Author Archives: navin

If Kapil Sibal is Such an Idiot, How Come You’re not the Prime Minister?

Posted on by
19
Kapil Sibal

Image by World Economic Forum via Flickr

It is so common to hear people going on and on and on about how somebody famous and/or powerful is a complete idiot for doing something. They don’t understand how someone can be so totally bone-headed.

If you find yourself ever thinking like this (and I think this happens to all of us once in a while), stop and consider this question:

If that guy is such an idiot, and you can clearly see his faults, how come you are poor and unknown and that person is rich and famous?

In other words, the people who are in charge did not get there by being idiots, so if they are doing something that seems idiotic to you, which is more likely: that they are being idiots, or that you don’t have all the data, you are not seeing all the angles that they can see, and hence you are making mistaken assumptions based on an incomplete understanding of the situation?

Take, for example, the case of Kapil Sibal asking Google, Facebook, and co. to actively screen and filter all content before it is uploaded on their sites. Yes, on the face of it, it does seem rather an idiotic thing to say. However, my dear reader, I am willing to bet that Kapil Sibal is much smarter than you and me combined. He is a lawyer, he was the Solicitor-General of India, he had cleared the IAS exam (which is ridiculously difficult), and he has beaten Kyuki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi in an election. So the best you and I can say is that we don’t really understand why Kapil Sibal is making such statements. There could be any number of reasons that you’ll never know. Maybe this is a move designed to win over rural voters. Maybe this is just a public stunt to soften up Google, Facebook for a backroom deal later on at terms very favorable to the Congress party. Maybe this is a way to make sure that Google, Facebook are very co-operative and pliable when police (or other government bodies) approach them with requests for private data. Maybe he is the unlucky one who got picked by Sonia to make ridiculous statements to divert media attention away from the FDI issue. Maybe. Maybe. Maybe.

Specifically, if you don’t understand Kapil Sibal’s motivations, you can’t really call him stupid.

Update 1: Do I agree with Kapil Sibal? Of course not. Pre-screen is neither possible, nor desirable. But I’m willing to bet that Kapil Sibal already knew both those things. My point is, saying we should oppose this is not the same as saying Kapil Sibal is an idiot

Update 2: Some people are interpreting my argument as “If you are not rich or famous, you shouldn’t air your opinion.” I’m definitely not saying that. All I am saying is that if your opinion is predicated on the fact that someone rich/famous is an idiot, then you really haven’t understood the situation, and should probably spend some more time thinking about the situation.  Feel free to express your opinion, and disagree. Feel free to even call that person an idiot. But if you actually think that person is an idiot, you are deluded.

Update 3: This article is not really about Kapil Sibal. The issue is broader. There are lots of people who keep saying/thinking that CEOs/VPs of large companies are idiots, or top actors/actresses are idiots, and talentless. SibalGate was a lucky coincidence which gave me a very current example to hang my argument on, but my argument is more general.

For example, consider all those who think Rakhi Sawant is a talentless idiot. Really?! Her job is to be in the news, be controversial, and keep getting paid to appear on TV and in movies. And she is doing her job far better than most of us are doing our own jobs. How then is she a talentless idiot? She is very smart, and does have lots of talent (in PR and marketing) – just not the talent you were looking for (acting). (By the way, I stole this argument from Scott Adams.)

What I’m talking about can more generally be stated as: “If everyone else is such an idiot, how come you’re not rich?”. This is a also known as the “Fallacy of Chesterton’s Fence.”.

This argument was long ago presented by G.K. Chesterton as follows:

In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.”

This paradox rests on the most elementary common sense. The gate or fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street. Some person had some reason for thinking it would be a good thing for somebody. And until we know what the reason was, we really cannot judge whether the reason was reasonable. It is extremely probable that we have overlooked some whole aspect of the question, if something set up by human beings like ourselves seems to be entirely meaningless and mysterious. There are reformers who get over this difficulty by assuming that all their fathers were fools; but if that be so, we can only say that folly appears to be a hereditary disease. But the truth is that nobody has any business to destroy a social institution until he has really seen it as an historical institution. If he knows how it arose, and what purposes it was supposed to serve, he may really be able to say that they were bad purposes, that they have since become bad purposes, or that they are purposes which are no longer served. But if he simply stares at the thing as a senseless monstrosity that has somehow sprung up in his path, it is he and not the traditionalist who is suffering from an illusion.

So next time you think the world is being run by idiots, stop and think a little more…

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why teenagers rebel, act stupid, and why this is a good thing

Posted on by
Reply

Teenagers, as a rule, are rebellious, don’t listen to their parents, do stupid, reckless, dangerous things, and are generally a huge pain for parents to deal with. An article in the National Geographic, based on recent research into brain functioning, explains why all of this happens, and more importantly, explains why this is actually good for the teenager (as long as one of the reckless things does not kill him/her).

The article is long, and parts are rather boring, but some parts, especially on the second page, are quite insightful.

I’ll summarize with very broad, simplistic strokes:

  • Yes, teenagers do take more dangerous risks than most other age groups
  • They do understand the dangers involved (so you telling them “Don’t you know what could happen?” is not particularly useful)
  • The main difference between teenagers and others is that they value the rewards (gained from taking the risks) much more than adults
  • Teenagers take more risks in the company of their friends/peers. In other words, they value “social rewards” and “peer recognition” quite a lot – much more so than adults
  • In general, this is evolution’s way of encouraging teenagers to learn new things, explore new opportunities, to boldly go where they haven’t gone before. This prepares them for leaving their parents’ home and going out into the world on their own
  • They prefer the company of young people. Parents, teenagers don’t what you as friends, they want their friends as friends. (As explained previously, they are wired to get excited about new and unknown things, and parents are neither new, nor unknown, nor exciting.) Evolutionarily speaking, this is the teenagers investing in their future rather than their past or present
  • To help, parents should “engage and guide their teens with a light but steady hand, staying connected but allowing independence.” While the teenagers should obviously benefit from your experience (and they often do – but a little later than you would like), their primary instinct is to learn from their own mistakes. Let them.

I am not the parent of a teenager, so I have no idea what I’m talking about. But I’m good at summarizing long articles into pithy blog posts.

You should probably read the full article.

TRAI’s new SMS guidelines are a step in the wrong direction

Posted on by
20

Starting today, TRAI has started enforcing new guidelines with the intention of stopping the menace of “promotional” SMS, or SMS spam. No promotional SMS can be sent to any user who is on the DND list, and there are hefty fines for violations. Everyone is rejoicing the death of SMS spam, but this is a huge backward step for India – because along with SMS spam, TRAI has also outlawed the sending of automated SMS to users with their permission. That’s right: there is no way for a company X to send a status update to user Y even if the user Y desperately wants such updates, and even if he’s willing to give it in writing.

Don’t get me wrong. I hate unsolicited SMS messages as much as you do. But what TRAI has done is throw out the baby with the bathwater.

If I book a ticket on http://BookMyShow.com, I used to get an SMS confirmation. I could use that SMS at the theatre to pick up my ticket. Now? Gone. If a doctor answers an important patient question on http://bharathealth.com, the patient would get an SMS with the doctor’s answer (so that they get the answer immediately, and not have to wait until they log in to the site next time). This is a service that the patients love, and they start complaining as soon as the SMS service stops working. Now? It’s illegal. The fact that the receiver of the SMS actually wants it does not matter. SMS from http://Flipkart.com telling me where my book has reached – Gone. SMS updates that tell me whether my waitlisted Indian Railways ticket’s status has gotten confirmed – Gone.

Here are the sordid details as I understand them:

Automated SMS can be divided up into two categories: promotional/bulk SMS, and transactional SMS. Bulk SMS is where you’re sending the same SMS to a large number of recipients (e.g. a daily stock tip would be in this category). Transactional SMS is when you’re sending different sms updates/alerts/messages to different customers (e.g. an sms update from your bank immediately after a high value transaction on your credit card).

According to the new regulations, here is my understanding of the effects:

  • Users can sign up for a full DND (in which you don’t get any bulk SMS), or a partial DND, where you can opt in to receive bulk sms in certain categories. There are 7 such categories: 1: Banking/Insurance/Finance, 2: Real Estate, 3: Education, 4: Health, 5: Consumer Goods, Automobiles, 6: Communications/Broadcasting/Entertainment/IT, 7: Tourism & Leisure
  • Any user signin up for partial DND is pretty much asking the world of spammers (in that category) to start spamming him/her. Imagine – the partial DND list will be a public available list of people who have indicated an interest in a particular category and cannot complian if you spam them. A marketer’s (aka spammer’s) dream. As we say in Hindi, this is pretty much aa bail mujhe maar.
  • For DND users, transactional SMS can be sent only by: Banks, Financial Institutions, Insurance Companies, Credit Card Companies, Railways or Airline companies, and registered Educational Institutions. That’s it. No one else can send any SMS to a user signed up for DND.
  • Everybody else will essentially be treated as a telemarketer and be fined heavily in case of DND violations.

So, imagine you provide stock tips via SMS to users you have opted in to your service (what the heck, they’re even paying you for it). Under the new regulations:

  • No, you are not a Financial Institution just because you’re providing finance information. So you can’t send transactional
  • Under the new regulations, you cannot send your SMS to any user on the DND.
  • Your only hope is to convince that user to sign up for a partial-DND and opt in to receive messages for category #1: banking/insurance/finance. I would assume that most users who’ve signed up for DND will be wary of opening themselves up to telemarketing by going the partial DND route.

Follow a discussion of this question on Quora for more.

Also see Sagar Bedmutha’s post on pluggd.in on this topic.