As promised, this is a guest post from Sweet Alien. Happy New Year, everybody!
------------------
Amidst the darkness of empty words,
lies our love, like an orphaned child
Where did those beautiful memories go?
Sweet words whispered by sea-shore,
And, music we heard when it rained.
Of hands we held now and then...
Smiles that lit up thousand skies
Promising us of eternal joy.
Oh! cruel time, off it flew...
leaving these tortured souls in pain.
Bring it back, O! kindly soul,
bear my burdens, for I can't.
Speak to me like we're never far
... of that love, we held so dear.
Grant me strength of your embrace
to wash away my troubles & pains.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Smart answers to smart-ass questions
Too often, we come across these nose-poking friends, aunts, cousins and grandmas who always want to know why you aren't running your life the way they think you should be running. If you are already 29 and you don't have a better half yet, when will it be? If you have been married for four years and don't have a kid yet, did you check with the doctor? As funny as these questions might be, I am sure some of you have been bombarded by these at some time. I heard a few of these answers below from other sources (fellow blogger Manasa and I were just talking about this recently). The others, trust me, are my very own.
Lets talk about how I discovered this wonderful technique. I believe in the concept of telling people exactly what they want to hear. One of my landlord's grand-daughter used to come to my room-mate and I for help when we were preparing for our 12th standard exams. Too often, she would come to us with a drawing or a sketch of some kind and ask us, "This is poor, isn't it?". And then she would listen intently as we tried to argue with her, "Oh no no no... what are you talking about... this picture is nice!" and so forth. One day she came in with the usual painting and asked her usual question. This time, I decided to try a different track. I replied, "Yeah you are right - it looks horrible" with a pretty sad face. She was scandalized. "Oh really?", she asked.
- "Well, you said it was bad, right?"
- "Oh but I said it just like that, so that you can tell me that it is in fact a good painting"
- "Oh I'm sorry dear... but I thought that is what you wanted to hear. But see, you already know it is good, why do you seek approval like this? Of course it is a good job... and you are in fact getting better! Come on, go out there and keep working at more!"
She went away sort of happy and sad at the same time. That, dear readers, was the origin of the species. :)
Well so then, here are some sample questions the standard answer to which should be "And why the f*** is this any of your business?". But alas, we can't call all paintings ugly and so here are a few answers which you are free to use. And when you tell these, make sure you add enough doses of "attitude" ;). Remember, tell them exactly what they want to hear: :D
Q: You are 28 already. Aren't you going to get married? So, when can I come to eat at your wedding?
Q: What, you don't have a girlfriend? Heh heh heh, that is kind of the status symbol these days you know. My son has had one right from his first year at college.
Lets talk about how I discovered this wonderful technique. I believe in the concept of telling people exactly what they want to hear. One of my landlord's grand-daughter used to come to my room-mate and I for help when we were preparing for our 12th standard exams. Too often, she would come to us with a drawing or a sketch of some kind and ask us, "This is poor, isn't it?". And then she would listen intently as we tried to argue with her, "Oh no no no... what are you talking about... this picture is nice!" and so forth. One day she came in with the usual painting and asked her usual question. This time, I decided to try a different track. I replied, "Yeah you are right - it looks horrible" with a pretty sad face. She was scandalized. "Oh really?", she asked.
- "Well, you said it was bad, right?"
- "Oh but I said it just like that, so that you can tell me that it is in fact a good painting"
- "Oh I'm sorry dear... but I thought that is what you wanted to hear. But see, you already know it is good, why do you seek approval like this? Of course it is a good job... and you are in fact getting better! Come on, go out there and keep working at more!"
She went away sort of happy and sad at the same time. That, dear readers, was the origin of the species. :)
Well so then, here are some sample questions the standard answer to which should be "And why the f*** is this any of your business?". But alas, we can't call all paintings ugly and so here are a few answers which you are free to use. And when you tell these, make sure you add enough doses of "attitude" ;). Remember, tell them exactly what they want to hear: :D
Q: You are 28 already. Aren't you going to get married? So, when can I come to eat at your wedding?
- - When it happens, You'll be the first to know and then you can come and pig out all you like.
- - Oh very soon... I already have a boyfriend. (Really?) Yeah he works for the NASA (Wow! Oh seriously, come on, what does he do?) He is in charge of checking air pressure of all the trucks there.
- - Well, umm... don't tell this to anyone, but I am not sure I am a girl anymore.
- - We had one, but my wife was too hungry in the maternity ward so she ate him off.
- - Well, umm, no can do. We tried a few times.(Add the short comment "target practice, y'know" for added effect). Premature ejaculation!
- - I can tell you only if you promise you would put that magic wand of yours away.
- - Never enough, you know, what with all these bills of these expensive massages and these personal accountants and stuff like that.
- - Heh heh heh... now how can I give you a number that doesn't embarrass you?
- - Yeah I think I can afford to hire you.
Q: What, you don't have a girlfriend? Heh heh heh, that is kind of the status symbol these days you know. My son has had one right from his first year at college.
- - Ah yes, I know... I don't date fourth-hand stuff.
- - Yeah as I was telling you, your son's room is always so noisy at night. Never understood why... hmm... oh I'm sorry what were you saying?
- - Oh is that what he told you? (After this, suppress a smirk and then make a serious face that says, "Damn should I tell her about this?")
Thursday, December 24, 2009
In defence of the computerized CAT
I just realized that there have been only 35 posts this year (not including this one), which is a very low number. I usually try to post during the weekends, but making up for missed weekends is a problem. Well I want to get the number to at least 40... so hopefully I'll make that number to 40 in the next ten days. :) Also, as is the tradition on the blog, I would like to invite all my readers to submit a guest post for the year-end post. Criteria: you don't have a blog or if you do, you haven't written there in at least 6 months. Well, now is the chance to scribble away at those creative quills of yours! :)
----------------------------------
I read Rashmi's blog post titled CAT: Restore the faith a few days back. Instead of posting a lengthy comment there, I thought I'd make my own blog post. Basically, I do not agree with her conclusions and have some counter-arguments. I think the heart of the CAT administrators was in the right place - they just lost sight of a few practical problems and messed up some things the first time. Please go and read that post first and also the comments if you have time - mine is rather a follow-up to that one.
Let me first begin with an analogy from cryptanalysis, or "breaking the code" as we commonly refer to it. Say there is an apartment complex, with a common gate and a number keypad combination lock in front. Every apartment in the complex is given a combination of digits and all such combinations open the gate. Now, if the combination is only 2 digits long, and there are even say 30 apartments in the complex with each having a unique combination, then 30 out of 100 possible combinations are already valid keys for the gate to open! If you are a random hawker/seller/murderer/friend/ex-boyfriend and want to get inside the apartment complex but don't know the key combination, you can just walk up there and chances are within 5-6 tries you will be able to punch in a key code that opens the gate!
So the obvious next question is: how do you prevent it? You do three things: one, you make the key combination pretty long and therefore difficult to randomly guess (say about 7 digits). Two: you install a video camera to check that someone can't stand around and keep trying codes all day. Three: you keep changing the codes every now and then so that even accidental leaks are controlled. In geek speak, this would mean increasing the size of the sample space (i.e. long combination sequence), making the cryptanalysis of the cipher-text too expensive to crack for the plaintext to be of any use after it has been decoded, and finally rotating through the sample space to add the dispersion of the combination sample points along the time dimension as well. Oh never mind - you simply know that 7 digit codes with a video camera installed and frequent key-combination changes would work. :)
So all that is very good, but how does it apply to CAT and computerized tests? Well, first of all, Rashmi quotes a bunch of surveys that proved that the ETS-organized tests were cracked by dedicated people taking the tests to just remember the question bank. Yes it is possible, of course, but you need to have access to the system numerous times and then you also need to be able to compile it together, advertise it, sell it, get people enough time to read it and practice, and then those people are to take the test. It worked for the GMAT because you can take the test whenever you want, as many times as you want. This luxury of the time window was sealed off through the administration of the CAT by making this test for only 10 days. This is basically the video camera analogy: you cannot keep trying and compiling the questions and then hope to be able to sell it to the right person who has to read and practice and remember 2,00,000 question-answers in a day hoping that 20 out of those 2,00,000 will be "common", i.e. repeat themselves. And then, they hope they don't get caught. What I am saying is, given the short window and a sufficiently large number of questions (most of which, hopefully, will change next year), the CAT can't be expected to be cracked in a 10-day window.
Second, how about questions repeating? Well, how do you judge if a question is good, in the first place, then? You give it to a large class of students and if only 5 out of 100 are able to solve it, then it is a fairly difficult question (of difficulty level 10, say). And then if there is another question which 90 out of 100 people are able to solve, then it can be deemed easy (of difficulty level 2, say). Effectively, this way you build up a question bank having all sorts of questions from grade 10 (most difficult) to grade 1 (easiest). Now, when you see that people who are consistently solving a difficulty level 7 question are struggling with a new question you are about to add to your bank, you can assume that it is of level 8 at least. That way, you don't even need to run every question past every person to find out where it stands. If just ten people of problem-solving-skill level (PSS level) 7 have struggled with one particular question at different times in the past, you can give the same question to everyone taking the test on a particular day and whoever solves it successfully is definitely a candidate for PSS level 7. What I am saying is simply: repetition is good. Repeated questions can help you classify and grade test-takers: exactly the purpose of the computerized and automated test. And if you say that the stakes are too high for something like CAT, then just make your key combination long! That is, increase the number of questions. Like in the GRE, sometimes you may be randomly administered an entire section that is being used just to build new question banks and will not affect your final score... but you cannot tell which is which: you have to take them all seriously. In our case in the CAT, you have to administer enough questions to enough volunteers, test takers, and draw from other global question banks and collaborate with such test administrators around the globe. If building the question bank is your problem, then crowdsourcing is your solution. That should not prevent the Common Admission Test from turning into a Computer Adaptive Test.
Yes of course some things were done absolutely stupidly: for example the interface being different at different times of the test, or the fact that no scalability tests were done and the software was just launched one fine morning. Marketing the word "computerized" into the CAT definitely drove a big chunk of the hasty deployment. The management had taken the "paper" out of the equation for the most part - a more scalable solution, definitely. If you are wondering whether the CAT results are relevant at all in determining your aptitude for business schools, you are asking the broader question that is outside the scope of the question: "Should the CAT be turned into a computerized test?". I think yes, the CAT should be computerized. No it wasn't implemented properly this time, but yes its future is definitely a computer-based avatar.
----------------------------------
I read Rashmi's blog post titled CAT: Restore the faith a few days back. Instead of posting a lengthy comment there, I thought I'd make my own blog post. Basically, I do not agree with her conclusions and have some counter-arguments. I think the heart of the CAT administrators was in the right place - they just lost sight of a few practical problems and messed up some things the first time. Please go and read that post first and also the comments if you have time - mine is rather a follow-up to that one.
Let me first begin with an analogy from cryptanalysis, or "breaking the code" as we commonly refer to it. Say there is an apartment complex, with a common gate and a number keypad combination lock in front. Every apartment in the complex is given a combination of digits and all such combinations open the gate. Now, if the combination is only 2 digits long, and there are even say 30 apartments in the complex with each having a unique combination, then 30 out of 100 possible combinations are already valid keys for the gate to open! If you are a random hawker/seller/murderer/friend/ex-boyfriend and want to get inside the apartment complex but don't know the key combination, you can just walk up there and chances are within 5-6 tries you will be able to punch in a key code that opens the gate!
So the obvious next question is: how do you prevent it? You do three things: one, you make the key combination pretty long and therefore difficult to randomly guess (say about 7 digits). Two: you install a video camera to check that someone can't stand around and keep trying codes all day. Three: you keep changing the codes every now and then so that even accidental leaks are controlled. In geek speak, this would mean increasing the size of the sample space (i.e. long combination sequence), making the cryptanalysis of the cipher-text too expensive to crack for the plaintext to be of any use after it has been decoded, and finally rotating through the sample space to add the dispersion of the combination sample points along the time dimension as well. Oh never mind - you simply know that 7 digit codes with a video camera installed and frequent key-combination changes would work. :)
So all that is very good, but how does it apply to CAT and computerized tests? Well, first of all, Rashmi quotes a bunch of surveys that proved that the ETS-organized tests were cracked by dedicated people taking the tests to just remember the question bank. Yes it is possible, of course, but you need to have access to the system numerous times and then you also need to be able to compile it together, advertise it, sell it, get people enough time to read it and practice, and then those people are to take the test. It worked for the GMAT because you can take the test whenever you want, as many times as you want. This luxury of the time window was sealed off through the administration of the CAT by making this test for only 10 days. This is basically the video camera analogy: you cannot keep trying and compiling the questions and then hope to be able to sell it to the right person who has to read and practice and remember 2,00,000 question-answers in a day hoping that 20 out of those 2,00,000 will be "common", i.e. repeat themselves. And then, they hope they don't get caught. What I am saying is, given the short window and a sufficiently large number of questions (most of which, hopefully, will change next year), the CAT can't be expected to be cracked in a 10-day window.
Second, how about questions repeating? Well, how do you judge if a question is good, in the first place, then? You give it to a large class of students and if only 5 out of 100 are able to solve it, then it is a fairly difficult question (of difficulty level 10, say). And then if there is another question which 90 out of 100 people are able to solve, then it can be deemed easy (of difficulty level 2, say). Effectively, this way you build up a question bank having all sorts of questions from grade 10 (most difficult) to grade 1 (easiest). Now, when you see that people who are consistently solving a difficulty level 7 question are struggling with a new question you are about to add to your bank, you can assume that it is of level 8 at least. That way, you don't even need to run every question past every person to find out where it stands. If just ten people of problem-solving-skill level (PSS level) 7 have struggled with one particular question at different times in the past, you can give the same question to everyone taking the test on a particular day and whoever solves it successfully is definitely a candidate for PSS level 7. What I am saying is simply: repetition is good. Repeated questions can help you classify and grade test-takers: exactly the purpose of the computerized and automated test. And if you say that the stakes are too high for something like CAT, then just make your key combination long! That is, increase the number of questions. Like in the GRE, sometimes you may be randomly administered an entire section that is being used just to build new question banks and will not affect your final score... but you cannot tell which is which: you have to take them all seriously. In our case in the CAT, you have to administer enough questions to enough volunteers, test takers, and draw from other global question banks and collaborate with such test administrators around the globe. If building the question bank is your problem, then crowdsourcing is your solution. That should not prevent the Common Admission Test from turning into a Computer Adaptive Test.
Yes of course some things were done absolutely stupidly: for example the interface being different at different times of the test, or the fact that no scalability tests were done and the software was just launched one fine morning. Marketing the word "computerized" into the CAT definitely drove a big chunk of the hasty deployment. The management had taken the "paper" out of the equation for the most part - a more scalable solution, definitely. If you are wondering whether the CAT results are relevant at all in determining your aptitude for business schools, you are asking the broader question that is outside the scope of the question: "Should the CAT be turned into a computerized test?". I think yes, the CAT should be computerized. No it wasn't implemented properly this time, but yes its future is definitely a computer-based avatar.
Monday, December 07, 2009
Wings on wheels
It has been close to a year now since I bought my motorcycle. Some pics are here: The Man, the Machine. But just those stationary pics do not tell the full story of having a motorcycle. The swings, the cuts, the 12 second planning ahead and the coolness factor. Yup, you guessed it right - this post will be my own "motorcycle diaries" :)
First of all, there is a difference between riding a bike here and in India. Most people in India learn to ride the bike before the car (and so did I). Naturally, most people get the motorcycle or two-wheeler driving license way before the car driving license. In the US, though, only a percentage of people who have driving license (which is almost everyone) have the permit to ride a motorcycle. Now, why is that? Availability, safety and usability of cars are the primary reason, I think. Tons of cars are in circulation and you will find a car dealership within 10 miles of any random place (I mean, inside a city or town) you pick. Cars are way safer than motorcycles on these roads. When you are going at 100-120 kmph (the "official" speed limit on highways), it definitely helps to have a cage around yourself with airbags and all. And finally, the usability: when you wish to get groceries from the market, our style of stacking up the jhola behind two legs in the scooter doesn't work... you will definitely get caught by a cop. Also, by comparison, fuel is cheaper (and I mean literally even if you compare the direct price comparison of dollars into rupees). Roughly, one liter of 87-octane fuel is about Rs. 37 here (3 * 47 / 3.875).
So, owning a bike immediately sends you into anelite smaller class of the population. And then there are bikes and there are bikes. The one I have: Suzuki SV650, is actually one of the beginner bikes. I know, I am saying that my bike has an only 650 cc engine (Maruti 800 runs at 800cc), but you ought to listen to the Harley Davidsons and Hayabusa-s with 1100 or 1400 cc engines to know what a roar of a bike can be. :D And how does this translate into the powering and acceleration of the bike? Well, on mine, I get from 0-60 mph (that is approximately 100 kmph) in about 4 seconds and 0-100 mph (about 160 kmph) in 10 seconds :D (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_SV650#Specifications). Oh the thrill of literally blasting ahead when a traffic signal turns green :) :)
Actually, there is more to it than just the signal turning green. Generally, people do not try to squeeze in a third car at a traffic signal when there are just two lanes marked. People will wait for long (and I mean as long as it takes) for their turn to come before they go through a signal. On a bike, on the other hand, lane-splitting is legal. Which means you can go between two cars even when there are just two lanes(within a margin of safety, of course). What this translates into, of course, is that when there is a traffic jam on a road or a highway is blocked during peak-hours traffic with people going at 10 mph through a 65 mph limit highway, on the bike you can roughly zoom across them at about 45 mph. I wish there was also a microphone attached to my helmet when I could laugh at the cars as I went past them. :D :D
And then the process of acclimatizing yourself with the bike is a whole different story. Initially, managing a 160 kg bike is a problem - especially if it has tipped over a little too much. And then, going into a turn, you're not sure what is the maximum speed you can take. So I began slow; very cautious and slow: I would slow down to 5 mph from 40 and then zoom back up there. And then, like a friend, the trust grew more. That much extra lean into the turn, that much extra speed of the turn, the right line, the right visual accuracy. I started taking that old 5 mph turn at 25 mph - and yeah it works! In the coaching classes here, one of the big lessons is "look where you want to go". This means that even if you are leaned at 45 degrees due to a turn, if you are staring at the pavement ahead, that is where you'll land up sliding. Instead, if you are focusing on the road at a distance and scanning for the next car about to jump into your lane already - you will get safely out of the curve. And boy does it feel good to execute a tight turn at the right speed and turn - the elevation shift of the view as the head goes more and more towards the asphalt when you are leaning is a thrill of a lifetime, and equally satisfying when you have gone through it perfectly.
So finally, how is it to drive the bike in normal traffic? If I were to choose one word, it would be "freedom". The spectacular view through the helmet of the scenery all around. The stares you draw when you come to an intersection and do a little vroom vroom before taking off again. The air you feel flowing past you when the bike is zooming at80 mph. It all makes it worth it. Each time you gun the power, you can sing, "Up, up and away!"
First of all, there is a difference between riding a bike here and in India. Most people in India learn to ride the bike before the car (and so did I). Naturally, most people get the motorcycle or two-wheeler driving license way before the car driving license. In the US, though, only a percentage of people who have driving license (which is almost everyone) have the permit to ride a motorcycle. Now, why is that? Availability, safety and usability of cars are the primary reason, I think. Tons of cars are in circulation and you will find a car dealership within 10 miles of any random place (I mean, inside a city or town) you pick. Cars are way safer than motorcycles on these roads. When you are going at 100-120 kmph (the "official" speed limit on highways), it definitely helps to have a cage around yourself with airbags and all. And finally, the usability: when you wish to get groceries from the market, our style of stacking up the jhola behind two legs in the scooter doesn't work... you will definitely get caught by a cop. Also, by comparison, fuel is cheaper (and I mean literally even if you compare the direct price comparison of dollars into rupees). Roughly, one liter of 87-octane fuel is about Rs. 37 here (3 * 47 / 3.875).
So, owning a bike immediately sends you into an
Actually, there is more to it than just the signal turning green. Generally, people do not try to squeeze in a third car at a traffic signal when there are just two lanes marked. People will wait for long (and I mean as long as it takes) for their turn to come before they go through a signal. On a bike, on the other hand, lane-splitting is legal. Which means you can go between two cars even when there are just two lanes(within a margin of safety, of course). What this translates into, of course, is that when there is a traffic jam on a road or a highway is blocked during peak-hours traffic with people going at 10 mph through a 65 mph limit highway, on the bike you can roughly zoom across them at about 45 mph. I wish there was also a microphone attached to my helmet when I could laugh at the cars as I went past them. :D :D
And then the process of acclimatizing yourself with the bike is a whole different story. Initially, managing a 160 kg bike is a problem - especially if it has tipped over a little too much. And then, going into a turn, you're not sure what is the maximum speed you can take. So I began slow; very cautious and slow: I would slow down to 5 mph from 40 and then zoom back up there. And then, like a friend, the trust grew more. That much extra lean into the turn, that much extra speed of the turn, the right line, the right visual accuracy. I started taking that old 5 mph turn at 25 mph - and yeah it works! In the coaching classes here, one of the big lessons is "look where you want to go". This means that even if you are leaned at 45 degrees due to a turn, if you are staring at the pavement ahead, that is where you'll land up sliding. Instead, if you are focusing on the road at a distance and scanning for the next car about to jump into your lane already - you will get safely out of the curve. And boy does it feel good to execute a tight turn at the right speed and turn - the elevation shift of the view as the head goes more and more towards the asphalt when you are leaning is a thrill of a lifetime, and equally satisfying when you have gone through it perfectly.
So finally, how is it to drive the bike in normal traffic? If I were to choose one word, it would be "freedom". The spectacular view through the helmet of the scenery all around. The stares you draw when you come to an intersection and do a little vroom vroom before taking off again. The air you feel flowing past you when the bike is zooming at80 mph. It all makes it worth it. Each time you gun the power, you can sing, "Up, up and away!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
