Charity

Once, I was chatting with my friend. We were chatting for long on the road. Just then, one beggar came along. Said, she was really hungry, and really poor and all. I told her this one thing, "Sorry, I don't do charity". She tried begging once more, but then she understood, that I was not going give any money. So, she left. For once, I felt that I might have had a really bad impression on my friend. "I don't do charity", that's pretty strong statement. For a bachelor like me, earning well enough to buy a gadget per month, it was not economical issue for me, specially when I didn't have any dependents. Even, I thought a bit odd about it.

There was another case. I was going home from Secunderabad station to Aurangabad for Diwali. As was just entering the station when 2 couples came along, each having a kid with them. They looked really scared in a way. They were asking, if anyone knew Hindi, as in Hyderabad, it was quite hard to find. I said, how can I help them. They said they came from Maharashtra, and lost all their stuff while visiting Tirupati. I sensed begging over their, and was ready to turn them down. Still, even I don't like to give money to strangers, I always like to help them. So, I asked them, that would they like to know any address, or how to reach any place etc. But they said, that they are going to return in some train to go back home as soon as possible and their only worry was their kids (both looked like 4-5 years old), who didn't have any food for a day or so. So, they asked me if I could lend them some money. I again tried to back out from that saying same phrase. But here, they were actually asking me for food, not money. As there were lot of fruit stalls and small shops around, I decided to give them some money for biscuits or something. And so I gave them money and left to catch my train.

While in train, I started to think, what was the difference between the 2 situations. Trust me when I say this, I do like to help anyone whenever possible. But somehow, giving money to anyone just makes me anxious and I just have a bad feeling about it. Somehow, I just feel that giving money makes things out of control. I heard and even seen many situations where beggars are millionaires (in Rs.). Also, I thing if anyone is begging for food, or any help, which will directly help him, I should give it to him/her. But when I give money, I dunno what that person is going to do with it. For all I know, from money given for food, he can go and get some alcohol, which will further ruin his life already in poverty. So, I decided this. I'll help anyone by buying things that he needs, or doing some help for him, like showing road, carrying stuff, giving drop at some place etc. Even I am ready to buy a hungry man some food. (In fact, I recently donated blood also :) ) I am not sure whether this approach is right or wrong, but I just feel nice if result of my money which also represents my efforts, should be in my control. Because, such a liquid thing like money, can result in any outcome, which I'll hate to do something which I don't want it to do.

Do pass your comments/ suggestions for this, since this questions keeps bothering me.

Never ending

It was year 2000. Inside a dark lane, a man appeared from nowhere. His name was "mr. Ganesh". After appearing, he had no identity proof with him. But being a born genius, he figured ways to get his identity back. Got a job in a reputed research lab. Meanwhile, he fell in love with this amazing woman called "Riddhi". Somehow she just reminded him of his mother, who died when he was just 8 years old. They fell in love. Got married in year 2005 in court with witness of many friends. A year after, they were blessed with a child. Very sweet and healthy child he was. Being a huge Lord Ganesh's devotee, Riddhi named him "Lambodar". (also the name signified his fatness) This kid turned out to be a genius. Sadly in year 2014, Riddhi and Ganesh died in a car accident. Lambodar was quite interested in physics. He went to research lab at the age of 20 only. He didn't like his name actually, now that he was all slim and all. He changed his name to "Ganesh". at the age of 25, he invented something improbable. "A time machine". After a year, he perfected his design. And set his course for year 2000...

Not so simple problem

There are 2 men.
There is one object that both crave.
It can be taken by only one of them.
They can get the object if and only if they work together.

Question : Will they work for getting this object?

(On a quick note, assume that there is no past affecting this decision. And there is nothing else there that they want or they can get.)

Have fun!!!

Friend or Foe

Imagine this:
You are put up on a very long plane white surface by someone.. say God. You say, "Hello, anyone there?" No one is there to respond. All you see is a place surface with nothing else in it. Even you can't dig into the surface. You are in terrible condition, living in nothingness.
'Twice a day, someone will ask "Are you hungry or are you bored?"
If all in there say hungry, they'll send 1 apple down.
If anyone say bored, they'll say one more human down.'
Now, once you say that you are bored, he'll send some other human there. For now, assume that is of your own sex and you are straight, so no other proposition is solved except someone to talk with.

The question is, will that human be your friend or foe? Remember, whoever comes on this land has the same rights as you have, and will be listened with equal importance. You'll first definitely talk with him like a friend. You are social animal and you need to socialize. So, it is fine to expect that he'll be your friend for a while. Now, again someone asks, "Are you bored or are you hungry?" You both say, "Hungry", since your boredom is gone while chatting. God sends you "a apple" You both are confused. There are 2 of you, but 1 apple. And trust this, you are hungry enough to eat at least one apple.

But rules are the rules. Twice a day, they'll ask "Are you hungry or are you bored?"
If all say hungry, they'll send 1 apple down.
If anyone say bored, they'll say one more human down.

Now, tell me. Will the other human is your friend or foe?

Applying this a little more generically, just makes me wonder, if the war along with humanity is also part of our nature? If it is so, is there a REAL concept called "world peace"?
If these generalization are not that acceptable.. forget about them, just answer the "friend or foe" question.

Have Fun!!!

Game Theory

Laws of Game :
1) First and most important law of a game:
you don't play your best move.... you play the move by which the opponent can do least damage to you.
2) You don't work what you are best at.... you work at what gives the best output to you.
3) You don't speak what you want to speak to others, you speak what gives best return answer from others.
4) You don't wear what feels best to you. You wear what looks best to others or what is most appreciated by others.
5) You don't do anyone a favour for good of people. People's appreciation and return of favour is most important concern.
6) You don't love anyone without getting the same love in return.

Laws of Sport :
1) Play as best as you can. Its about making and braking records.
2) Work what you are best at. You might end up doing something which no one has ever done before.
3) Speak up your mind. Your feelings deserve an expression.
4) Wear what you are comfortable with. Its you who needs to be comfortable.
5) Favours automatically multiply. Do them whenever you can.
6) Love is beautiful. Just go for it.

Life is a game and a sport at the same time.... Sometimes we 'Play Games', sometimes we are 'Sportsmen'.

Dead

I was preparing for NTS interviews once. Sometimes back them , I came across this question. What is the difference between living and non-living? Many speculations were made in our group, like, living things grow, reproduce, eat, think, have mind.. blah blah blah. But then too the questions remained. Cars or Bikes also 'eat' in a way. They consume fuel and perform work. regarding grow and reproduce, how about some automated plants today that create cars without human intervention. About think or have mind, AI is emerging really quickly these days. I am sure it is not the exact kind of intelligence that human mind has. But it has its own benefits, like accuracy or speed. Even our mind has all such linked memories, and memory mappings and all that, which are becoming part of computers these days. But the mentioned things are called 'non-living'. But, we humans call ourselves 'alive' or 'self-motivated'... So, what's the difference.

One of my friend's mother was a physician. She told us one good bookish definition of 'alive'. "One who has death is alive"...... WHOAA... now that makes sense. I never saw any of the non-living things die before. Sure they get repaired and rusted and outdated, but they don't die. So, why 'living' things are the only ones that die? To understand this, I looked closely at the definition of 'death'. Its a kind of irreversible process. Once you are dead, you can't come back. Well, we can repair a computer, a plant, or any engine these days, why not human bodies? Well, that answer came to me from a joke :
"

Mechanic : You are a famous heart surgeon and I am fixing your car's engine. Tell me what's difference between you and me. My engine also needs good care, it pumps power and also fails some times. Then why are you so important and not me?

Surgeon : Try and repair engine while its running and we'll talk about it.

"

Well, the process of body can't be stopped. Cyanide kills our brain for a moment. But that it enough to shut it down permanently. Because, once stopped, these things can't be started. Perhaps it's due to some limitations while making the body so complex. So, many things can be called alive in the same analogy. Like a painting, which after getting ruined by water, not possible to regenerate. But I am sure that a genuine artist can make a replica. Or an engine, which won't work exactly as before after opening it. (Believe me, I have tried it... My friends are still blaming me for their engine failure for a competition :P ) But I am sure that some expert mechanic would be able to correct it.

So, in a way, we just say that things that are so complex that thy can't be reverted are 'alive'. Something that we can't control. Because when we say we control stuff, one part of it is making process reversible. So that you can get back to what it was. So, more control you have, more you get close to making things reversible. In a way, you are making yourself more GODish.

I hope one day will come when this death process will be reversible too. (Just like flying, or automating or curing diseases)

But then, will it mean that we'll be 'non-living'? Think about it.

Matching

In a relationship, there are 'reachers' (who gets partner better that them) and there are 'settlers' (who have to settle for partners). (Refer to HIMYM's latest episod) There are 'perfect match' with highly low probability. But that's not the point. It's what the person in relationship thinks about it. Just a brief survey.

	REACHER	SETTLER
Optimist	Looks at other guys and says... Now see, that's what I call luck. I am the luckiest guy in the world. Not like you s*****s.	That's how I am. I follow my love and I don't care what anyone says. My honey loves me. And that's what counts.
Pessimist	I am a reacher... ohh no. My girl will eat me. She must be thinking of me like a looser and must be seeing others by now....	Now, this is what I got to settle for haan... I could have done much better. Look at that lucky guy. I am stuck.