. 

To summarize, gotta do- something about the grip strength, drop sets with squats, loads of clean pulls focusing on the second pull speed, and work the calves.

September 23

Today was again a decent session with some progression. I'm not playing any badminton for the next 10 days, and volleyball doesn't seem to strain my wrist so much. I decided to not do anything that stresses the wrist and let it heal in the meantime, so had to change my routine quite a bit. The warm up was as usual, but with no arm cleans and front squats, 10 first pulls, 10 military presses (without loading the wrist in shear), and 10 back squats with the empty bar. 

Clean pulls: 70kgx3r, 80kgx3r, 90kgx2rx5s, 70kgx3rx3s

Lots of clean pulls. I did 80kg and 90kg with straps. That didn't stop the calluses. The lighter pulls felt weird, I kept losing balance until I completely slowed down the first pull and used mostly an arm-pull for the second. 80kg was okay, 90 only reached the lower chest, a half-clean seems possible in the next few weeks. Did some drop sets to feel better about the pulls. 

Back squats: 60kgx5, 70kgx3, 80kgx2, 90kgx2, 100kgx2, 110kgx2rx3s, 60kgx5rx3s

The weights still feel quite heavy, but had some decent speed with 100kg, and 110kg wasn't uncomfortable either except for the heavy feel. Knees don't hurt anymore, but they do feel a little bit uncomfy at the bottom with the crackling. The drop sets again to feel good about the lifts. 

Pull-ups: 4rx4s

Threw these in since I wasn't doing a lot today. The first three reps were until the eyes/nose, fourth was bad in all four sets, probably got only the hair or forehead to the bar's level. 

Good mornings: 50kgx5rx3s

I keep thinking this was a bad idea, going too heavy too soon. But training just once a week, I should get some heavy good mornings in. The lower back's going to hurt tomorrow. 

Bent Barbell rows: 40kgx5, 50kgx5, 60kgx5rx3s

Not bad. I'm not really sure if these are going to be of any use, but with my pull-ups being as weak as they are, and my general dislike for the lat pull-downs, I have to sneak some of these into the workout. 

Single-legged calf-raises (no weights)- (10+10)x3s

Did a few of these just so my calves could get at least a bit of a workout. Super-setted these with B.B.B.Rows.

I really wanted to sneak in some workout for the forearms and triceps, but couldn't think of anything that doesn't strain the wrist. Did a bit of stretching in the end. All's fine, except the lower back's complaining a bit. I'll probably have to stick to the same routine next week too.

September 28

I was a bit skeptical about today since I haven't rested since my last session (played volleyball for the last 4 days). It turned out okay, with the marginal progress I've been making. I stuck to last week's routine to rest my wrist. The first callus of the season ripped open tonight, I should have prepared for this. 

Warm up was as usual- empty bar for 10 each of first pulls, arm cleans, presses, and back squats. Didn't do a second set. 

Clean pulls: 40x5rx2s, 55x5, 70x3, 80x3, 90x2rx5s, 70x3rx2s

The lighter weights didn't feel all that good today. I got the height but it just didn't feel right. Got 80 to upper chest, high enough for a decent clean. 90s were to lower chest. Used straps for 80 and 90. The callus ripped in the second drop set of 70. Stupid. 

Back Squats: 70x3, 80x3, 90x2, 100x2, 110x2, 115x2rx3s, 70x5rx2s

Again, the weight felt quite heavy. The knees were crackling quite a bit, but didn't hurt. The 115 doubles were alright, finished without issues. Still, it felt REALLY heavy, heavy enough I started to wonder if I should give up half way through. Strange how this works- if I hadn't know about my lifts from 4 years ago, I probably would have given up, or not attempted in the first place. 

Pullups: 4r x 3s

First 3 reps in all sets were better than last time. Fourth is still a bit of a pain, could only rise till the forehead. 

Good mornings: 55x5rx3s

No issues here. I wonder if I should keep loading these up till 70 or settle down at 60 or something. 

B.B.B.Rows: 55x5, 70x5x2, 70x3

Was probably being over ambitious with the 70. Last week was 60, and today's 55 was easy peasy. First 3 reps with 70 were alright, but I kept thinking I was using my lower back in the last 2 reps. The ripped callus was an excuse for stopping at 3 in the last.

Single-legged calf-raises: (10,10)x7

Kept doing these between sets of the last 3 exercises. The last couple reps of the last couple sets weren't good. At least I'm doing something with the calves. 

Summary

That's the end of the month. I'm satisfied with the progress. However, training in this gym, I can't help but feel inferior. Back in insti, I was one of the strongest guys around. During my previous session here, some guy was squatting 160kg for 5 reps. They were powerlifting squats, but still. A couple weeks ago, I saw this other guy bench 140 for reps. Clearly, my ego isn't getting the boost that it did back at IITM. With all the work I have to do in the next couple months, and all the volleyball and badminton, I'm not sure if I can actually join the uni's WL club. I'm seriously reconsidering the goal I set for myself. 

For now, I'll wait and see how it goes. It does feel good to be back in the gym- the calluses are a pain, but I just need to not be stupid about caring for my hands. In any case, I'm avoiding this guilt I used to have for throwing away the years of training. I'll think of this as preparing for the time when I wouldn't have access to a sports hall and all I could do was hit the gym for exercise. 

A case for atheism: Part 1

Some years ago, I wrote a blogpost arguing that followers of the scientific method cannot be atheists. I argued that the only reasonable position on the question of gods is one of agnostism- the position that one cannot be sure that gods exist or do not exist. Since then, I have grown, I have read a fair bit on religion, I have been part of debates, and now my position is that of a strong atheist. I'm fairly sure that gods do not exist. Of course, I don't say that about every possible definition for gods. If one defines god as "the universe", or "the entity that created the universe", or "a coat hanger", then the answer to "Does god exist?" is "yes", "maybe", and "yes" respectively.

The gods I refer to are the standard gods used by religion- a being that cares about human beings, a being that created human beings, a being that created an afterlife for human beings, a being that made up rules that must govern human behavior. These gods cannot exist. And in what follows, I will show why these gods cannot exist.

First, I must counter the argument that is often made for gods- "So many people believe in gods. Surely, all of them cannot be wrong."

It is precisely because so many people believe in gods that we must be skeptical about the existence of gods. People don't all believe in the same god. Gods come in different flavors, from the element-of-nature-gods of Hindu, Greek, and Norse mythology, to the one-god-to-rule-it-all version of Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). There are also shamanic gods- the tribal gods that supposedly speak to priests in the tribe- gods that tend to respond to sacrifice and gifts (to the priests, of course).

There are so many religions that tell you so many mutually contradictory things that it's fairly obvious that most of them were invented by people. We need to accept the fact that gods can be invented, and that they are routinely invented. We also need to accept that entire civilizations would believe in invented gods without reservation. Norsemen believed for a long time that the best way for a man to go would be to have a glorious death on the battlefield, so they could be chosen by Odin to join legendary heroes and kings in Valhalla. Most people today would agree that they followed an invented god, that their god does not exist. But people of the time did believe in the god without question, and tons of people took to arms for a place in Valhalla.

Gods can be invented. Gods are invented. Tons of people believe in invented gods. A child born into a society that believes in an invented god also believes in the invented god. If you, the reader, can let this sink into your mind, you would start to understand my position of skepticism. "So many people believe in gods. Surely, all of them cannot be wrong." That is not an argument. It only shows us that people are gullible, that people would believe in gods if everyone around them believed in a god. People believe all sorts of things if that is what they are taught to believe. 

What is science?

There are tons of articles out there that address this question. I realize that anything I write, with the awkward style that I can't seem to improve on, would add little value to the wealth of resources on the internet. Yet, I really want to write about this. I realized that this blog of mine is more a journal than it is a blog- about 1% of all the views it has come from myself, and I find it quite interesting, or amusing, or even embarrassing, to read things I wrote a few years ago. It's like looking at a stupider version of myself. It makes me feel good that I didn't stay that stupid later on.

Anyways, that little "Note to self" aside,
What is science?

Different people refer to different things when they say "science". Even I refer to different things at different times, and sometimes different things AT THE SAME TIME.

Sometimes, the word "science" refers to the body of scientific literature. All of the conjectures, hypotheses, and theories that are currently accepted to be sensible. Sometimes it also includes hypotheses that we, today, say are invalid. The geocentric theory, for instance, is sometimes considered part of science- but we all know today that celestial bodies do not revolve around the earth.

And at other times, the word "science" refers to the scientific method. One phrase I love using is, "Let's do some science". It carries that feeling of adventure, of invention, and of altruism, the excitement that goes with doing something that no one has done before, knowing something unknown to the rest of humanity.

When one says, "We are doing science", they are referring to the scientific method, not the body of literature.

But then again, not everything that follows the scientific method is called science. Learning to hit a target with a projectile isn't called a science, although the mind does do a bit of experimentation, a bit of modeling, and in the end produces skill in being able to predict and control projectile motion. No, "science" requires more rigor. More data. MORE MATH.

And this is what makes me embrace this definition for science:
Science is the practice of mapping the physical world to the mathematical world.

I don't remember who said that, but this definition for science is the one I've been using for quite some time now. The scientific method helps identify the right mapping, and the scientific literature is the collection of maps.

With my definition for science, three things become clear:
1) If a "hypothesis" does not involve mathematics, it cannot be science.

2) It pisses me off when someone says "I came up with this super cool theory, and it doesn't even need math."  I'm sorry, but if there's no math in there, it's not worth squat.

3) Mathematics has a special, some might call it mystical, connection to the physical world.

(Note: There are the so-called "soft sciences" that don't involve much precise math. Medicine, for instance. I don't think that these sciences don't involve math. Rather, the complex dynamics of these systems make the math so hard that we are simply not competent enough to deal with it.)

The first consequence makes sense. After all, one of the biggest motivations for doing science is the ability to make predictions. And except for the most mundane things, predictions involve math.

The second, well that's a given. We wouldn't need to spend billions of dollars on funding mathematicians, and building super computers, if all it took to understand the universe was for little Johnny to scribble some ignorant non-sense on a piece of paper.

The third one, that's quite philosophical. I guess it's obligatory to cite this article here: The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences
Why math? What's special about it? And, this is where it gets interesting, WHAT IS MATHEMATICS?

People have different definitions for math too. And, again, the one I embrace is:
The art of (finding) (non-trivial) tautologies.

That's all I can think of when I try to understand what math is. You start with a bunch of axioms, and you use logic to arrive at non-trivial conclusions. Well well well.. And what exactly is logic? (shit just got real)

Let's see. Logic is a consequence of language, it's the practice of mapping "statements with the same meaning" to one another. Again, that's how I choose to understand logic.


So, this is what I understand of what we're doing:
We have two, apparently separate, worlds.
1) The natural world that just does its thing without caring for our desire to understand it.
And
2) The mathematical world, which is a huge collection of statements that all, after loads of manipulation, mean the same things as a small set of statements put together (the axioms).

Some of the greatest geniuses of our species devote decades to find more statements that mean the same thing as others we are interested.

And some of the other geniuses devote decades to map things in the natural world to something in the mathematical world- either to the axioms directly, or something derived from the axioms.

As long as the axioms are sensibly chosen, and the mapping from the natural to the mathematical world is well-made, we can make all sorts of predictions- thanks to all those mathematicians who have already worked thousands and thousands of things that follow.

And this leads to the question that's really been bugging me- can we come up with a better math?

After all, all  we need is a set of consistent axioms, and a mapping from the physical to this new mathematical world. Is our math the ONLY possible math? Is there a better math "out there" that can do a better job at explaining nature? Would artificial intelligence be able to come up with different maths than we did?

If there are different sorts of math that can explain nature, which one do we hold? The best one? The worst one? A mediocre one? Supposing there's an intelligent alien life a few thousand light years away, could they have identified a better math?

Bonus reading: The reasonable ineffectiveness of mathematics

Should we celebrate wealth?

Just about a week ago, my family moved from a flat we owned to a house we're renting. My mum had taken a loan to buy the house, and after 4 years of payments, the principal amount of the loan has barely decreased. I told my mum, "We're not using that flat anymore, and we have no plans of moving back into it anytime soon. So why don't you just sell it off and repay the loan, and keep the rest of the cash as your retirement fund."

I thought I made a sensible suggestion. It seemed to make little sense to be paying interest on a loan taken for something we didn't use. Yet, after hours of trying to convince my mum, she didn't want to sell that flat. Her reason was this- Owning property is 1) an investment, and 2) a status symbol.

The investment part of it didn't make much sense, since she would have to pay the interest on a loan, and the price of the flat may not keep up with inflation in consumed goods. I could easily convince my mum that keeping that flat wasn't a good way to invest her cash.

But it was the second reason that was more important to my mum. My parents had very humble beginnings, having to work full-time throughout the year with no properties to their names. After 20 years of hard work, steadily rising amongst the ranks from a typist's position to that of a manager in a company, my mum finally saved enough cash to buy a house, and then another. Having gone from not owning any property to owning a house outside the city, and a flat close to the city, apparently her status in her social circles rose. And selling that flat would chip away at that status.

This, I can't wrap my head around. There's absolutely no reason for people to be owning multiple houses. And yet, when we know of someone who owns several houses, people tend to think of them as being a successful person. They might have taken out loans, or been involved in some corrupt business, or cheated someone into selling property. All of that, for nothing- people can't use multiple houses.

This is especially bad when it happens in cities. Cities have limited space, and there are lots of people moving into cities for work. People need a place to stay. But thanks to property owners, people have to either pay lots of rent for space, or pay tons of cash to buy a place.

Think about it- a flat close to a city (I'm using Hyderabad for reference) would cost about INR 20 lakh. Even skilled workers probably make only INR 3-4 lakh per year. That means it takes 6 whole years of salary for someone to be able to buy a flat. For semi-skilled or unskilled workers, it would take a decade or two- that is, if they saved all of their income without spending any of it.

After all, a flat is just a little bit of empty space (construction doesn't cost much). It shouldn't cost years and years of hardwork for someone to own a little bit of empty space close to a city. Think of it in terms of resources- picture the amount of resources (say, rice and vegetables) that can be bought with an years worth of rent or a part of a flat's cost. The farmers and factory workers have had to exchange all those resources for that lump of empty space.

The best thing, for society, would be if people only owned one house/flat for themselves. Anyone who finds work in a city should be able to rent or buy a house/flat for a tiny cost. Owning multiple houses is bad for society- because- supply and demand. When people own more property than they need, they're simply hoarding valuable city space. That's bad. We should be deriding people for doing that. But we don't. For some reason that I cannot understand, we have decided to praise and respect people who hoard property. This has to stop.

So, the next time someone comes to you and says they bought a new house they don't need, think about what you should say to them:
"Well done. I respect you for your success."
or
"What's wrong with you? Why do you want to spend all that cash on something you don't need, something that someone else could really use? I'm appalled at your lack of consideration for others."

Because society isn't something separate from us. We build and shape society, through our thoughts, words, and deeds.

Missed connection, and Turkish treats...

I was on only my second ınternatıonal flıght yesterday, flyıng wıth Turkısh Aırlınes, from London to Istanbul to Mumbaı. The fırst one got delayed, and here I am, usıng a Turkısh keyboard to type thıs post, tryıng to get used to the bunch of addıtıonal alphabet and the Turkısh key posıtıonıng... They have thıs letter: ı, whıch ıs located where i ıs supposed to be, and I decıded ıt´s too much of a paın to try to go for the i.

Anyways, I´m quıte jobless at the hotel, so here´s an account of how I ended up here...

So I booked a tıcket wıth Turkısh Aırlınes- London to Istanbul to Mumbaı. I was supposed to land ın Istanbul yesterday at 6 35 PM, and then take another flıght at 7 35 PM to Mumbaı. I was quıte aware that just an hour for the connectıon ıs pushıng ıt a bıt too much, but the aırlınes gave me that tıcket and they run both flıghts, so I fıgured they´d hold the second flıght ıf the fırst got delayed (but apparently not).

I was ın the fırst flıght, at Gatwıck aırport, London. Everythıng was goıng nıce and smooth, ıt was all on tıme. Plane´s loaded, pılots goıng through all the checks. When I thought they´d turn on the engınes and start to taxı, the cabın crew announced that they´d have to waıt to check all our luggages- because someone apparently lost somethıng. And just lıke that, ıt went from everythıng beıng on schedule to a 40-mınute delay at take-off, because someone couldn´t manage handlıng a couple of bags. As one can ımagıne, I was quıte pıssed off. Holdıng a plane for 40 mınutes for a bag of stuff- that´s completely unreasonable. And ıt wasn´t lıke ıt was the aırlıne´s fault eıther, just some schmuck who dıdn´t gıve a shıt about other people´s tıme.

The flıght eventually took-off. Beıng run by Turkısh Aırlınes, all announcements were repeated ın Englısh and Turkısh. I can´t understand Turkısh, so I don´t know what they saıd, but ıt seemed lıke the crew dıdn´t even bother to make an effort for the Englısh announcements- except for a few keywords, I never understood what they saıd and had to guess what they were sayıng based on the sıtuatıon.

Other than that, ıt was all pretty smooth- they served a regular Turkısh meal- whıch felt a bıt weırd sınce ıt was totally dry wıth no sauces at all. It was boıled rıce wıth grılled chıcken, somethıng that tasted lıke a mınced steak fıllet, grılled peppers, grılled brınjals, and cheese. As I saıd, no sauce at all. But ıt was stıll a good meal. And the programmıng ın those tıny screens on the back of the seats also ın Turkısh and Englısh, but the optıons for Englısh were quıte lımıted and I had to watch one of the few Englısh movıes.

The flıght landed ın Istanbul, 30 mınutes late. That meant I stıll had 15 mınutes before the boardıng closed on the flıght to Mumbaı. And thıs tıme ıt was a woman who decıded she´d take her own sweet tıme to play wıth her kıds ınstead of gettıng on the shuttles that took the passengers to the termınal. I understand ıt´s not easy handlıng kıds, but the lady dıdn´t even ask for the crew´s help. A bus fılled wıth passengers watched her and her kıds (there were 2 of them) take 4 mınutes (yes, someone dıd check the tıme) to clımb down the staırs, after already havıng waıted about 10 mınutes for them to get to the exıt. There were about of couple dozen others who had to make the same connectıon as mıne, and all of them were pıssed.

The shuttle dropped us off at the termınal and we all rushed to the gate (gate ınfo was provıded on the prevıous flıght). The ınfo boards ın the termınal already showed that the gates were closed for our flıght, but I hoped they would let us on sınce the connectıng flıght was delayed, or at the very least, to talk to the staff about what flıght they would put us on. But when we dıd get to the gate, the staff had already left. And then the weırdest thıng happened. Everyone was just sıttıng at the gate- as ıf someone would magıcally turn up ıf they waıted long enough. And no one dıd. Gıven that there were a couple dozen people wıth the same story, I wasn´t sure ıf ıt would be best for me to go talk to the aırlınes by myself. But after waıtıng for about 5 mınutes, I left to fınd the aırlınes´help desk. I wasn´t very effıcıent wıth the search and took quıte a long tıme to fınd the rıght desk. And when I dıd, I was ıssued a boardıng pass for a flıght for the next day rıght away, no questıons asked.

The questıon came from me though- I had a day to spare and I needed the place to say. Agaın, the aırlıne saıd they would accommodate ın theır hotel. The problem was that theır hotel was outsıde the aırport and I dıd not have a vısa. They asked us to get a tourıst vısa (valıd for a month), whıch cost USD 43, and told us they´d refund us for the vısa after arrıval at Mumbaı.

And then started my journey across the entıre termınal- I´m not kıddıng, I dıd go through the entıre termınal. For the vısa, we had to pay ın cash, but only ın USD or Euros (or Turkısh Lıra), and I only had UK pound sterlıng. I kept askıng people for dırectıons to an exchange counter, but I kept gettıng lost and ended up goıng to all of the gates, everywhere except the lounge. I fınally decıded to just use an ATM machıne next to the vısa offıce, whıch I avoıded because the exchange rates are bad and commıssıons are hıgh. And then I had to run back and forth between passport control and vısa counters, and fınally got my Turkısh vısa after about an hour and a half of runnıng around.

After I got the vısa, I realızed I forgot to ask where I needed to go to get to the aırlıne´s hotel. And agaın, I vısıted several desks of the aırlıne before I ended up at the rıght one. In the process, I met a bunch of Pakıstanı guys who thought I was from Pakıstan too- these guys were ıllegal ımmıgrants and they dıd not know much about aırport procedures. They were beıng deported, wıth tıckets arranged by theır embassy. After a brıef chat about Indıa and Pakıstan and how people ın Pakıstan thınk of Indıans as theır brothers and all that, I told them I had to fınd the help desk ASAP and took my leave. When I dıd fınd the rıght desk, the aırlıne´s staff took a look at my boardıng pass and arranged a shuttle to take me to a hotel ın about 15 mınutes, and I ended up at thıs hotel called ``Radısson Blu´´. The hotel looks pretty good, although there are a few thıngs they could ımprove upon. And the aırlınes- although I would have apprecıated ıf they had sent a representatıve to meet us rıght after we came to the termınal- ınstead of us havıng to fınd theır desk, they have done quıte well. When they heard the connectıng flıght was delayed, they ıssued us boardıng passes for the next flıght and they arranged for a hotel rıght away. Some of theır staff had trouble communıcatıng ın Englısh, but they were stıll quıte polıte. And now I waıt for theır shuttle to come pıck me up from the hotel.

And about the Turkısh treats I mentıon ın the tıtle- that has to do wıth the breakfast they serve at the hotel- lots of kınds of cheese, olıves, pastrıes, fruıts, and nuts- probably the best breakfast I´ve ever had.