From Combustion Chambers to Circuit Boards: What driving EVs taught me about embracing change!

Some months ago I penned down some thoughts, a vanguard defence as it were, of why I still drive manual transmission cars. Pretty heartfelt stuff. Pretty irrelevant too since most cars being sold now are automatics. Recently I've gotten my hands on a car with an electric powertrain. Which means no gears, instant torque on tap and no noise. It's been a pretty strange experience. Which meant I had to pen some thoughts on that as well. Me being me, I search for underlying mental models. Not so surprisingly, even when it comes to the prickly topic of ICE vs EV, some are evident.

I feel modern day EVs/HEVs/PHEVs differ fundamentally in their approach to driving experience than traditional ICE cars. How they look at driving itself is different. The former wants to isolate you from the road, the latter wants to connect you to the road. I'm not judging. Neither is good or bad. Just that the approach is fundamentally different. To use the “Amazonian” term, two different mental models.

This shift is perhaps most tangibly felt in the evolution of the gear shifter, which has transitioned from a mechanical instrument of engagement to a digital prompt. In a traditional manual transmission, the gear lever is an extension of the gearbox itself. The "thump" you feel when slotting into gear, the mechanical resistance, the audible click, the vibration traveling up the stick. It is a direct, physical handshake between the driver and the engine’s internals. It confirms that the gear has locked, grounding the driver in the reality of the machine's state. It's raw, it's visceral. As we moved toward the DCT (dual-clutch transmission) and it's more advanced CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) and automatic era, that connection began to soften. The physical urgency of a hard mechanical lock was replaced by a smoother, more deliberate motion, often mediated by cables and electronics. While still mechanical in spirit, the act became less about commanding a cog to engage and more about selecting a state of operation. In fact, for a DCT, you still feel some of the connect. The sensation of the clutch engaging and gear changing is still there, it's just softened and not so visceral. In fact, the DCT developed as a need for the driver to feel some tactile feedback over the very delayed reaction of an AMT (automated manual transmission). CVT takes it further by removing the need for a clutch to be engaged at all. This is reflected in the user input. CVTs don't need a “gear shifter” so the “toggle” which still sometimes resembles a stick, doesn't feel so connected to the whole system. Today, in the EV/HEV paradigm, the "gear shifter" is frequently reduced to a rotary knob, a push-button array, or a stalk mounted on the steering column. The tactile feedback has been abstracted away; the physical sensation of "shifting" is gone, replaced by a satisfying but ultimately cosmetic click. This shift mirrors the broader transition in automotive philosophy: we have moved from manipulating a mechanical linkage to sending a digital signal. The driver is no longer commanding a physical force but rather confirming an intent to the vehicle's computer, prioritizing the clean, buttoned-up composure of the cabin over the visceral, clunky honesty of the machine. Come to the cabin experience. Even inside the cabin, this transition is evident. In cabins for cars as advanced and premium as the Corolla Cross, the ICE impact is evident. It's a mechanical device. The infotainment system is large, but the electronics are subservient to the machine. It's obvious you're sitting in a car with an advanced infotainment system. But it's still obvious it's a car. Cut to EVs/PHEVs coming out of the Chinese ecosystem. It's as if the shackles of restraint are thrown away. There's no pretense at masking the digitization. You step into a digital device not a mechanical one. The screen is front and centre. The steering wheel is smaller. The buttons are plush against the consoles or digitized altogether and blended into the infotainment system. The cabin experience in modern EVs extends this digital-first philosophy beyond just screens and controls. In many ICE vehicles, the interior architecture is defined by the central tunnel, which is a necessary housing for the transmission and exhaust components. This creates a distinct separation, a cocoon for the driver and passengers, reinforcing the idea of a machine built around the drivetrain. In contrast, the absence of these mechanical components in most dedicated EV platforms allows for a "flat floor" architecture. The transmission tunnel disappears, liberating the cabin floor space and turning the interior into an open lounge. This spatial shift from the intimate, cockpit-like feel of a performance ICE car to the expansive, airy interior of an EV is the most immediate physical manifestation of the powertrain's removal from the cabin environment. Furthermore, the sensory landscape inside is fundamentally altered. In an ICE car, the cabin is an acoustic chamber designed to manage the engine’s presence. You hear the idle, the revs, and the thrum of the motor, all of which provide constant, albeit often filtered, feedback on the engine's load. Engineers spend years tuning the sound to be pleasant, sporty, or authoritative. In an EV, that primary sensory anchor is gone. The silence forces a rethink of the entire cabin atmosphere. Without the engine as a backdrop, wind noise, tire roar, and the subtle whir of electronics become the new focus, leading to cabins that feel less like a mechanical workshop and more like a serene, hermetically sealed sanctuary designed for isolation rather than engagement.

Again, I'm not judging. I'm enjoying this new experience these days. It's different. It's not like driving a car at all. I sometimes miss that thrum, that thump, that feeling of connection. When you learn to drive, you learn to listen to the car's engine, the gears engaging, the sound, and the feel. That's what tells you whether you're in the right gear or at the right speed. Driving an EV is entirely different, and it will take time to adjust. It feels like a massive transition in the automobile industry: the old vs. the new. Rather than looking at it as a “loss of soul,” I'm looking at it as a “migration” of it. From the combustion chamber to the circuit board. Guess this automotive example is just a microcosm. We live in an era of constant change. AI, robotics, hyper-automation; they are fundamentally altering the way we live and work. Transformation is the new baseline. Why would something as personal as driving be left behind? Hell, I'm embracing the shift. Adieu to the visceral feeling of driving a car (albeit with nostalgia), hello to the high-tech isolation of a digital transportation device! All aboard, I say!

Am I a Seeder or a Leecher?

Sometimes, small things, incidents or discussions in your daily routine can take on a bigger and more profound dimension. Call them one of those "Aha" moments when you re-think or deep-dive into a lot of the things you'd never really thought about before and you introspect upon your actions to come to a small (or big) epiphany. Such a thing happened (and is still happening of course) to me recently when I was discussing something as mundane as downloading torrents. I was having this discussion with a colleague (as crazy and off the rocker as me) about the technology of peer-to-peer file sharing using the torrent protocol. We were talking download speeds, share ratios and how good a download rate one would get if a particular torrent had a good share ratio.  For the benefit of people who don't use torrents, here's a bit of a primer on the concept being discussed (and for my own convenience, I'm going to use a lot of wiki here)

What is a torrent?A torrent (or a BitTorrent as the original terminology goes) is a protocol for the practice of file sharing that is used to distribute large amounts of data over the internet. BitTorrent is one of the most common protocols for transferring large files, and peer-to-peer networks have been estimated to collectively account for approximately 43% to 70% of all Internet traffic (depending on geographical location) as of February 2009. In November 2004, BitTorrent was responsible for 35% of all Internet traffic. As of February 2013, BitTorrent was responsible for 3.35% of all worldwide bandwidth, more than half of the 6% of total bandwidth dedicated to file sharing. Well, all good so far. But the next question is -

How does it work? To send or receive files the user must have a torrent client; a computer program that implements the BitTorrent protocol. Some popular BitTorrent clients include uTorrent, Xunlei, Transmission, Vuze or the official BitTorrent. A user must also have enough hard disk space to save whatever is being downloaded or uploaded and a working internet connection. A typical user downloads the software (let's say uTorrent), installs it on his hard drive and is then ready to download stuff off the internet. All he or she then has to do is search for what they're downloading, find a torrent, download the torrent file (it's a small file which has a .torrent extension) from a million torrent search engines like torrentz.com, open this torrent file using aforementioned uTorrent and they're good to go! Here's a small infographic that explains the principle behind this -

The colorful dots beneath each computer in the animation represent different parts of the file being shared. By the time a copy to a destination computer of each of those parts completes, a copy to another destination computer of that part (or other parts) is already taking place between users. The tracker (server) provides only a single copy of the file, and all the users clone its parts from one another.

The dynamics of a good download - Now comes the interesting part. People who download a lot of stuff from torrents know that the higher the number of seeders, the faster one can download stuff. If leechers outnumber seeders, the download rate goes down. We know this. We consciously select torrents with a high number of seeders and ignore or are wary of any torrent that has a higher number of leechers. But why is that?

A seed refers to a machine possessing some part of the data. A peer or downloader becomes a seed when it starts uploading the already downloaded content for other peers to download from. This includes any peer possessing 100% of the data. When a downloader starts uploading content, the peer becomes a seed. On the other hand, leechers are just downloading content. Basically, a peer or any client that does not have 100% of the data. The term leech also refers to a peer(s) that has a negative effect on the swarm by having a very poor share ratio, downloading much more than they upload. To put it in a nutshell, peers can either be seeders or leechers. Seeders are good, leechers are bad. 

Now comes the interesting part of our discussion. Both of us agreed that as end-users of this technology we're more leechers than seeders. In this cut-throat world of limited bandwidth where every kilobyte is paid for, we can't afford to seed! Or can we? Then we started generalizing the concept of peer-to-peer sharing - and that's where the first phase of our "epiphany" (for lack of a better word) hit us. Am I a seeder or a leecher? Do I just download stuff or do I give back content to the community when I'm done downloading?

Phase 1 of this epiphany is the digital world. Take the example of something as mundane as the Google Play Store. We all download apps and use them. Before downloading, we check the rating. Anything above 4 is good. We then check user comments and reviews. If most users are satisfied with the app, we download the app and forget about Play Store till we need another app. Classic leecher behaviour. On the other hand, the seeders amongst us use apps, rate them and the best of us review them with helpful comments. That way, the community gets more information about the app. What would happen if Play Store ratings remained blank? What would happen if there were no reviews? We'd have to go by the app developer's word for what a product is and can be. And boy, do we know how reliable that is! Take the example of a million other such communities. The Zomato community, the Maps community, the Goodreads community, the Facebook community, the Google users community and to scale up all these communities; the digital community at large. This world is built upon seeders. Those who share rather than hoard. Those who help rather than leech. And our small epiphany that day was to begin our transformation from being a seeder to a leecher in the digital world. By the end of this month, I plan to review (rate at the very least) each app I use. A more mid-term resolution is to participate more in the communities I'm a part of. Comment on a news article, write more on topics of general interest, edit Wikipedia entries when I know better, suggest feedback on apps I use, edit incorrect maps to suggest improvements and be a more active user. 

And then followed the larger realization of carrying this same principles forward into the physical world. Am I a seeder or am I a leecher? Do I just expect help from others but not help in return? Do I expect civic sense from others but can't exhibit it myself? Do I take or do I share? Do I hoard information just for personal betterment or do I share it freely with others? That is the question. As a human being, am I a seeder or am I a leecher?

Phase 2 is real life. Here the epiphany takes on bigger and more disturbing dimensions. Every resource is finite. Fuel, water, food, land; even knowledge and information. We can either take from the common pool, we can share with the common pool or we can add to the common pool. For every resource in our life, we can either seed or leech. 

Take the example of Turing Pharma that's currently in the news. Daraprim is a standard drug that is prescribed to AIDS patients to tackle a specific parasitic infection. It's been around for 60-odd years and has been priced (as of 2015) at USD 13.50 a tablet. Turing Pharma (a start-up that's been managed by an ex fund manager named Martin Shkreli) acquired the rights to this medicine sometime in September (this month). Overnight, the company jacked up the retail price to USD 750 per tablet! That's a 5455% increase . . overnight! Classic leecher behaviour. It's not enough to earn profits. Turing wants to cash in on a necessity and take advantage of it. Earning profits isn't bad at all. You can earn profits and still help people. That's seeding. But what Turing Pharma has done is the typical behaviour of a leecher. They want to take money from the community (leech) without giving anything back. They want exorbitant profits out of a necessity. Classic leeches. 

Unfortunately, I'm a leecher most of the time. Most of us are. We expect but not give. We want bigger houses for ourselves and our families, we want bigger cars, more money, a better lifestyle for ourselves and for our near and dear ones. Classic leecher behaviour. On the other hand, the seeders amongst us make sure that resources are shared with others, and the best amongst us go out of their way to ensure that inequity is corrected in the distribution of resources in their own spheres of influence. Take the example of a mundane resource like knowledge. What would happen if there were no teachers (the best seeders of all). Where would we be? We would have to learn for ourselves from books and the internet. But if there were no seeders, would books be written? If there were no seeders of knowledge, would there be self-learning tools on the internet? A horrible scenario isn’t it? We can pick a resource at will and find seeders and leechers amongst the users of that resource. Money, land, water, food, knowledge, influence, power . . you name it and you’ll find seeders and leechers for all of these. 

And that brings me to the question that faces each one of us in our lives. The question that should form the basis of all our interactions with other people. The question that we should keep foremost in our mind when deciding on a course of action that has an impact on people around us. The question that shall define our psyche as a culture, as a community, as a nation and as a specie . . . Am I a seeder or a leecher?

God

While I don't usually publish my compositions, I can't resist but sharing this. The most beautiful sunset that I have ever seen was the inspiration for this short poem. While I most assuredly continue to be an atheist (and an outspoken one), the reference to god is the unity one feels with nature. Not god as a benefactor, but as a concept that embodies the deep sense of connection one feels with mother earth. It is this connection that I like to think of as spirituality. 

----

Here. At the junction;

Of sky, water and earth

The sun vows rebirth. 

Here; a symphony

Of waves crashing ashore

Lets my soul explore. 

Here is a marriage;

Of rich color and sound

Where reds and golds abound.

Here; that blessed union

Even the skies applaud

Of me and my god.

The Future is Open

This advert was released in 2003. It opens with the picture of a kid learning from its elders. It learns poetry, data analysis, computing, aeronautics. We hear voices say, "it's just a child"; but the kid continues learning. The child is Linux. The future is open. 

Its 2014. The child has grown up. And how. Linux is currently the backbone for 90% of all supercomputers, 70% of all web servers and 50% of all mobile phones in the world. From applications as diverse as mobile computing to particle physics, Linux has grown. The child is now a youth. 

And the journey has just begun. The fascinating phenomenon that is open source is spreading its reach. We are slowly learning that sharing knowledge is the key to progress. We are slowly learning that collective wisdom is the path to enlightenment. At the same time, we are slowly learning that a quest for improvement is inherent in humanity.

The future is indeed open. 

Cloud Atlas

Cloud Atlas – A Synopsis

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb, we are bound to others. Past and present. And by each crime, and every kindness, we birth our future”

This is what Sonmi-451 says during her broadcast to humanity; revealing to the world the injustice being meted out to “Fabricants” in Neo-Seoul. Thus begins the saga that is Cloud Atlas. The only words to describe this movie are “Grand Vision”. The complexity of the movie ensure that you MUST watch the movie at-least twice to start following this grand vision. I saw this movie in a multiplex called “E-Square” along University Road in Pune. I dropped off my girlfriend home and on the drive back to my own home, the story started dawning on me. Small scenes flashed before my eyes as if giving me glimpses of what the directors wanted to achieve. Half-way home, I stopped. I had to. I turned around, went back to the multiplex and booked myself another show the same day. I saw the movie two more times after that and then I decided to pen this tribute to a movie that had a deep impact on me.

The movie comprises of 6 stories spanning from 1849 to 2349. Each story is interconnected through a series of events. Each story comprises of - 

• A protagonist who carries a birthmark which is the same for all protagonists across all 6 stories. 
• A guiding hand who helps the protagonist in his/her goals for that particular story. 
• An antagonist who is trying to stop the protagonist from achieving aforementioned goals.

Each story follows a similar theme. In some small way, the protagonist has helped (directly or indirectly) the guiding hand. In return for this act of kindness, the guiding hand helps the protagonist achieve his/her goals. Through each story, one document is carried forward to the next story which is a remnant and a symbol of this act of kindness. Across 500 years each act of kindness has a rippling effect ultimately leading to Zachry’s salvation from Earth to another planet with his partner – Meronym. Here’s how it happens –

The sheer audacity of the vision that the directors had tried to encapsulate in approximately 2 hours 50 minutes had me spell-bound; not just the first time or the second time that I saw the movie, but even after seeing it for the third time. The direction is immaculate. Even a slight loophole would have thrown the entire story to the dogs. Even a slight scene not in keeping with the seriousness of the movie would have rendered it laughable and irrelevant. The acting is another gem. Tom Hanks has outdone himself in 6 roles, each as varied as the sun and the moon. From a Brit author to a post-apocalyptic villager the depth and range that he brings to all roles is fascinating. In fact, I realized that the innkeeper in the second story is Tom Hanks when I saw the movie for the third time. Hugo Weaving too has shown similar skill and range. Right from the role of Nurse Noakes to ol’ Georgie; he has displayed histrionic skills which had hitherto gone unnoticed; especially given the wooden nature of his character in the Matrix. Halle Berry too does a good job in all her roles. Especially well done is her portrayal of Loiusa Ray in which she brings believability to the role of a young journalist trying to justify the chip on her shoulder, left there by her famous father; Lester Ray. But what takes the cake in the movie for me is the music. The haunting background score during Sonmi-451’s speech gave me a vision of a better humanity. A humanity that justifies the concept of evolution; that validates the fact that humans are at the top of the evolutionary tree with a superior intellect.

I am a misanthrope by nature. But for a small amount of time the movie showed me a sliver of a silver lining for humanity. As long as art like this is created, there is still hope. Hope that entertainment is not just for the mindless and the moronic but for the intelligent and the discerning. Hope that it is not old-fashioned to be entertained by thought-provoking works of art. Hope that we can still turn the current trend of degeneration and laziness around and uphold values like excellence and effort in all fields (art being the one I am speaking of in this article). But even more than the quality of the movie, what gave me hope was the plot and the story. Hope that though in today’s society evil far outnumbers the good, each small act of kindness MIGHT have that rippling effect. Each small act of kindness MIGHT just be reciprocated in some small way. Towards the end of the movie, Ewing’s father in law berates Ewing for his decision to work for slavery abolishment and asks him, “ . . . . For what? No matter what you do, you will never amount to anything more than a single drop in a limitless ocean”. Ewing’s response underlines very nicely this feeling of hope, “What is an ocean but a multitude of drops”. Let us hope that such works of art are cherished and propogated through generations. Though the movie did not get even a single Oscar nomination, I know that it shall have much more of an impact than most other Oscar winning movies I have seen or shall see. Let us hope that humanity does indeed justify its place at the top of the evolutionary tree. 

The Man from Earth

There are some movies that you just can’t get out of your head. They scratch you right where you itch and you just can't get enough of them. They make you think, they make you throw back your head and marvel at the creativity that fueled the story and the participants. One such movie is “The Man fromEarth”.

The entire movie is set in one living room. There are some shots outside the room on the porch and one shot from the porch overlooking the driveway. Other than that, everything is inside that one living room. And with such a limited setting, this movie draws you in like a Venus fly-trap. You feel like you are part of the group sitting and talking. Let me copy some info on the movie from IMDb to give you some background –

An impromptu goodbye party for Professor John Oldman becomes a mysterious interrogation after the retiring scholar reveals to his colleagues he never ages and has walked the earth for 14,000 years

The list of characters are as follows –

• John Oldman – The ‘Cro-Magnon’.
• Harry - A biologist
• Edith - Art Historian (and a religious person)
• Dan - An anthropologist
• Sandy - A historian
• Will Gruber - A psychiatrist
• Art - An archeologist
• Linda - Art's student

The magic of the movie starts when John reveals to the group that he is a cro-magnon man. The discussion begins from there. The initial reaction is that of laughter. But when the motley crew realize that John isn’t joking, their laughter turns to incredulity, disbelief, envy, wonder, rage and concern (not necessarily in that order).

What is absolutely magical though, is the reaction of each and every person to John’s revelations through the course of the discussion. Since the group is a highly educated one, there is very little crassness about the discussion. Each person brings his or her own specialty to the table. Harry immediately starts wondering how this would be possible from a biological perspective. Art immediately wants to know about tool usage and locations. Small details are shot beautifully. Dan is shown to be the most open to the idea and makes a very important statement – that just as John can’t prove his statement, the rest can’t disprove it. This sets the stage for people to take positions. From memories to geography to timescapes/landscapes the discussion takes interesting turns. John’s responses are so simple and obvious that you wonder about the plausibility.

Soon the discussion turns to religion. On deeper probing, it turns out that John was Jesus! He explains to the group that he learnt a lot from the Buddha and all he wanted to do was teach the west about it. But since he was talking of radical notions, he was persecuted. He then describes each fantasy in the bible as a simple occurrence that was embellished by his followers to create the religion that is Christianity. This immediately offends Edith. This is where the movie really comes into its own. The discussion takes interesting turns from the plausibility of such a simplistic religion to the authenticity of the Bible itself. There is another brief discussion on morality and men which is quite thought provoking too.

I won’t take up too much of your time with details of the actual discussions. But I must say one thing – the movie is a must-watch. Such clean simple acting and taut story! In the confines of one room, the director and writer (and the actors of course) take the viewer through a timeless journey. They force the viewer to rethink his/her worldview and come away breathless. They made me pause the movie and think about what was being said like it was a conversation. They made me wish the movie was real wish I could participate in the actual conversation. They left me with a wonder-struck expression on my face much after the screen went blank. They made me wish I had more intelligent conversations in my life to enrich it further. They made me thank my forefathers for the wealth of knowledge that science has produced and the immense potential that the human brain has; and made me sad that we’ve wasted so much till now in foolish pursuits like religion.

Kudos to all involved in this gem of a movie. A true collectible.

Utopia

Usually, our triad indulges in morning tea sessions which are the breeding ground of odd discussions on a multitude of topics ranging from science and religion, to girls and sex. Today was a bit different though. All started from a very unique feature which one of us had on our laptop – a fingerprint scanner right beside the touchpad. We were suggesting the proud owner of this laptop to utilise it effectively. Unfortunately, along the course of our conversation, we learnt that he didn’t use passwords, let alone an advanced security feature like a fingerprint scanner.

This triggered a rather heated argument on how technology is so useful. The opposition party was of the opinion that technology doesn’t help maintain a system. To take for example, our government and its related arms. The opposition made the assertion that the system was sound; the people who implement it are not. Technology is not going to help at all in such situations.

From here on, I’ll let the debate that happened go into our own memory archives. I’ll branch off into this topic to delve into details and try to find an answer for myself. Let’s begin with the basics:

What is a System?
As defined by Wiki, a system is a set of interacting or interdependent entities, real or abstract, forming an integrated whole.

Wiki also goes on to say that a system has a purpose and an objective. And that all interacting entities work towards that purpose. So far so good. So where does our ‘system’ go wrong? If individual entities use the ‘system’ in an inappropriate manner, do we blame the people or the system? I’ll ask the same questions in a more ‘acceptable’ manner. When people take advantage of our system and use it for their own vested interests, is there any way that can be called decisive and purposeful to ensure that such an occurrence can be minimized?

Two schools of thought emerge from this instance – conscience and science. I’ll take a very rudimentary example to state what I thought was appropriate. Take India, a developed country and a country out of which I intend to make an example. In our motherland, a traffic signal is a pole where a light blinks and a vehicle is supposed to stop till the light turns to an appropriate colour. If I choose to break the law, the chances of me being caught are pretty remote. If I am caught, it is a matter of a couple of hundred rupees slipped to ensure that I am not booked for the crime. In a more developed country, the chances of determining that a crime has happened are very high. This is largely due to the fact that a vast number of cameras are installed along a certain interval of the road and a trespasser is caught and punished appropriately. Moreover, a notification is sent automatically to the offender’s address and a fine extracted in a very similarly effective manner. The perfect system is however, a long way away. I envisage a land where it is impossible to run a traffic light because as soon as you do so, your vehicle gets locked.

The point I am trying to make is that technology can help reduce crime and misuse of the system. And how is this technology developed? By a constant effort to ensure that a system is built which also invests resources to prevent errors rather than fine the offender. To use the above example, the worst system (India) is where an error can be easily made, it is rather difficult to detect that an error has been made and even more difficult to ensure that a penalty or punishment is applied fairly and justly. A better system (say UK or the US of A) is where it is pretty easy to make an error, but the chances of detecting that error are very high and the offender is almost always punished or penalised. The perfect system (one where I will run the show), is where it is almost impossible to commit an error in the first place and where if an error is detected there is a certainty that the offender is punished.

Let’s return to the conscience verses science debate now. If our systems were so robust, there would be no need for a conscience to make a decision; science would have made that decision already. A decision to indulge in corruption, vice, fraud, theft, the works would never be left to a particular individual’s conscience because science would have made that decision already by making all the activities mentioned above impossible to indulge in. Imagine a world, where selection to colleges is based on an automated weighted ranking system rather than quotas, imagine a world where a politician cannot apply for elections (applications will be computerised) if he does not hold a graduates degree. Imagine a world, where promotions are decided by a computer system which evaluates all performance parameters to make the right choice. Imagine a world, where security systems are so robust that thefts are unheard of. Imagine a world, where your PDA keeps you connected 24 hours of the clock to your home and your office to make your location redundant. And above all this, imagine a world where we know that a dedicated team of scientists is constantly trying to improve the system to ensure that it becomes all the more fool-proof.

So the last question, having determined that an error preventing system is better than an error fixing one, is, how do we get there? I honestly believe that the answer is in starting early. It is our responsibility to educate our next generation to the power of thinking along these lines, to the power of rationality, and to the power of the simple question – “Why?” I’ll give you an example here to elucidate my point. My father bought a computer when I was a kid and I used it when he wasn’t. In those early days of Windows 3.11, the file “autoexec.dat” was all important and helps Windows gain control from DOS. Somehow, I managed to delete it. Any other parent would have scolded his child for such an act, called an IT engineer and paid a hundred bucks to get the problem resolved. My father told me that since I had “broken” the computer, I had to fix it myself. I read books, asked people more knowledgeable than myself and found out about how Windows booted up to get to the root of the problem. Such an eventuality is much reduced in later versions of Windows with the concept of protected system files which the layman can’t delete even if he or she tried. My point is that if I hadn’t understood the system, I would never have been able to repair it; let alone improve it.

The last point that I want to make before I become too tedious is that to inculcate these principles and values in all our nextgen, so to speak, it is very important not to expose them to our age-old dogmatic methods and beliefs. It is our responsibility to shield them from superstitions like religion, the supernatural, non-value added traditions, and above all – give them the ability and capacity to recognise the people who uphold these so that they can be avoided.