Surreptitious Radical Maniac

  I'm seeing a problem with these innovations. It's not that these boys didn't do a great job. In fact, with what they have, they did a far better job. They should be applauded. But, it's not going to help them overcome the reality of poverty. By addressing problems with ideas as these is very intriguing, makes young minds think, innovate, specialize and so on.  My question is simple. Of the 23,149 people who liked this post, would you be using this on a daily basis? It can be seen to be used as an exception once or twice, but then it doesn't work. And, what's the excuse that these boys don't have proper toilet? Is that being questioned? That is being sidelined. Imagine what these kids could do if they aren't building toilets, and apply this brain to more challenging needs?  The question of toilets, on the longer run has a viable solution i.e. from using ceramic materials, water connectivity, hygienic conditions, proper waste disposal, drainage optio...

I wrote this as part of article write-up for a course. Feel free to comment and suggest. What makes Capitalism stick and why is it dangerous? Capitalism is an economic and political system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. As critics point out, capitalism can cause inequality, market failure, damage to the environment, excess materialism and other challenges. Although these problems can be seen as endemic, it is still one of the major systems across the world. It is seen as broadly winning against communism, and even socialism. But, if it’s successful, as even adopted by many countries, why is it seen as dangerous? Does it have to be dangerous? What makes it stick? Pondering these questions makes me think of human nature. The famous parable of ‘A pond full of milk’ where the king asks people to put milk, but everyone puts water. It explains the innate nature of humans, where they think 'I don’t have to put the milk, someone e...

Does egg necessarily have to be in a shell? Lately, I was watching a lot of videos related to cooking and one thing caught my eye. Does egg, which we consume everyday, has to be necessarily in a shell? Can it be mass produced with the required aspects and not be in a shell? This just came to my mind. Like, economies of scale, could there be a bigger egg, which is similar to that of 10 eggs? There are already egg whites available in tetra packaging. So, how is that made? Are the regular shells broken and yolk separated? Or, is the egg whites created as such? Maybe eggs can be made differently than with a chicken. Is that possible? Could be. Why or why is not being pursued? Cost efficiency? Feasibility? Or, is it just people like to break the egg to get the feel of it?

Many conflicts across the world usually has same interests or similar objectives. As would it be for any goal or outcome, who is that going to benefit from a particular thing changes. Considering this perspective, you can often see many intangible conflicts, especially related to a piece of land, there would be mutually conflicting goals, not in terms of the final objective, but in conflict of who gets it.  This reminds me of the  famous example where the reply that Francis I of France gave in the early sixteenth century when he was asked what differences led to constant warfare with Spain's Charles V. He replied, "None whatever. We agree perfectly. We both want control of Italy!" As such, you can see both have more commonalities than differences. But, how can this change perspectives? What if something can be mutually used by both parties? or maybe more parties? What stops someone from doing that? It's a simple logic. The greed and possessiveness, whether it's fo...

Witnessing the way party politics work not just in India, but across democracies around the world makes me consider if there's any alternative to Representative Democracy. Abraham Lincoln said, "democracy is a government of the people, by the people and for the people." Is this true anymore? By voting/selecting a candidate and asking them to be your representative actually work? This is just giving voter a 'power' to select a candidate for a certain period of time. By the vote, the 'power' is transferred from citizen to the representative and disconnecting the citizen from the remaining aspects of exercising democratic functions. Moreover, the elections are seen just as an event focused on swing states, swing candidates, and also swing voters. So, is there an alternative? One alternative is partyless democracy. I guess this is something envisioned by our constitution writers as there's no mention of political party in our constitution. The concept is ...

Is emotional pain = physical pain? or vice versa? I read about it earlier learning that both are the same, but didn't agree or disagree with it straightaway. Maybe, I was looking for additional research or proof. Well, I got it yesterday. I met with an accident yesterday and my left leg is hurt. Physically. A major accident resulting in a serious injury under the wheels of a truck was avoided in split of a second. Ironically, nothing can be seen outside. Not even a scratch on the surface of the skin of my left leg. It's internal pain, a bit of swelling on outside, but pain can be felt. Unable to walk, cross, close or open legs, stress on the leg or use it for support. Apparently, MRI scan showed completely torn ligaments. Now, normal walk is few months away while surgery is required in the coming weeks. It's still a physical pain although my leg is hurt internally. As this is the situation, it reminded me of a totally disconnected situation. Emotional pain. I was hurt...

https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/treaty-banning-nuclear-weapons-to-enter-into-force-un/article32939207.ece? “Today is a victory for humanity, and a promise of a safer future,” Peter Maurer, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said in a statement. An international treaty banning nuclear weapons has been ratified by a 50th country -- Honduras -- allowing it to enter into force after 90 days, a UN official said Saturday.  What difference does it make? Which country used a nuke after WW2 or other than US? None. It's a taboo. There are more number of deaths recorded due to conventional warfare than nuclear warfare. And, there would be more number of civilians dead or misplaced than the number of soldiers died. So, what use is this if it's ratified? Does it change anything? The clutch of nuclear-armed states, including the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia, have not signed the treaty. UNSC countries didn't sign it. S...