Monday, December 11, 2017

Does Rossiya's Ilyushin Il-96-300PU presidential plane realize that it shoulders the entire world's safety and future each time it flies with Vladimir Putin?

Realized this while watching this nice video. Mankind really has all of its eggs in one basket. The Rossiya Ilyushin Il-96-300PU aircraft really carries the one man who is single-handedly saving this planet from getting enslaved by the American monster. So much weight on the shoulders of the Ilyushin airliner. So much responsibility. We, the rest of the world, don't realize the gravity of each of Putin's flights. Out fate, our future, our safety, all depend on the safety and well-being of Vladimir Putin. America would chew us all alive if not for Putin. He is the one indestructible, impregnable adamantium wall that's standing between the insatiable greed and lust of America, and the rest of us.


Bisleri's Vedica premium drinking water from Himalayan mountain springs is worth a case study [COMPACTIDEA]

In short, it's a product directed at the affluent, rich, status-conscious types. The extra/high price is more about the premium brand than about any actual marginal benefits of the product compared to "regular" mineral water. Brilliant - essentially the same product but with double or triple margins. Today I frequently/regularly see Indians serving Vedica to guests when they have to portray themselves as rich, where they have to showcase a certain "image" in the society. And I think Bisleri has been quite successful - I see a lot of [and growing] usage of Vedica around. Sales and profits are probably growing [in general I'm not in favor of companies looting people on the basis of merely brands, but because Bisleri is an Indian company, it's less bad compared to Western companies such as Coca Cola or Pepsi taking away Indians' hard-earned money]. Overall, Bisleri's Vedica is a brilliant idea and a good candidate for a business school case study. Packaged mineral drinking water was already considered a premium, luxury product in India, but before Bisleri launched Vedica, who knew that you could go even higher in this product?








Sunday, November 12, 2017

An important paradox - he should've helped in the situation instead of filming it with his camera

Recently, a video surfaced in which a staff of the Indian airline IndiGo could be seen manhandling an arguing passenger. So many people sympathized with the passenger and expressed anger at the airline, while some thought that the passenger was the first one to provoke. Regardless, a large number of people expressed their views about the situation. This video was recorded by another IndiGo staff member. I personally read many comments [on FB, Twitter, etc.] from Indians, suggesting that this second staff member who recorded the video should've instead "focused on his duty" and should've helped to stop the manhandling of the passenger, instead of being busy recording the video.

Rubbish. Nonsense. The incident couldn't have become public without this recording. Similarly, the world wouldn't have come to know about the evil acts of the United States, if not for the leaks by Edward Snowden. The debate taking place within the US about Snowden's leaks is focusing only on the criminality of the act of leaking [by Snowden], and not on the utter criminality of America's acts that have been exposed in the leaks. The question here is the same as the IndiGo question - how could've the world come to know about America's brutal, illegal actions and worldwide spying operations without someone leaking records related to these? Doesn't an otherwise illegal leak retrospectively become legal and pardonable if it exposes crimes and illegal acts?

So although we might complain that some bystanders chose to film and record certain incidents that took place in front of them, instead of helping, but we ought to ask ourselves how could've or would've we come to know about those incidents without watching those very photos and videos?

Wednesday, November 8, 2017

Android is not the last operating system - this is both my wish and my prediction

Have we reached the point where Google's Android has become so popular/ubiquitous, so familiar, so entrenched into the ecosystem, and getting so much help from network effect that no other OS can ever hope to challenge it? Just when we start to think this way, it's worthwhile to recollect the utterly dominant position that Microsoft's Windows once had in computing, when Windows' market share made it feel like nobody could ever challenge it - not because Windows was/is the best OS, but because of reasons similar to Android's current apparent insurmountability - sheer popularity, network effect, strong and increasing familiarity, and a deep ecosystem of applications/developers, support services and industry backing.

Let's not blindly assume that Android is mankind's last, final operating system. One never knows what changes can and will occur in the future. At one point it seemed like Android's popularity will lead to the demise of Apple's iOS. But it hasn't happened yet and doesn't seem as likely today as it seemed back then. Firefox is rising once again now, just when it was beginning to be ignored. Russia is now a food/grain/wheat export superpower, and this didn't seem likely some years ago. So wait. And let's see what happens.

Friday, October 20, 2017

One way to visually understand why total surface area of a sphere doesn't double when its volume is doubled [COMPACTIDEA]

This explanation uses a cylinder, but if you think carefully, it applies to a sphere too, albeit it's tougher and more complicated to visualize it properly. Now, when the length of a cylinder is doubled, its volume doubles, but the original and new surface areas are as follows:
  1. SAW + SAE + SAE
  2. NSAW + SAE + SAE
Where SAW= surface area of wall, SAE= surface area of end, NSAW= new surface area of wall. When volume is doubled, NSAW= 2*SAW, but SAE remains SAE. So when volume is doubled, 2*SAE remains 2*SAE rather than becoming 4* SAE [size of caps at the ends remains the same], hence the total surface area is lower than twice.


Saturday, October 7, 2017

A major limitation, a weakness of MBA programs at business schools is that they can't and don't teach you illegal, immoral or unethical practices [COMPACTIDEA]

Whereas, in real life, perhaps all big firms and all high-ranking folks routinely use ways and methods that anyone would call illegal, immoral or unethical. Like bribes, kickbacks, lobbying, abuse of monopoly position, "relationships" with ministers and politicians, forming anti-consumer cartels, abuse of employees, threats, deliberate theft of intellectual property, use of forged documents, use of harmful ingredients in food products [knowingly], and so on. It isn't like it's optional - it's very much essential. Numerous documented examples show that while companies and officials speak only moral, ethical and legal stuff in the public, in private the same companies and officials hold highly repulsive views and conduct equally repulsive actions.

And they're successful.

But business schools can't, don't and won't tell you to use accounting tricks or to stuff bribes down the throats of high-ranking officials. No MBA program will teach its students that even though America and Europe preach morality, human rights and democracy to the rest of the world, in reality the British, the French and the Americans knowingly resorted to mass-murder of Libyan people, destruction of Libyan infrastructure and property, daylight theft of Libyan oil and arming of terrorist groups inside Libya. The latter is what is done in reality in order to quickly get rich and to preserve the American/European "way of life". But no business school will teach doing any of this.

And all of this is a major shortcoming of current management programs.

Monday, September 25, 2017

Thinking of a nuclear power plant as a deniable nuclear weapon [COMPACTIDEA]

This thought occurred to me when I read this FT story [that purposely tried to stir up controversy and a general sense of unease] about a Russian-built nuclear power plant in Belarus, close to Lithuania. China's artificial islands are sometimes [rightly] thought of as unsinkable aircraft carriers. Could benign-looking civilian-use nuclear power stations be in fact usable - in times of war - as killer nuclear weapons? Specifically, what if a nation - say Belarus - strategically locates a "civilian use" nuclear power plant at its border, in an area with near-zero own population, but close to an adversary nation's key population center? What international law stops a nation from doing this? Probably none. You get plausible deniability - "Oh! It's just a civilian-use plant for reliable electricity supply.".

But what if during war such an atomic power station is purposely blown up, thus releasing highly toxic radioactive radiation and particles towards the adversary nation's population center? Usual wind directions could also be taken into account to conduct planning. The idea isn't as impractical as it might seem at first, particularly with countries such as Russia forced to resort to asymmetrical reciprocal measures in response to Western financial/trade sanctions and heavy eastward military buildup of NATO.


Tuesday, September 12, 2017

India needs one day in each quarter in which absolutely no one makes any work-related calls, SMSes, emails, WhatsApp messages, etc., to you [COMPACTIDEA]

In India's timings outside the stipulated work hours aren't respected. Employers call up employees at odd hours and on odd days, aware that the employee must be sleeping or enjoying his holiday. Customers call up their suppliers before 9 AM [and after 8 PM], knowing fully well that it's either too early to call or is the other person's private/family time. This basically indicates a severe lack of respect for the life of others, and a regard for only one's own needs and priorities [I do the same, or rather I have to do the same].

And so I wish that the Indian government introduce one day each quarter on which - through advertisements and radio messages - Indians are encouraged to make absolutely no work-related phone calls, SMS messages, WhatsApp messages, emails, etc.. Indians deserve at least 4 days per year which are totally free of the nuisance/nonsense of incoming calls/messages at outrageous hours. It should be made a taboo to make a business-related communication on these 4 days. It'll be so nice to have such peaceful days.

Monday, September 4, 2017

Buy at 68% discount and sell at 65% discount doesn't imply 3% gross profit margin [COMPACTIDEA]

Learnt this from a guy named Pankaj [a CA] at his fireworks shop at the annual Diwali fireworks market at Dana Mandi, Ludhiana. He said the other shops are selling Cock brand fireworks at 60% discount thinking that since they're buying at 68% discount, they get 8% gross margin when they sell at 60% discount, and that this is the minimum that they need considering shop rental, interest cost, wastage, wages, other expenses, etc.

Wrong.

Buying a thing with basic price 100 at 68% discount means you bought it at 32. Selling at 65% discount means you sell at 35. Gross profit margin is 3/35, or 8.6%. So the >=8% gross margin that others are asking for is already there at 65% discount. So Mr. Pankaj gets all the sales and volumes he needs since he quotes the best price in the market, while the fools out there sit idle, continuing to quote 60% discount. What's more, these fools happily believe that Mr. Pankaj isn't making any money or maybe is selling at a loss. Amidst all this, mathematics has the last laugh.

*****

Similarly, some people think that if a bank borrows money at 4% interest rate per year [the current rate paid on savings accounts] and issues loan at 10%, then its gross margin is 6%. May not be true. One way to think about this is to forget that the entity in which the bank is dealing is currency/rupees itself. Just call it "goods". The bank borrows 100 rupees but let's just call it "goods" without specifying its value. It pays 4 rupees for one year for these goods and collects 10 rupees. So for the bank the cost of goods sold is 4 while "revenue" is 10. Hence on this trade the gross profit margin is 6/10= 60%.

But there seems to be a problem with the above way of thinking. What if it's a factory that borrows 100 rupees worth of steel [excluding interest cost, if any] and needs to pay 4 rupees for the borrowing cost? Selling this steel at 110 is sort of identical to the bank example, but in this case we'll calculate gross profit margin as 6/110= ~5.45%

Not wholly clear to me yet.

Saturday, September 2, 2017

America accuses without proof, then retaliates, then demands pro-America concessions or steps in order to normalize the situation

I've seen this thing repeat many times over the past few years, that it has become a pattern. This is so important that it needs to be explained. Examples will make this clear.

- US accused Russia of "interference" and "meddling" in its 2016 election. No evidence was offered. US media spread this accusation like wildfire. US politicians spoke/speak about this in a matter-of-fact way. No one questioned/questions that US hasn't provided and isn't providing even a bit of proof. Now US folks talk about this "meddling" as if this is an indisputable fact. Fact established, US went on to illegally seize two Russian-owned diplomatic compounds located in US [on another accusation/pretext that these were being used for spying]. Illegality aside, US later offered Russia a "deal" in which "the return of the compounds was tied to allowing the U.S. to expand its consulate in St. Petersburg" [link]. So first create a false pretext for something that's otherwise illegal and unjustifiable. Then carry out the illegal action and keep loudly beating the drum that it's justified because of that false pretext. Then offer a "deal" in which America gets benefits in "return" for normalization of the situation [from the standpoint of the affected party]. So at the end, America gets something positive while the other party comes back to zero level. And what if you choose to reject their "deal"? In that case America is shameless enough to blame YOU for rejecting their "deal/offer" and for "escalating" the situation.

"Despite an offer to return the compounds, the Russians chose escalation over accommodation. The Trump administration, in the end, chose retaliation." [link]

-

Friday, August 25, 2017

Donald Trump should post short-length videos instead of giving out short-length text statements on Twitter

Text, if it's brief, removes the feelings, the emotions, the expressions, the gestures, etc., from the overall message. It's very mechanical, cold and thin form of communication [unless it's a long, eloquently-written, detailed story and the reader reads all of it]. Short text is easy to misinterpret, and the real intentions are frequently missed out because we aren't actually seeing and/or hearing a/the person speak. This unfortunate fact about writing is powerfully and systematically used by Western media to demonize foreign leaders they don't like - for example they won't frequently/repeatedly show you the various English-language video interviews of Bashar al-Assad, because that would make you realize that Mr. Assad seems like a very reasonable man, a loyal Syrian, and a defender of his people, in total contrast to his butcher-like image that Western media has carefully crafted. So, Donald Trump should post short-length videos instead of short-length text posts on Twitter. When people will see him, they'll feel what he's trying to say, rather than only worrying about the spelling mistakes or the exclamation marks.

Tuesday, August 1, 2017

Mukesh Ambani versus some petty financial analysts

One thing I frequently wonder when I read bearish comments/reports from these so-called financial analysts about large family-owned global companies and/or their owners and owners' ideas is this - should you trust the wisdom, judgment, experience, track record and planning of the owner, or should you trust the thoughts of these petty "analysts" who make a living passing lofty judgments on others' companies?

"Local brokerage Kotak Securities Ltd. sounded a warning on July 23 when it downgraded Reliance’s stock to reduce. “We remain wary of high capex run-rate and rising net debt levels,” wrote Mumbai-based analysts Tarun Lakhotia and Akshay Bhor." [link]

Shouldn't we rather trust the long-term vision and planning of Mukesh Ambani than some "Tarun Lakhotia and Akshay Bhor", chaps who have likely never actually run any company or done any kind of business, and who still dare to declare as bearish the future of the mammoth entity that RIL is, based only upon "high capex run-rate and rising net debt levels", with no look into the tactical and strategic plans of RIL and its constituents? What do these chaps know about Mukesh's vision about Jio? Can they "feel" the potential in Jio that Mr. Ambani can? Not at all, in all likelihood.



Monday, June 26, 2017

Google's competitors advertise on Google - Google knows which users click on which ads of competitors [COMPACTIDEA]

I clicked on a banner ad by Zoho on some website 2-3 days ago. Ever since, Google is bombarding me with ads of its G Suite - a Zoho competitor. So a significant disadvantage of Google's competitors having to advertise on Google's online ad services is that Google knows fully which users click on which competitor ads. It can then go after those folks with its own products, thus steering them away from competitor products. Evidence or no evidence, this is happening.


Update [27-Jun-17]: Of course, whatever we all search on Google tells Google a lot about which competitor products/services we use, at what time of the day/night, how often, and maybe even whether we use the free version or the paid one. Google, in all likelihood, already vigorously acts on this "intelligence" to "introduce" those people to its products/services who primarily use competitor products/services.

Sunday, June 25, 2017

My respect and admiration for Elon Musk just reduced significantly [COMPACTIDEA]

Based on several news stories that I read recently, it can be summarized that Elon Musk:
  • Puts in 85-100 hours of work per week [that's 16.67/day for 6 days of work in a week].
    • Likely works all 7 days a week.
  • Sleeps ~6 hours per night.
  • Eats his lunch during one of his five-minute slots, usually during a meeting.
The words/phrases used to praise him are:
  • "...how does he manage to get everything done..."
  • "...Musk has a special strategy up his sleeve..."
  • "...breaking a schedule into smaller increments can provide a major productivity boost..."
  • "...helps Musk stay on task throughout his busy day..."
  • "...none of his time goes to waste..."
  • "...CEO says he is constantly trying to innovate and enhance his productivity..."
  • "...secrets behind his productivity..."
  • "Musk doesn’t even take a 30 minute lunch break. Instead, he combines it with meetings and emails to maximise productivity."
  • "...batching--e.g. responding to emails on your smartphone while sitting in a sauna while listening to relaxing music while drinking a glass of vegetable juice...."
  • "...I find is I’m able to be with [my kids] and still be on email. I can be with them and still be working at the same time..."
Musk, to me, looks like a perpetual work-obsessed machine. One who's wasting his entire life working and working compulsively, all the while falsely assuming that he's being hyper-productive. He isn't able to enjoy food, and isn't able to enjoy sleep/resting, isn't able to be only with his kids, and isn't able to enjoy the time we "waste" on "non-productive" tasks. Poor fellow with pathetic life, no matter how rich he is.

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Artificial Intelligence [AI], natural language processing [NLP], and natural language understanding [NLU] will enable digital services to build detailed behavioral profiles of people based on detailed past communications [COMPACTIDEA]

Those hundreds of emails, Facebook Messenger messages, WhatsApp chat messages, SMSes, comments under news stories, etc., that we're all creating daily, we just forget those, but those chats/emails/messages don't disappear or become useless. They just get hidden from our eyes. They're there, waiting for advances in artificial Intelligence [AI], natural language processing [NLP], and natural language understanding [NLU]. In the near future, when these technologies reach a very high level of maturity, all those old chats/emails/messages will come back to life. The old stuff will be analyzed deeply again to build a detailed and accurate profile of the person [the way a human can today]. So the value of this otherwise useless stuff is in the future.