I’m referring to this link. Having sex with robot hookers is soon going to be a reality; but don’t they already get sex toys that can be used for sexual gratification and isn’t that a cheating? Than what about masturbation? While masturbating can you guaranty that you are thinking about your partner and not your porn idol?
I think more than technical it is an emotional, psychological issue. But I think it is a technical issue too; technical in the sense… let us say socio-technical. Why doesn’t one partner agree to the other partner having sex with someone else (I’m talking about conventional couples and not "liberated" and "ultramodern" couples)? It has a lot to do with having a sense of security. Sex is an important aspect in a relationship and lots of our decisions are based on sex. If you begin to have sex outside of the ongoing relationship on a routine basis then a big binding force is missing. This binding force often keeps a relationship intact and if it is missing it is very difficult to maintain the bond although I’m not saying that it is not at all possible.
Consciously or unconsciously we also attach sex with giving birth to children and we don’t want to bring up children with just about anybody; we choose the partners very carefully or with lots of social deliberations (as is the case in India where marriages are often arranged by parents and relatives). So since we are possessive about our children we also become possessive about the source, that is, the other partner. We want to preserve that sources exclusively for ourselves. For instance you won’t like your husband’s kids popping up everywhere in the neighborhood and when your wife becomes pregnant you want to be sure that it is your child and not someone else’s. This is also because so much effort goes into bringing up a child so you would only like to make so much effort for your own child.
But then a robot hooker will not be producing your kids so that problem gets sorted out on its own.
No matter how open our society becomes sex is still an intimate activity shared by two individuals in the most private corner of their existence. It is a special activity with your most special person. Your partner feels complete when he or she is able to satiate your sexual needs. When you seek sexual gratification from other sources, for instance, a robot hooker, then it means your partner is not able to provide you that gratification, and this further means a distance developing between you and your partner. The issue is not about having sex with some other person or a robot, the issue is that at that moment you are not having sex with your partner. Your partner has an unwritten right on your every orgasm. The writer in the above link says it’s okay to have sex with a robot hooker because there is no emotional attachment.
Do you agree to that? Share your thoughts in the comment section.
The problem with religion is that it has two sides: a dark side from where major evils of the world originate, and a fair side, out of which lots of good happens. The problem is religion has fewer advantages and lots of disadvantages. Most cruelties in this world take place in the name of religion. Of course there is the race factor but it can also be somehow traced to religion. So what’s wrong if a state wants to teach its children that religion doesn’t matter and when they grow up they can choose whatever religion they feel like? I think I would like to give this choice to my daughter rather than calling her a Hindu or a Sikh.
People feel threatened by such endeavors because they will have to pull the shutters of their religion shops down. Lots of business and politics and black marketing happens in the name of religion; what will these people do if religion loses its control over the masses? From India’s perspective, from the BJP to the Congress to the communists and to the terrorists, every major organization and group uses religion to influence people. If people are taught that religion is not as important as it is made out to be, these people and organizations won’t be able to wield their power. The Congress won’t be able to divide Hindus and Muslims and the BJP won’t be able to instigate the Hindu masses to garner votes and the communists won’t be able to protect people from Hindu fundamentalism. Similarly the terrorists won’t get sympathy from Islamic countries.
But as people we should strive for a society where religion does not play a dominant role. Instead more stress should be given to developing fundamental human values that are universal everywhere. There should be education against the irrelevance of religion, caste, class segregation, racialism and prejudice. The society should be value-based and not religion-based. There should be no Hindus, no Christians, no Muslims and no Jews; there should only be good people and bad people.
This is the first-page scan of our Hindi newspaper:
And this is the first page scan of our English newspaper – unless you look careful you won’t even notice the news:
India’s first Field Marshal Sam Hormusji Framji Jamshedji Manekshaw, whose military victory in the 1971 Indo-Pak war led to the creation of Bangladesh, died yesterday. What caught my attention was the way both the newspapers carried the news. In the Hindi newspaper scan you’ll notice that Sehwag (he’s a cricket player) gets more exposure due to his performance against some match again Pakistan, and in The Pioneer the news is so small that it’s embarrassing. Contrary to this, Aishwarya Roy gets front-page coverage even if she sneezes.
In such details lie the values and ethics of the society, but is it really? This is how it seems media alters our perception. Both Alka and I found the way our newspapers have covered the news infuriating. There must be thousands of others feeling the same thing, but you ask the representatives of these newspapers and they will very cutely say, “Our public is more interested in Sehwag than Field Marshal Manekshaw.” I don’t think so.
Without being rude to Sehwag, does it make a difference if tomorrow Sehwag stops playing? But Manekshaw did help re-orient the boundaries of the Indian sub-continent and even the thankless Bangladeshi’s silently agree to that.
This is what this Hindu links says of Field Marshal Manekshaw:
A soldier’s General, Field Marshal Sam Hormusji Framji Jamshedji Manekshaw crafted India’s greatest military victory in the 1971 Indo-Pak war that created just not history but also a new nation.
Affectionately called "Sam Bahadur", Manekshaw (94) was the architect of many a military triumph but his finest hour came when Pakistani forces were vanquished in 14 days flat. And Bangladesh was born.
Handsome, witty and sporting his trademark handlebar moustache, Manekshaw had the rare distinction of being honoured for his bravery - Military Cross - right on the battle front itself during the Second World War. He was also the first Indian officer to command the Gorkhas after India got Independence.
Manekshaw, who got a second life after the young Captain survived near fatal wounds during the Second World War in Burma, is the first of only two Indian military officers to hold the highest rank of Field Marshal of the Indian Army (The other being Field Marshal K M Cariappa).
His distinguished military career spanned four decades from the British era and through five wars, including the Second World War.
Flamboyant by nature, Manekshaw always had his way with people, including his seniors and even the country’s Head of Government.
Just before the Bangladesh operations in December 1971, the then prime minister Indira Gandhi asked Manekshaw ,who was the Army Chief then, "General are you ready" (for the war). Pat came the reply from the dapper officer, "I am always ready sweetie." Gandhi was not unpleased, nor offended.
On another occasion, Gandhi asked him whether he was planning to take over the country. Pointing to his long nose, the General replied: "I don’t use it to poke into other’s affairs."
When Gandhi asked him to go to Dhaka and accept the surrender of Pakistani forces, Manekshaw declined, magnanimously saying that honour should go to his army commander in the East (Lt Gen Jagjit Singh Aurora).
Manekshaw said he would only go if it were to accept the surrender of the entire Pakistani army.
A shrewd tactician, Manekshaw meticulously planned the Indian attack on Pakistan on both fronts — East and West. While the Indian forces captured the then East Pakistan in the eastern sector, the army made heavy inroads in the western sector going up to Lahore.
Adopting a mature war strategy, he masterminded the rout of the Pakistan Army in one of the quickest victories in the recent military history to liberate Bangladesh.
The Indian government, as is normally the norm during the various Congress governments, made a highly costly strategical blunder by sidelining him during the Indo-China war just because he didn’t wag his tail:
In 1961, his outspoken frankness got him into trouble with Defence Minister V K Krishna Menon and his protege of the time Lt Gen B M Kaul. He refused to toe Menon’s line and was sidelined.
Manekshaw was vindicated soon after when the Indian army suffered a humiliating defeat in North East Frontier Agency (NEFA), now Arunachal Pradesh, the next year, at the hands of the Chinese that led to Menon’s resignation. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru rushed Manekshaw to NEFA to command the retreating Indian forces. This had an electrifying effect on the demoralised officers.
In no time, Manekshaw convinced the troops that the Chinese soldier was not "10 feet tall". His first order of the day said, "There will be no withdrawal without written orders and these orders shall never be issued." The soldiers showed faith in their new commander and successfully checked further ingress by the Chinese.
Here’s a nice link on Manekshaw. This link contains a very beautiful line:
When I die I would rather have people say why there is no monument to me than why there is.
As Alka says on her blog that it is uncool to talk about uncool people and here I am adding another drop to this uncoolness. But unlike her I don’t intend to berate people who pursue “other passions” because whether you do something for the self-good or for the social goodness, you mostly do something that makes your heart happy and that gives you a sense of fulfillment. Nonetheless, it requires great courage and vision to do what Kaushlendra is doing: despite being a topper at IIM-Ahmedabad he is selling vegetables on a cart. Visit Alka’s link to know more about Kaushlendra.
Today’s society is a crude society; have you seen that ad these days where the cricket player Dhoni says that you have no identity without wearing good clothes? It may sound like a silly ad but it exactly reflects the societal attitude of contemporary times. I have nothing against good clothes or acquiring materials of luxury but these days such possessions have become a maniacal obsession. To aspire, to get rich and affluent does no harm, what harms is the extent to which people go to reach there. Resisting these seemingly universal temptations and doing something for the others requires lots of grit and determination.
Update (June 23, 2008): Krishna’s custody has been extended again. What, another bout of narco-tests and lie-detector tests? I think the CBI will drive this guy nuts and then declare that although he has lost his mind it was he who had committed both the murders. Of course in his deranged state of mind he won’t be able to deny it or defend himself; he will simply admit. The CBI is just waiting for the media and the public to get bored of this case and then they will have a field day.
Another confusing thing is the murder weapon. Recently the CBI had said that the murder weapon was flushed down in Arushi’s bathroom. For almost a fortnight Krishna’s niece has been telling the news channels that Krishna’s “badly blunted” khukri has been lying at home and the CBI never came to get it. And now the CBI has got the khukri from Krishna’s place. So what happens to the theory of the flushed down weapon? Flushed down?
Update (June 20, 2008): Krishna has now supposedly told the CBI that it was Rajkumar (Anita Durani’s servant) who killed Arushi and later on Hemraj, and Krishna saw her being first assaulted in order to be raped, then injured, and eventually killed. This is truly bizarre. Now they’ll say the weapon wasn’t a Khukri and it was some other weapon that was used. The statement is probably being changed because now there is too much public support for Krishna. So much happened and the parents kept sleeping. I wonder if someone lived downstairs. In multi-storyed flats the roofs are generally so sound sensitive that the people downstairs can hear the sound even when children run around in the flat above. If so much fighting and physical violence took place, how come nobody heard a sound? And that too at night, when everything is so quiet despite the air-conditioners and coolers.
Beside, why did they choose to come at night for the assault knowing that everyone would be at home: both the parents and the servant. Why didn’t they choose a time when she was alone at home? Were the parents not supposed to be there that day and was it known to the culprits?
Is this the smartest investigative agency the country has? Pathetic, to say the least. They can’t even fabricate properly.
The old post follows
According to the latest development it seems the CBI will go to ludicrous lengths to ensure compounder Krishna’s conviction. By hook or by crook the CBI is hell bent on proving that it was Krishna who committed the twin murders of Arushi Talwar and her man-servant Hemraj. According the the CBI theory (whatever news I’m getting while working), Krishna first murdered Hemraj, took the body to the roof and hid it under the cooler’s cover. Then he murdered Arushi with the same khukri (see on Wikipedia what khukri means) and then flushed the khukri down in Arushi’s bathroom (correction: he first murdered Arushi and then Hemraj). Then he broke both Arushi’s and Hemraj’s cell phones and threw them into the water tank on the roof. All this happened while the girl’s parents soundly slept. After putting the body on the roof and throwing the phones into the water tank he locked the door that goes to the roof (the police found the door locked in the morning of the murder).
Some conflicting facts: Arushi’s bedroom door, due to some weird reason, was always locked from the outside whenever she went to sleep, and nobody has so far asked the parents why this used to happen. But there was another door through Hemraj’s room from where one could enter Arushi’s bedroom. The keys of Arushi’s locked doors were always with Arushi’s parents (now why would Hemraj keep the keys unless he had duplicate keys?). But the next day when Arushi’s body was found, the door was unlocked, wide open. So someone would go to great lengths to lock the door to the roof after dumping Hemraj’s body there but would not lock back Arushi’s bedroom after murdering her. The blood stains on the outer side of the door also proved that the door was wide open even when Arushi was being murdered.
The parents too sound quite shady, and this is why the father was arrested in the first place (and the CBI is doing its best to prove that he’s innocent, as of now). In the morning when the maid turned up, the mother told the maid that the main entrance door was locked from the outside. She told the maid to go down, where she would throw the keys from the balcony. The maid went down and the mother threw the keys down sounding perfectly normal. When the maid entered the house, she found both the mother and the father crying. Had the mother tried going through Hemraj’s room. she could have easily gone out herself and opened the door from the outside. The police, who totally decimated the crime scene by acting prodigiously clumsy and unprofessional, half-heartedly proved that it was simply not possible to go to the roof without creating lots of noise and waking up the family as the door made loud noises while being shut and opened. And anyway, with so much happening in the house, how could have they kept sleeping? Of course the father, a high-profile dentist, said that he had consumed liquor before going to bed. Nonetheless, he was arrested as police thought the girl and the servant had been murdered as either honor killing, or to keep an elicit affair secret, or something more sinister. Both the CBI and the policy have been trying to ascertain what clothes the couple were wearing when they had gone to bed, and strangely, none of them can recall.
It was reported that after finding the body with a slit throat and a badly bashed up face, they were calling up relatives and colleagues instead of the police. After the police had conducted the initial inquisition they promptly performed the last rites and took the ashes to Haridwar and consigned them to the Ganges. The Hindus record the death details at Haridwar and there they mentioned that Arushi had died at 2 A.M. All this pointed the needle of suspicion at them.
The difference between the have’s and the havenots has also come to the fore. The CBI is arresting servants left and right, and the joint director of CBI immediately called a press conference to deny that Nupur Talwar (Arushi’s mother) was going to be arrested, as the news of her imminent arrest began to appear on the Internet. Contrary to that, Krishna has been under arrest for more than a month and the CBI has been conducting all sorts of psychological interrogations of him even without court’s order. Rajesh Talwar’s (Arushi’s father) lawyers are always present when he is being interrogated. Krishna had cried in front the TV cameras that he was being tortured and falsely implicated to save someone else’s butt.
Whoever has murdered Arushi and Hemraj, neither police nor the CBI has come out convincing. I’ll post more thoughts on this case later on. In the meantime, here are some intriguing questions.
Transhumanism is supposed to immortalize us. It involves uploading all memories and motions into computers so that we can live as human machines. This is fascinating as well as scary. Living forever is a nice ability, as long as it is in your hand to shut your system down whenever you feel like. Or you should be able to go into hibernation, self-programmed to wake up after a certain period, or when there is an emergency.
But this can also give rise to a species of super-humans that cannot be easily destroyed, that don’t tire, and that can change bodies in case some real damage occurs. In the beginning this technology will only be available to a selected few and this where the danger begins. What if a few rich people decide that only they can use the technology, and the rest of the people are turned into slaves? Humans have this tendency to enslave weaker, less privileged human beings whenever they get a chance, whether there is a valid need or not. They enslave merely to feel powerful and I’m sure no matter how much science and technology advance the basic attitude is going to remain the same.
But I am not against the idea as some people are. Lots of opportunities will be there for humans if the factor of death is removed from the same. Take for instance scientific discoveries and space exploration. If we don’t die we can continue our work for, let us say, hundreds of years. Imagine what could have been achieved if Newton, Ramanujam and Einstein could work together? What if Aryabhatta could use the latest space technology to study planets and other heavenly bodies? What mathematical fetes could Descartes have achieved with new computer software?
Of course with given scientific knowledge Transhhumanism is just a concept but it can some day really change the way we live and die, if dying doesn’t become obsolete by that time. Above all there will remain no such thing as disability, as long as we’re not talking about mental disability (but these days it is very difficult to make out who is mentally challenged and who is not). Another benefit of this technology will manifest when we totally mess up the environment. Since we won’t have biological bodies, we won’t need oxygen, and may be not even food. We’ll be able to live on man-made satellites in the sky or under water, where there is still lots of space. People who are not much inclined towards moving around will be able to share a mainframe with millions of other brains and this means millions of people will be able to live in a single room.
Sounds quite gloomy, but if you can create your own virtual reality (I assume by then technology will be able to give us lots of disk space and processing power within a single room) then it won’t be that boring.
A man named Rahul Krishnakumar Vaid has been arrested for posting vulgar tirades at an Orkut group called "I hate Sonia" against Sonia Gandhi, who is the Congress chairperson. The man was arrested with Google’s assistance, as the police needed to know his IP address etc.
As Michael Arrington of TechCrunch notes, what’s perfectly legal in America or Europe might be out and out illegal in other countries and since people on their own assume (without reading policies and terms and conditions etc.) that their data is safe with the social networking websites, they post whatever they feel like.
Now, I’m not comparing this to murderers and pedophiles, and I’m not even supporting posting vulgar messages against all and sundry, but I think information like "we will reveal your identity if the law of the land requires us to do so" should be boldly displayed on the home page.
Anonymity is bad and it is good too. For instance there are many blogs on the Internet run by anonymous writers who have plenty to say against the government. What if tomorrow the government begins a crackdown on these bloggers and starts tracking them with open support from blogging companies and server space providers? Such policies should be revealed, in bold, when one is about to sign up.
Since Rahul Krishnakumar Vaid was arrested at the behest of a political activist and since there is a very thin line that differentiates criminals and politicians, some human rights watch group must keep track of what happens with him.
More information:
In my previous post I talked about the food becoming scarce and dear. The thought of food became a catalyst to another thought that has been coming to my mind for a few weeks, and that thought is, why don’t we feed those who don’t have food? This is no social work, this is nation-building.
I’ll talk from India’s point of view; we desperately need a thinking revamp when it comes to feeding ourselves and the others. Yesterday Alka and I were sitting in the balcony observing kids going to their schools, followed by mothers-teachers (in our building most of the mothers are teachers because this building was constructed by the society of teachers from a particular school). The children seemed to have no spirits. It was morning, and ideally they should have been full of vigor and enthusiasm; where was that charm of greeting a new day? We attributed this to food.
In India we stuff our bellies (those who can) but never give a second thought to the kind of food we are eating. We equate eating lots of food with nourishment. This misconception must be changed. We don’t need to eat lots of food, we need to eat good food.
The other thing is, we must routinely feed poor families that cannot afford food. As I mentioned above, this is not social work. There are lots of disparities in our country and that is why we are not progressing the way we should have. The poor family you try to feed might turn out to be a pack of assholes but that’s not the point. Feeding poor families will achieve two things that our country desperately needs:
- To a tiny extent it will bridge the gap between the haves and the havenots. It will sensitize us towards each other. There is lots of animosity: the rich dislike the poor and the poor dislike the rich and I see this everywhere. Someday this feeling is going to explode and nobody will be able to control the ensuing catastrophe. Knowing the ratio of haves and havenots you can easily make out who will suffer the most at the hands of whom. Feeding will at least initiate a contact.
- It will improve the health of people around you. With better health they will be able to work more. Take for instance your sweeper, or your maid. If you feed them, even twice a week, it will significantly improve their health and they will do their jobs better. Gradually, may be in the next 5 to 10 years, a small portion (because we cannot reach every nook and corner of the country) of the population will be healthier, happier.
From unhealthy food, and the lack of basic food, stem most of the problems India faces today. I think good food gives rise to good thoughts and good principals.
Sharing food is not as difficult as it seems. Small lifestyle changes can enable you to give food to the poor. If you eat 3 pizzas every month, eat two. If you go to a restaurant 5 times in a month, go 3 times. Don’t throw away the food after parties and marriages: let the poor have it. Be innovative and reduce your electricity bill and use that money for the extra food you need to purchase. Similarly, there are many cost-cuttings you can carry out to arrange enough money to feed a poor family.
Bush says the price of food has increased because people in India as well as in China are eating more. What does he intend to say, that it was better when people in these countries were impoverished and stayed malnourished? Some studies have claimed that 73% of food in the United States is disposed of, uneaten (read this). People simply consign the food on their plates to the garbage can as soon as they don’t feel like consuming it; and they take big portions even when they don’t intend to eat the whole thing. So much for causing food shortage by eating more by people in other countries.
I’m not denying that food habits in India have changed. In fact even at our house we eat a lot better than what we used to eat when we were kids. We were not poor back then but there was not much awareness regarding food-eating options and to be frank, not much was available. Due to overall progress and globalization people have access to a variety of comestibles, irrespective of the escalating costs.
But you cannot blame people for eating better, especially when people in your own country moronically go on wasting food and fuel despite the galling shortage. The problem is not the shortage, it is a litany of bad decisions. Currently, almost 30% of corn produce in the USA is converted into ethanol and similar trends are being observed in the EU where different governments are setting up targets for producing more and more biofuel.
In India more food rots in the godowns than is eaten. Shady marketers horde food so that they can sell it at the times of scarcity and in the process lots of it is destroyed, and the government doesn’t do much about this, and this must be happening in many countries. In fact numerous countries are experiencing food riots already.
People in Cuba can use PCs at home now. If you think this is the news from the early 90s you are mistaken. The communist government in Cuba never allowed its citizens to use computers. The Internet is still banned there. Empowerment and access to information are the most scary things for such regimes. Sometimes I feel certain people deserve such Draconian governments; they are too lazy or laid-back to overthrow their governments.
A couple of days ago I was reading in a forum that countries like India, China, Saudi Arabia, etc. don’t allow their citizens to use VoIP services like Skype because this will give them unrestricted power to communicate. Actually, Skype has many wonderful subscription features that allow you to make unlimited calls to landline phones as well as cellphones all over the world for a fixed, nominal, monthly fee. Only recently having a telephone itself was a luxury in India.
RSS Feeds
