Surya Sripati - Thinking through things that matter

Ringa Ringa Song Lyrics - Aarya 2 - Telugu Movie

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:23:00 +0000

I never thought I would write about an item song on my blog. But, Ringa Ringa song written by lyricist Chandra Bose is different and does deserve a special mention.

It is beautiful, sensuous and contextual - not the kind of adjectives that one would normally associate for an item song.

It might well be categorized an item song but this probably will also count as one of the best songs written by Chandra Bose - at least I hope so! For, it has bordered on the sensuousness so beautifully. I thought it is one of the finest & very creative vernacular expression.

Lyrics are here (I never though I would pen down lyrics - albeit, written by someone else) (Inserts are my commentary):

Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....

Posh posh paradesi nenu foreign nunchi vachesaanu

Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....

Roshamunna kurralla kosam washingtonnu vadilesaanu

Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....

Airbus ekki ekki rothe putti,
erra bus meeda naaku moje putti
errakota cherinanu cherinaaka edhuruchusina

[Up until here, you would see her introduction]

evarikosam?

Bodi moothi muddulante bore kotti,
kora meesa kurragaala aarapatti
Bangalore kellinanu, Mangalore kellinanu
Biharu kellinanu, Jaipur kellinanu
Raayalori seemakochi set ayyanu

Ohoo. marikkada kurrollu emchesaaru?

Kadapa bombu kaanultho esi, kanne kompa pelchesaaru
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

Veta kathi ontlone dhoosi, siggu guthi thenchesaaru
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

[In this part, she expresses first action in a sequence of 3 - if you are still searching for answers, 'siggu gutti' ]

Idhigo thella pilla idhiantha sare gaani asalu e ringa ringa golenti?

Asalukemo na sontha peru, Andreona Swartzaringa
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

Palakaleka eelettinaaru muddu peru Ringa Ringa
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

Jeans teesi kattinaru voni langa
papidi hair savaram baga
raaya laga unna nanu rangasani chesinaruga

engilsh marchinaaru etakaranga
inti enakakochinaru emakaranga
vonti loni water antha chamata laga pindinaaru
vompu lonu atharantha aviralle peelchinaru
vompi vonti sompulanni taagesaru

[second action in a sequence 3 - let me put it as 'moving down the value chain']

Aibaboi tagesara? inkemchesaru?

Puttu macchalu lekketesaaru, leni macchalu puttinchaaru
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

unna kolathalu marchesinaaru, rani madathalu rappinchinaaru
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

[ 'Awesome' expression - they covered and got a hang of the ground]

Idhigo foreign ammai, ela undenti mana kurrola poweru

Panchikattu kurrallaloni punch naku telisochindi
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

muntha kallu laginchetolla strength naku tega nachindi
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

[ 'This part tries to address to emotions of telugu audience - after all, every one of us feel 'We are the best' - Don't care what the world report says on who does the best]

Neeti bed sarasamante jarru jarru
nulaka mancham sarasamante kirru kirru
surru manna scene lanni phone lona friends tho cheppina

[ 'Can there be a better way to put desi masala? - neeti (water) bed vs nulaka mancham]

Cheppesaventi!!

5star hotel ante gacha bicha
pampu shed matter aithe racho racha
anna mata cheppagane,
ireland, greenland, newzealand, netherland, thailand, finland,
anni land la paapalikada land ayyaru

land ayyara!! mari mememcheyaali?

Hand meeda hand eseyandi
Land kabjaa cheseyandi

[Third and final action in a sequence 3]

Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee.....

Hand meeda hand esesthame
Land kabjaa chesesthame

Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....
Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa Ringa reeee....

Well done DSP, Chandra Bose & Priya Hemesh (Singer)

Schwarzenegger Letter

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 03:55:00 +0000

I don't care if it is unintentional or whatever else - but I think what Arnold said makes sense CA and Californians need reforms on things that are affecting them badly than what 1176 is trying - creation of infrastructure finance districts in city and county of SFO.

Yeah there is this thing called Dems Vs Reps in it and it is very strange to see 'I Fuck You' ( first alphabets of each of the lines read that) from Governor's office.

Here is the letter that Arnold wrote:

Huh,

(Late) Flavio Briatore

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:29:00 +0000

Just in case the above is not visible and also because of the angst that I have for him now:

Flavio Briatore
(12 Apr 1950 - 21 Sept 2009*)

The guy who brought F1 to disrepute by planning a crash of Nelson Piquet to help Fernando Alonso win Singapore Grand Prix in Sept 2008.

* He is till alive, but dead in Motorsport

Return of Namaste

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:11:00 +0000

Not that this is a forgotten art of greeting one another but I guess we, probably, are gonna see it more often - courtesy, H1N1.

I, most probably, am jumping the gun too soon and generalizing based one instance - I was at a social gathering yesterday and I saw people genuinely anxious about shaking hands with a stranger - I am a victim and culprit in equal proportions, so not pointing fingers.

Just in case it really happens and we don't get to see a handshake, hug, kiss, bow, pat etc ever - this world will be a boring place.

[PS: On a feature-by-feature comparison - Handshake, Hug, Kiss, Bow and Pat (all, individually) score above Namaste.]

94-Feet Press, Insurgent strategies

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 04:05:00 +0000

Malcom Gladwell (Author of books like Blink, Tipping point) wrote an interesting article in The New Yorker on how some basketball teams (Davids) use 94-feet press strategy to win over highly talented (Goliaths) teams.

In basketball, Team A would score and then immediately retreat to its own end of the court. Team B would inbound the ball and dribble it into Team A’s end, where Team A was patiently waiting. Then the process would reverse itself. A basketball court was ninety-four feet long. But most of the time a team defended only about twenty-four feet of that, conceding the other seventy feet. Occasionally, teams would play a full-court press—that is, they would contest their opponent’s attempt to advance the ball up the court. But they would do it for only a few minutes at a time. It was as if there were a kind of conspiracy in the basketball world about the way the game ought to be played.

Vivek Ranadivé who coached Redwood City team, a team of “little blond girls” from Menlo Park and Redwood City, the heart of Silicon Valley. These were the daughters of computer programmers and people with graduate degrees. They worked on science projects, and read books, and went on ski vacations with their parents, and dreamed about growing up to be marine biologists. Ranadivé knew that if they played the conventional way—if they let their opponents dribble the ball up the court without opposition—they would almost certainly lose to the girls for whom basketball was a passion. Ranadivé resorted to insurgent strategy - his team would play a real full-court press, every game, all the time. The team ended up at the national championships.

Redwood City’s strategy was built around the two deadlines that all basketball teams must meet in order to advance the ball. The first is the inbounds pass. When one team scores, a player from the other team takes the ball out of bounds and has five seconds to pass it to a teammate on the court. If that deadline is missed, the ball goes to the other team. Usually, that’s not an issue, because teams don’t contest the inbounds pass. They run back to their own end. Redwood City did not. Each girl on the team closely shadowed her counterpart. When some teams play the press, the defender plays behind the offensive player she’s guarding, to impede her once she catches the ball. The Redwood City girls, by contrast, played in front of their opponents, to prevent them from catching the inbounds pass in the first place. And they didn’t guard the player throwing the ball in. Why bother? Ranadivé used that extra player as a floater, who could serve as a second defender against the other team’s best player. “Think about football,” Ranadivé said. “The quarterback can run with the ball. He has the whole field to throw to, and it’s still damned difficult to complete a pass.” Basketball was harder. A smaller court. A five-second deadline. A heavier, bigger ball. As often as not, the teams Redwood City was playing against simply couldn’t make the inbounds pass within the five-second limit. Or the inbounding player, panicked by the thought that her five seconds were about to be up, would throw the ball away. Or her pass would be intercepted by one of the Redwood City players. Ranadivé’s girls were maniacal.

The second deadline requires a team to advance the ball across mid-court, into its opponent’s end, within ten seconds, and if Redwood City’s opponents met the first deadline the girls would turn their attention to the second. They would descend on the girl who caught the inbounds pass and “trap” her. Anjali was the designated trapper. She’d sprint over and double-team the dribbler, stretching her long arms high and wide. Maybe she’d steal the ball. Maybe the other player would throw it away in a panic—or get bottled up and stalled, so that the ref would end up blowing the whistle. “When we first started out, no one knew how to play defense or anything,” Anjali said. “So my dad said the whole game long, ‘Your job is to guard someone and make sure they never get the ball on inbounds plays.’ It’s the best feeling in the world to steal the ball from someone. We would press and steal, and do that over and over again. It made people so nervous. There were teams that were a lot better than us, that had been playing a long time, and we would beat them.”

As Malcom points out in his article, It is not as if this is the first time a team used this strategy in basketball history. Fordham University Rams used similar strategy in 1971 playing against UMass. Rick Pitino of UMass who missed that particular game watched the game sitting in the arena and adopted this strategy for many teams he has coached since.

Essentially, what Malcom points out in this excellent article is that insurgent strategies (substituting effort for ability and challenging conventions) represent one of David's only chances of competing successfully against Goliath, so it's surprising that more underdogs don't use them. The data on underdogs in war is quite compelling in this regard. But it's also true on the basketball court. The press isn't perfect. But given its track record, surely it is under-utilized. Isn't that strange?

Here is the full article.

Try this with your kids

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:18:00 +0000

Source: Don't! by The New Yorker
Video: Oh! The Temptation, at Vimeo

The article tries to explain in a very detailed way an experiment that was first conducted in 1960s - considered now a classic Stanford psychological experiment in which kids are put in a room with a marshmallow and told they can either eat it immediately or wait until the researcher gets back, and they'll be given a second marshmallow.

Walter Mischel, the Stanford professor of psychology in charge of the experiment says, "What we’re really measuring with the marshmallows isn’t will power or self-control... It’s much more important than that. This task forces kids to find a way to make the situation work for them. They want the second marshmallow, but how can they get it? We can’t control the world, but we can control how we think about it.”

They tracked all those people who took this test and say "It turned out that the ones who passed the marshmallow test enjoyed greater success as adults".

Essentially what they seem to be telling is that child’s ability to delay gratification is a good predictor of achievement later in life. (Not just for kids, I add.)

Someone created a cool video - Notice at the very end how that girl doesn't even bother to let the instructor complete what she had to say before swallowing the marshmallow, that was fun!

May be those of with kids wanna try this at home.

Discovery voyage

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:49:00 +0000

"We are (1) providing a context which is marked by (2) access to a luxuriant portfolio of meaningful opportunities (projects) which (3) allow people to fully express their innate talent & curiosity and (4) engage in a vigorous discovery voyage (alone and in small teams, assisted by an extensive self-constructed network) by which they (and their team-mentors-teachers-leaders) (5) go to/create places they had never dreamed!"

Note: What a place it will be I thought when I first read it somewhere some 6 years back and got into my notes but, unfortunately, forgot to make a note of which company it is. And then I thought 'Is such a thing a physical place? Why can't it be a way of approach?'. Soon got convinced that this can be a way of approach and then such a place could be your own company, your own workplace - you could create this world all for yourself. I was so deeply in love with idea that it triggered a thought and that thought materialized into something called 'High Performers Club' in our organization.

(Housekeeping - I was so much in love with the idea and also presenter's articulateness that I wanted to preserve and hence copied it exactly the same way in my notes - same fonts, same font size, same colors etc. Pity I did not write down the company name)

HPC was a leadership development initiative and one of the key ingredients of HPC was to provide access to luxurious portfolio of projects for the chosen few to harness their skills and develop as a multi-faceted leader.

[PS: Don't bother about what I did with the above - that's not the point - think about your own 'Context', 'Luxurious portfolio of projects' and 'Engaging on a vigorous discovery voyage'.]

Lessons from being with a Lion in a cage

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 04:22:00 +0000

Just in case you too find yourself in a lion cage

Lesson #1 - Don't be scared (Don't ask me how), Lions can sense fear and then you have it.

Lesson #2 - When it mauls you, wait for it lose interest in you (and pray, silently) and think about the last moment when you said to yourself 'Luck doesn't get any better'.

But there is a wiser way

#1 - Don't be an asshole
#2 - Stay behind the barrier
#3 - Do not touch the Animal

Who should be the Chief Minister of AP?

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 05:13:00 +0000

This seems to be the big question and understandably there are opinions expressed by many. I am no expert in Politics neither do I have any political affiliations (to my mind, no political party in India is better or worse than the next one - cut to bare bones they all look alike) but I guess you don't need to be an expert to talk common sense.

After YSR's death, many MLAs started voicing their opinion that Jagan Mohan Reddy (son of YSR) to be made next Chief Minister. And then in the last two days, newspapers and TV Channels started reporting the following sentiments:

'High Command' doesn't want processions or representations to be made on who should be the next chief minister
'High Command' will decide who will be the next chief minister
'We will respect whatever decision our High Command takes'

I find these sentiments utterly disappointing for the following reasons:

In India, we elect MLAs
Governor of the state asks the party with most (usually) MLAs to form the government
MLAs of the party asked to form the government, in turn, elect the Chief Minister

So, technically it is MLAs who will & should elect the Chief Minister - Not you, me or High Command. It is a different matter that all political parties will always look up to their High Command (bargaining power of an Individual MLA is almost Zero in relationship to the consequences for his career) - but this alone should not be a reason 'to keep quiet':-

Are we saying MLAs should not voice their opinions on who should be their leader?
Are we saying MLAs do not know the pulse of the public (yours & mine) opinion? If that is so, how can one guarantee that 'High command' know the public opinion?
What extra does the 'High command' will know that the 290+ MLAs (supposedly more closer to the constituents of his constituency) doesn't know?
Even assuming that the 'High Command' will take decision keeping view the long-term interests of the state, are we saying MLAs do not keep these long-term interests and just keep their individual or short-term interests? If so, why have them as MLAs?

Finally, why are we suppressing debate? - A very healthy instrument of Democracy.

Having elected our MLAs, let us respect our own decision of electing them and have them express their views and elect the next Chief Minister.

I am getting bored of Bolt

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 08:40:00 +0000

Another race - another win - another gold - another world record, it is just getting bored. I am not tired though to see this amazing athlete. This is his 5th world record in 5 events (3 in Beijing, 2 in Berlin)

Having set 9.56 sec in 100m, he now sets 19.19 sec in 200m - just as incredible, in fact I believe more, as it is in the 100 m. While simple arithmetic tells you that you should double the time of 100 m (9.56 * 2 = 19.12), it is actually that alone - Too simplistic a view. Ask any sprinter worth his salt, he will be quick to point out that it is god damn difficult to maintain the speed over the entire 200m as they do over 100m.

But Bolt is different - he almost did it. His time of 19.19 is actually just 0.07 sec away from 19.12 simple arithmetic and that is why I thought his performance in 200m is more incredible than in the 100m. Who knows - but for the 0.3 m/s head wind this time, as opposed to 0.9 m/s tail wind in 100m - he probably would have clocked 19.12 sec proving that it is, after all, not too simplistic a view.

While I wait for IAAF's data on split times and other details to do further analysis, what is clearly visible, from the video below, is that again he consistently outperformed every other opponent and won the race by even bigger margin than when he won the 100m.

One thing that he certainly improved in 200m race is his reaction time. In 100m he reacted to shot by 0.146 sec and now he reacted by 0.133 sec. In 100m he was 5th best in reacting, now he was 1st - Just goes to show how great athletes focus on & improve every aspect of performance.

If you have missed his 100m race & my analysis here are my earlier posts:

100m Race
100m Race Analysis

[PS: Bolt seems to like 11 (as if to say they represent his two legs) - he bettered both 100m & 200m by exactly 0.11 sec]

5th Ashes Test @ Oval

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:01:00 +0000

Boy-o-boy I am flabbergasted with the amount of hype surrounding the 5th (and final) Ashes 2009 Test to be played @ Oval today (to be precise its gonna start in exactly 58 min from the time this post appears)

I know this will be a decider, with both teams at 1-1, and then there is this 'Freddie Farewell' thing but I wonder does it need so much hype. (For those of you English supporters like me, statistics tell that Australia have never won the decider after 1930s)

Here is something Will Luke of Cricinfo said 1 1/2 hr before the scheduled start and this just blows me off:

".....If you have work to do, children to take to school, groceries to buy or a cat to kick, then you could swallow the loser's pill and do just that. Or, you could be one of life's winners: sack the wife, expel the husband, shoot the boss and eBay your children: this is where you should be for the next five days."

The problem with hypes is that they rarely live up - anyways let me reserve more for 'after the match comments'

Heights of stupidity, LOL Vs LMAO

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:49:00 +0000

Take a look at this first video clip (from a telugu movie called Bava Bava Panneeru)

(For those who can't fallow telugu - Frustrated with his earlier answers, Interviewers ask the Hero to spell 'coffee' in an interview and they promise that they will give him the job if he spells it correctly and he spells it as 'kauphy' - he doesn't get even single character right)

As good as it is (this comedy clip), all this while I used to think something as stupid as this will never happen in real world till I came across this below video:

I'm sure she would have been crowned 'coz the judge who asked the question too is blond - JK. Going by the way MC behaved, he seems to be in a great hurry to show the door to the contestant.

Usain Bolt's (9.58 sec) Race Analysis

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 05:23:00 +0000

First it was astonishment and then it is time to understand how that astonishing feat was achieved. IAAF released data pertaining to 20m splits of the 100 meter race and here is the summary:

Here is some more analysis:

Cells highlighted in yellow represent the best time clocked amongst participants. Usain Bolt topped everything which goes to show he consistently outperformed everyone at every stage barring reacting to gun shot. In other words, he achieved fastest time at each split.
He turned 0.027 sec disadvantage of reaction time (difference between Bolt and Thomson) into a 0.07 sec advantage (difference between Bolt and Patton) by the time he reached 20 mtrs. Meaning he gained 0.097 sec over the best starting athlete in just 20 mtrs - incredible.
Tyson Gay's 9.71 is very impressive, without any doubt. But if you look at how Usain Bolt built his lead on Tyson Gay, one will have to say WOW:
He gained 0.03 sec (0-20 m), 0.03 sec (20-40m), 0.02 sec (40-60m), 0.02 (60-80m) and 0.03 sec (80-100m) - totaling to 0.13 sec in all (difference between 9.58 & 9.71 sec) - again consistently outperformed the nearest competitor
60-80m in just 1.61 sec - I'm becoming speechless - A 20m distance being covered in an incredible 1.61 seconds (if you convert into speed it would be 44.8 kmph average speed during those 20 m)

I then took at look at how he gained so much from his Beijing exploits and here are the splits:

The highest advantage he gained in Berlin over Beijing is during 80-100m, an advantage of 0.07 sec and then he gained another 0.03 sec during 60-80m, a total of 0.1 sec during the last 40mtrs - I am wondering if he was jogging in Beijing during that split. Otherwise to gain such margin of advantage seems ridiculous.
He got off the block in Berlin better than Beijing (reaction time was better in Berlin than in Beijing) but by the he reached 20mts that advantage was gone (in fact at 20m split, he was doing better in Beijing than in Berlin)

Lightening may not strike twice, but Bolt did

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 07:26:00 +0000

Like most, I thought it would be tough to better 9.69 seconds but past Sunday Usain Bolt proved it wrong and did an astonishing 9.58 sec for 100 meters. He has taken off 11 hundredth of a second which seems almost like defying logic. F1 teams (spending upwards of quarter billion dollars every year) would be very happy to have this kind of improvement per lap.

How the heck can he do this?

His speed is at 37.6 kmph - to put it in the perspective, my car - a Honda City with 1.6 Ltr engine, 4 cylinders and 75 hp takes about 4 seconds to reach the same speed.

I heard on TV that his reaction time (to the sound of bullet) was at 0.146 seconds and is 0.027 seconds higher than the best (achieved by Thomson). Which effectively means that Usain Bolt can do a 9.55 seconds.

If the time he recorded was great, the margin with which he won was equally great. Take a look at the picture below (courtesy Getty Images):

In all this hoopla, people forgot that Tyson Gay had finished the race with 9.71 sec timing - a timing that could have won him every other world championship (by massive margin too). Such was the out-performance of Usain. [Just in case you wanna check this statistic - click here]

Why not rename Autobahn in Germany to 'Usainbhan - No (speed) limits!'

[PS: One of these days I wanna do a 100 mtrs and check how close am I to Bolt @]

460 Days of blogging

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:15:00 +0000

460 days of blogging until today and I wanted to see what am I blogging about. Wordle seemed the most easiest too available on internet to analyze this by creating, what they call, 'a word cloud'.

I used the titles of each post as a source to create this cloud and here is my blogging word cloud , most commonly used 150 words (The larger the word, the more I used it in my post title):

I was not surprised with the cloud data, were you?

Vision

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:14:00 +0000

Walt Disney had two managers who oversaw and completed the Walt Disney World Resort in Florida, supposedly THE dream project, after Walt died.

One of the managers told the other at the inaugural function 'It was a pity that Walt was not alive today to see this amazing Disney Land'.

The other guy replied 'Sorry mate. Walt had already seen this. Otherwise this would not have been, in the first place, built at all'

That's vision!

Operation Northwoods

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 06:30:00 +0000

I had very little interest in world history and so when I read about 'Operation Northwoods' over the weekend, I was shocked.

I knew of people doing stunts to gain popularity and public support (likes of NTR, Chief Minister of AP during 1983-90, had a dummy attack on him) but I never thought (I could very well be dumb or was just not following world politics) countries will also attempt (or do) stunts to gain popularity and public support.

Operation Northwoods was exactly that - a 1962 plan by the U.S. Department of Defense to stage acts of simulated or real terrorism on US soil and against U.S. interests and then put the blame of these acts on Cuba in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro. The plan said:

".....The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere."

Back in 1962, The document was presented by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lyman Lemnitzer, to Secretary of Defense Rober McNamara on March 13 as a preliminary submission for planning purposes. It had a list of methods / plans that the authors believed would garner public and international support for U.S. military intervention in Cuba. These are staged attacks purporting to be of Cuban origin.

Staged attacks include killing innocent people, sinking ships, blowing planes, explode bombs and many more -

Full document is here. List of staged/fake attacks suggested in the document are below:

Since it would seem desirable to use legitimate provocation as the basis for US military intervention in Cuba a cover and deception plan, to include requisite preliminary actions such as has been developed in response to Task 33 c, could be executed as an initial effort to provoke Cuban reactions. Harassment plus deceptive actions to convince the Cubans of imminent invasion would be emphasized. Our military posture throughout execution of the plan will allow a rapid change from exercise to intervention if Cuban response justifies.
A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.
a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in chronological order):
1. Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
2. Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
3. Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
4. Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
5. Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.
6. Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage).
7. Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.
8. Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
9. Capture militia group which storms the base.
10. Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires—napthalene.
11. Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims (may be in lieu of (10)).
b. United States would respond by executing offensive operations to secure water and power supplies, destroying artillery and mortar emplacements which threaten the base.
c. Commence large scale United States military operations.
A "Remember the Maine" incident could be arranged in several forms:
a. We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba.
b. We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. We could arrange to cause such incident in the vicinity of Havana or Santiago as a spectacular result of Cuban attack from the air or sea, or both. The presence of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The nearness to Havana or Santiago would add credibility especially to those people that might have heard the blast or have seen the fire. The US could follow up with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existent crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.
We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington.
The terror campaign could be pointed at refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement, also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government.
A "Cuban-based, Castro-supported" filibuster could be simulated against a neighboring Caribbean nation (in the vein of the 14th of June invasion of the Dominican Republic). We know that Castro is backing subversive efforts clandestinely against Haiti, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, and Nicaragua at present and possible others. These efforts can be magnified and additional ones contrived for exposure. For example, advantage can be taken of the sensitivity of the Dominican Air Force to intrusions within their national air space. "Cuban" B-26 or C-46 type aircraft could make cane-burning raids at night. Soviet Bloc incendiaries could be found. This could be coupled with "Cuban" messages to the Communist underground in the Dominican Republic and "Cuban" shipments of arm which would be found, or intercepted, on the beach.
Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce such fact. The primary drawback to this suggestion appears to be the security risk inherent in obtaining or modifying an aircraft. However, reasonable copies of the MIG could be produced from US resources in about three months.
Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba. Concurrently, genuine defections of Cuban civil and military air and surface craft should be encouraged.
It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.
a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.
b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.
It is possible to create an incident which will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack.
a. Approximately 4 or 5 F-101 aircraft will be dispatched in trail from Homestead AFB, Florida, to the vicinity of Cuba. Their mission will be to reverse course and simulate fakir aircraft for an air defense exercise in southern Florida. These aircraft would conduct variations of these flights at frequent Intervals. Crews would be briefed to remain at least 12 miles off the Cuban coast; however, they would be required to carry live ammunition in the event that hostile actions were taken by the Cuban MIGs.
b. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly tail-end Charley at considerable interval between aircraft. While near the Cuban Island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. No other calls would be made. The pilot would then fly directly west at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who had performed the mission under an alias, would resume his proper identity and return to his normal place of business. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.
c. At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down, a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc., at approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast and depart. The pilots returning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found.

If you have come thus far, John F Kennedy, President of US then, did not appprove this. (I was happy to note this)

Weekend action & learning

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:01:00 +0000

I went out on sunday driving for about 80 kms along with a friend of mine, his wife and 3 kids. Spent about 6 hours together. As I kept thinking about 'How was the trip', what struck me most is:

All 3 kids had smile on their faces for the best part of 6 hours for various reasons (and, I am guessing, without reason too some times). How often do I have a smile on my face in a day?

and then Is it important? (yes), What's stopping me from sporting a smile? (donno), Should I sport one or let it come? (let it), Am I in deep shit for so long that I can't even smile (no) - Then why the heck? (seems like I was bitten by RGV). At this point I burst into laughter.

[PS: Laughing is different from having a smile on your face.]

Starting a start-up

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:02:00 +0000

[Prelude: Aditya asked if I could write something on entrepreneurship. So I am venturing now. Yes, venturing 'coz I have never started a company if that is what entrepreneurship is about. I don't believe it is, but that's not the topic. These thoughts are related to starting a business not a charity organization.]

[Confession@start: I had to take help of spellchecker to get 'entrepreneurship' correct. I wrote it is as 'enterprenuership'.]

[Caution: It is not a cookbook. Just my thoughts, no empirical evidence.]
________________________________________________________

I am hoping I will be able to address the below 3 points in this post. There are many more things in 'entrepreneurship' but just wanted to focus on softer aspects for a start:

While many of us have this thought of starting something on our own, why only a very few of us start? (I thought it is important to address this 'coz if I have to sum-up two most important stages in entrepreneurship, they will be 'start' & 'finish' (finish not as in closing, but as in realizing the dream/ambition))
How do we gauge if we are succeeding? (notice that it is suc-c-e-e-d-i-n-g)
Related to the above, what if we are not succeeding? (notice that it is not failing)

Why only few start?

World is notoriously low on start-ups. I am guessing it is not because of lack of ideas or money. I believe it is because of 'fear of failure' and it gets compounded by our societal pressures (These pressures in India are exponentially higher than in the western nations) and these pressures place, what I call, 'moral weight' which is too heavy for many people to bear.

'Financial risk' and 'Responsibility' are the other two factors but I would argue that 'fear of failure' and 'moral weight' outweigh those two factors. If you are 30 something, you wouldn't anyway have a lot of money (and fame too) to loose and you still have age on your side to make-up for any loss you suffer. As far as responsibility is considered, you are any way used to working long hours and be accountable in your job and so nothing is new either here. In fact, given that your own hard earned money is in there you probably would work even harder (and hopefully smarter).

So, If you wanna start you will have to figure out a way of sorting out these impediments - Fear of failure and Moral weight - you will have to figure out your own way.

One possible way is to start-up something tough in your current job - launching a new product or a service - and do everything you will have to do as if this is your start-up company. Often, distinguishing this task from your regular tasks is difficult and there is 'comfort zone' & 'I don't have authority' phenomenons to contend with. These are escapist behaviors and if you have these, you are not cut out for entrepreneurship.

How do we gauge if we are succeeding?

My first thought on this is if you are surviving, you probably are succeeding. Let me explain, you left your job and started a company. First sign of succeeding is 'Am I covering my living expenses'. In a start-up you don't anyway have a big payroll to run or big time overheads to cover. All that you have are the costs of delivering service/product.

If you are covering your living expenses, it greatly eases the pressures of 'fear of failure' and 'moral weight'. More importantly, it gives you the stamina to run longer because:

You figured out that there are people (market) out there who are willing to pay for your product/service. You figured out that your value proposition is making sense (now it is a question of growing the number of people).
You figured out that there is enough discipline in your start-up about keeping the costs low enough to cover your living expenses.
You are not running for funding/money. The more the time you spend on thinking/looking for funding, the less the time you will spend on actual product/service.

To my mind, there can't be a bigger motivation (than these three) for a start-up to graduate to the next stage of 'making big' & 'making real money'.

Covering your living expenses is not making real money and it is important one appreciates this difference and also appreciates that 'making real money' is the ultimate sign of succeeding.

Covering living expenses is only providing you the motivation, not money. Making money is what you have stated your start-up for, not for motivation. The first few customers for your start-up, more often, are from your friends, relatives, neighbors, colleagues. All these people put together might give you enough business to cover living expenses initially but these are not real customers. They are some where else and these are the people who give you money/profits.

Covering living expenses is like test marketing your start-up's value proposition. There is still real marketing and lots more to be done.

What if we are not succeeding?

If you have asked yourself this question before you start the start-up, it is a good question and bad question at the same time. Good because, you are thinking of alternative plan for succeeding and shows that you are flexible enough. Bad because, you are already thinking about 'not succeeding' (fear of failure & moral weight).

Give yourself a honest answer on why did you ask yourself this question - For the good part or the bad part. Answer to this will give you answers on 'Should I start or not?'. 'Coz if fear of failure and moral weight does bother you a lot, you probably are not cut out for entrepreneurship.

But if you have asked this question mid-way through running the start-up, it is a real good question. Most start-ups do not succeed (as in making real money over long-term) but that is not failing (more later on failing). We all start with an idea thinking that it would make sense to customers and that they would pay. We would not do a empirical study to test our hypothesis, it is more a gut check thing - no hard data.

If your hypothesis is not turning out to be true (in other words if you do not seem to be succeeding), the key is to have flexibility and not getting too emotionally attached to the idea. Just because you would have liked a service to be offered in your neighborhood, it doesn't mean that customers will buy that service if you start-up. To shamelessly copy from Uday, 'Every vacuum is not an opportunity'.

This means, yes we will have to pursue the idea but also have the flexibility and mentality that as we get signals that this idea is not making sense, we should be prepared to change or shelve this idea. Changing or even shelving an idea, in entrepreneurship is not failing. It in fact is, if anything, sowing the seeds for succeeding. 'Coz in entrepreneurship, most times, there is no real market or stated need. You are trying to create a market or address a non-stated need of the customers which is not currently served by anyone else - In such case it is very rare that one gets the idea perfectly right in the first instance. It is rare because you are wanting to address a non stated need in a way that you perceived that non stated need. and not every time your perception matches the reality. Hence the idea will (and have to) evolve as you keep talking to customers (reality).

Net Net, be prepared to change the original idea or even shelve it and get on to a new one.

Thank you Aditya. Don't know about you but your request helped me a lot.
________________________________________________________

[Confession@end: In my quest to be as logically thinking a person as one can be, I poured water on the enthusiasm of many wanna-be entrepreneurs by asking this question 'What if we are not succeeding?' and contributed to they not starting. Enthusiasm is a very good quality at start stage and too much logic at start stage is a bad quality. My quest still remains, so talk to me on your next idea at your own peril.]

Random Thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:39:00 +0000

In this world, every human being is different (or has a unique DNA) right. Then how would it be if I say to you "My dearest friend, You are unique. Like everyone else"

[PS: Am I thinking laterally or joking?, Is this a factual statement or a jibe?]

If doing right is right and doing wrong is wrong, what is doing nothing? - Nothing, ney. In my book it is wrong (actually worst thing) - do anything/something, but not nothing.

Stock Market Ghajini

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 07:25:00 +0000

Just one more reason why stock markets are not always the best yardstick of performance or potential:

Satyam Computers' (now Mahindra Satyam) market capitalization today is more than the market capitalization it had before the infamous scandal broke - Crazy, Irrational, call it whatever you want.

Satyam's market cap today is at $2.5 Bn and on 6th Jan (before Raju confessed) was at $2.4 Bn.

Date	Price (Rs)	Shares (Mil)	MCap (INR Mil)	MCap ($ Mil)
6-Jan-09	175	675	118,125	2,411
24-Jul-09	104	1175	122,200	2,546

In about 6 months people seem to have forgotten (ala Ghajini) pretty much everything that has gone wrong with Satyam - I salute those investor's bravery but can't help think that there is going to be hard landing.

Good luck guys - God pl. help them, if you can & want!

The picture above is my modest attempt to bring back your memory.

[PS: Ghajini is a hindi movie in which the hero suffers memory loss, it is based on 'Memento' released in 2000]

Discrimination

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 04:34:00 +0000

I hate this word 'discrimination'. I love 'differentiation' though! [In differentiation you do different/extra things. In discrimination you don't do anything different/extra]

Last evening we went to Care Hospital to see a relative who is unwell and I was utterly disappointed with their discrimination tactics. To cut the long story short:

1. If you are in a triple-sharing room, you pay Rs. 11000/- for angiogram
2. If you are in a twin-sharing room, you pay Rs. 13000/- for angiogram
3. If you are in a single room, you pay Rs. 15000/- for angiogram

Needless to mention that room charges for all three are very different.

What baffles me most is 'When you are already differentiating the price that one pays based on the type of room that he is being treated in, why discriminate again on the price for the angiogram test?' - Cruel it is. Will the equipment used for angiogram change based on the type of room?, Is it your way of saying that the people in single rooms are supposed to subsidize people in triple-sharing rooms?

I just couldn't understand the logic behind this.

I wanted to check if their website offer some insights and they say:

CARE has understood the needs of its patients and to that end has devised a physician co-operative approach. The approach enables us to understand the requirements of patients and help see issues from primarily a medical perspective and then a financial perspective, making this a unique feature of CARE.

What they seem to be telling is "All things being equal from a medical perspective, we will charge different sums to different people (financial perspective)" - I say again, this is cruel!

I know of some hospitals/doctors who treat poor people without charging or charging nominal fees and make-up for this loss by charging those who can afford a little more than normal - I am absolutely fine with this. It is a way of me subsidizing you and you subsidizing the other.

But Care Hospitals is not subsidizing those who can't afford by charging those who can afford higher than normal, what they are doing is maximizing their profits. What they are doing is discriminating those who can afford to pay more.

If discrimination of 'poor' is wrong/illegal why not discrimination of 'rich'?

Ashes

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:23:00 +0000

A friend of mine asked "If Ashes is to be played biennially, why is the gap between two series not 24 months citing the example July 2005 Ashes in England - Nov 2006 Ashes in Australia - July 2009 Ashes in England"

Ans: Cricket is largely a summer game. England and Australia are in different hemispheres and hence their summer is also different. Because of this, gap between the Ashes series actually alternates between 18 and 30 months.

[Helped by Wikipedia]

One thing in common

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:00:00 +0000

that Obama and I did (BTW, I was told it is illegal to climb the pyramids and is prohibited by the Govt. of Egypt)

Love your BEER

noreply@blogger.com (Surya Sripati) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:59:00 +0000

I would do what the guy in the 1st pic has done but not what the guy in the 2nd pic is doing - use water to clean mud, why waste beer? (I am upset)

Source: Glastonbury Festival, The Big Picture