Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts

Thursday, 3 May 2012

Taxi Fraud - Facts and Interpretations

There was an interesting incident yesterday, combined with today. While narrating I have tried my best to separate facts and my opinions. Let me know your opinions (and facts, if available).

After a trip to Jhansi over the extended weekend, wife and I reached Dadar by train yesterday (Tuesday) around 8 pm. A taxi driver in dull pink shirt asked us as we got down, "Kahaan chalenge?"
"Borivali", I said.
"Thik hai, chaliye, meter se chalenge."
I was mildly surprised at his offer, since he had approached us first. But I had nothing to lose, so I just nodded and went with him.

We dragged the luggage towards his taxi. It didn't have enough space behind since it was CNG-fitted old car. I think it was Maruti 800. We kept some luggage above in the tray, and a bag in the front seat. He seemed reluctant to keep it there, but I insisted. It appeared that another friend of him wanted to sit there. The friend, a sardar in white turban, managed to push the bag a bit and sit there.

Then sardar friend asked if we had two notes of 500 in exchange of a 1000 Rs note. I took the note, drew my wallet, and handed him two notes. He turned them back saying "thousand diye na". I looked at the notes again, and noticed that they were two 100 Rs notes, not 500. I was mildly surprised again. We took those notes back and gave him two 500 notes instead. He walked off.

Later the pink-shirt requested that we take another cab instead as he didn't have enough fuel to reach Borivali. He guided us to another cab and helped move our luggage. The new driver then drove us home from Dadar station.

Halfway to Borivali I noticed that I should have had more 500 Rs notes, and I had more 100 Rs notes than I should have had. Then it struck me that the sardar friend must have exchanged them. I had heard such stories with Bangalore rickshaw-wallas, but it didn't strike me at the instant when the same fraud was happening with me. As a friend had commented earlier - I am too nice.

We had failed to note the registration number of both - the earlier taxi we sat in, and the taxi we eventually took to Borivali. Angry with ourselves, we came home, cursed, ate and slept.

Today (Wednesday) I was staying a bit late in office, but left and reached Mahalaxmi station at around 7.41 pm (since 7.40 Borivali local was already gone, and 7.43 Andheri was next). I like 7.40 Borivali, it goes to platform number 8 at Borivali, from where I can walk home easily. Next Borivali train was 7.50 which goes to PF7. Not so bad, but... meh. So I thought let's go to Dadar and check out if I can find the pink shirt and the white turban again.

I went there. There was a similar looking (though I am not really sure whether he was the same) sardar at the same spot. I roamed around and tried to observe him for five minutes. Eventually he took an old couple to his taxi. Now I was watching him like a mom watching her two year old walk in the park, without the affection of course. Another sardar, with dark blue turban sat in the front seat and engaged in some talk with the old couple. After two minutes the couple came out of taxi, being walked to another one.

Now reasonably sure of the culprit, I confronted the sardar driver (with white turban) and asked him where he was yesterday. He came out of the taxi. I maintained that he had embezzled me of 800 rupees yesterday. He listened curiously to my allegations and denied being there the last day. 3-4 people gathered around the drama. I explained the whole sequence to everyone and accused that he was trying the same trick with the old couple. I ran to the uncle and asked him whether he was asked for change of 1000 rs note. He submitted that he was asked but he didn't have change. Lucky him!

So now back to the driver I asked for my money back and threatened to report to police otherwise. When I was walking away from him, another fellow sardar (third one) and a non-sardar driver tried to console me and asked me about the details.After much exchange of facts and descriptions of the people and taxi involved, they said they knew of the taxi and it belonged to a rival taxi union. Now here comes the twist. They fully reimbursed me my loss, and noted my mobile number to verify the fraud at a later stage of investigation.

I asked them why he had to suffer because of someone else's mischief. One of them said they will recover it from the actual culprit since they know him, and "customer is god". Even after more hesitation in taking money, they insisted that it was not a big thing. I finally walked off with the recovery.

End the facts, start the thoughts.

First, did the fraud actually occur, or was I too suspicious? Cues - taxi driver approaching and then asking to go by meter, reluctance of bag being kept in front seat (pre-planning of fraudster coming and sitting), my estimation of number of notes in my wallet, similar incident heard in case of bangalore rickshaw-wallas, guiding to another taxi to avoid questions later using an excuse of low fuel (he should have known earlier). Or I was downright cynical. I am betting a 95% probability of fraud.

Secondly, did I catch the culprit or ended up victimizing someone else? Frankly I have no idea.

One possibility is that I was mistaken about the identity, it is hard for me to distinguish one sardar with white turban from another. They either knew the real culprit and were in a position to get the money back or just wanted to shut it off since the costs of the matter reaching police may be very high - suspension/fine. Supporting cases - their narrative, a general opinion of sardars on average being truthful and honest, seeming rivalry between taxi unions. Second case is more disturbing since it is equivalent to harrassment.

Another possibility is that these guys or their friends were the real culprits. So to avoid the matter from reaching the police, they kept it amongst themselves. Supporting facts - same episode with elderly couple, readiness to reimburse me, the insistance that it was not a big thing (he actually showed a bunch of 100 and 500 notes, which together would have been approx cash 5k), and "customer is god" jargon.

Put with these facts and interpretations, I would take a 20% bet on them knowing, 20% on them paying me off (the first possibility cases) and 60% bet on the second possibility. Let us see if I get a call for the promised investigation.

Thirdly, should I have taken money from him at that instant, or waited for investigation and then asked for it? Given the above bets of mine, I now think I did the right thing by taking it.

Fourthly, should I have reported the incident to police anyway? I did not put myself into the agony, since there was a natural justice received. I am still not sure how to proceed. What if policeman takes advantage and harrasses them unduly? What if the fraud keeps on happening to others?

Also, why is it so hard to take note of taxi numbers, or why are we so lazy in such basic things?

As Nietzsche's famous quote goes - "There are no facts, but only interpretations." My interpretation is that I am nice, but not too much. Also, management bullshit lingo has gone mainstream.

PS: Finally off from my blog-o-sleep. Only such incident could wake me up. Comments welcome.

Tuesday, 8 December 2009

Hypnotists and us

While at IIMB, I attended a panel discussion on Corporate Governance and Transparency. An interesting takeaway from this discussion (and from Fin.Acc. course) was that the good guys wanting stability have always played a game of catching up over rogue behaviour by bad guys.

As from following story, it turns out that curbing rogue behaviour can end up encouraging rogue behaviour in some other form. Story picked from MarginalRevolutions (pointing out how licensing is ineffective)
Back when I was working for the Indiana General Assembly, one member...became convinced that it was crucially important for the state to address, via statute, the problem of rogue hypnotists traveling the land, preying upon unsuspecting Hoosiers. He wasn’t anti-hypnotist, mind you–he thought the government needed to protect people from unqualified hypnotists...

So the state passed a hypnotist licensing law, complete with the requisite boards, professional standards, forms to fill out, fees to pay, and so on....Then, after the law was enacted, a funny thing started happening: The state began receiving license applications from people who didn’t live in Indiana....It turns out they were doing it so they could advertise in the yellow pages and on bus-stop billboards as “state-licensed.”

This got me thinking. For starter, I am a product of two of the certified brand names - IITKgp and IIMB. So it turns out that the certification from the brands is no indicator of whether I will be a good guy or a bad guy. Ok, leave me aside. I am a nice guy. But that is not the point.

We demand transparency to have accountability. We enforce transparency through rules and laws. We take transparency as (only) means to accountability since moral conscience is not as objective. Iam not saying that all hypnotists are corrupt. But the point I see in this story is transparency alone can only be partially effective at best, and corruptible at worst (refer to use of derivatives in financial crisis and current debate on whether carbon derivatives will be the cause of next bubble). Relatively best economy is where good guys are consistently catching up over bad guys. If there is something else which can drive responsible behaviour, please comment.

I have a parallel theory. Spiritual and religious philosophers had realized this problem (i.e. transparency not guaranteeing responsible behaviour) centuries ago. Hence they themselves acted opaquely to make it easier for others to follow. They painted good economic behaviour as moral behaviour. You may say that their reason for opacity is well-meant. Or maybe it was just laziness.

Tuesday, 3 November 2009

Truth, power and peace

"Only power can protect peace", Says China Air Force Commander (refering to imminent unavoidable militarization of space) and "Only power can protect truth", says RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat (in news on TV, can't find link). Without endorsing the philosophical background of both, let me agree with "power can protect peace/truth" and disagree with the word "only".

Power is an easy solution to protect peace and truth, but a very dangerous one. All the history will show that centralization of power has always led to its abuse more than holding up peace/truth. While Bhagwat acknowledges that truth has a way of staying dormant and that it never dies, my contention is why do you need power in the first place.

An easy argument is that in order to preserve your identity, you would prefer that someone powerful doesn't arm-twist you for his personal interest. All the politics at national and international levels in its most genuine form keeps coming back to "I want to be powerful because I don't want other powerfuls to dictate my life."

The difficult part is to understand that the power is not over others, but over self - one, in preserving myself while being arm-twisted, and two, controlling myself and avoiding arm-twisting others. Even if I suffer or even die in the process, the truth does not, it never will. I end up living through the truth that lives beyond me and everyone else.

In the long term, majority people (and I am sure other animals and plants) want peace and truth. The natural path is of peace and truth. By the logic of evolution, life moves to a path of 'fit'ness to the environment around. The environment is the facts - the truth. Keeping it sustained is peace.

Any suppression of truth only builds a temporary imbalance. Unnaturally tackling the imbalance using power only creates another bigger one somewhere else, until it all collapses and ends up abusing the power. It is like entropy and the second law of thermodynamics (more on it sometime later).

Without contradicting oneself at different points of time, the only long term sustainable strategy of life is truth and power over oneself, thereby implying peace and benevolence (not necesssarily altruism).

Monday, 2 February 2009

Defining love

The age old question: What is love?
  1. Caring for someone
  2. Not expecting something in exchange
  3. Willingness to give anything up (except your core values/beliefs/system)
  4. Forgiveness/Absence of hatred or indifference
I think the last one is generic and yet elegant. Hatred comes from feeling of merciless revenge. Ability or willingness to forgive someone (sometimes after a punishment/revenge) is absence of unforgiving hatred, is love.

In the vaguest of terms, I have no idea how convincing this argument is. I just scribbled out the train of thought. Don't think too much about it, you need not react to this thought immediately. Take your time.

Friday, 7 November 2008

God

What is common between prisoner's dilemma, global financial markets, and law? All of them give good results if (and only if) everyone believes and complies with the rules of the system.

If I forsake other prisoner's trust, I gain in a single game. But in repeated games, my best strategy is to comply voluntarily and punish immediately (more specifically, copy other player's previous move, at times with small probability of forgiving defection). With a rational opponent, the sum of individual benefits in non-compliance is less than that in compliance strategy. A beautiful illustration of this can be found at S Anand's four philosophies arising out of pure mathematical logic. Communication, or any method of co-operation between prisoners helps.

In an investment bank I can earn fat bonuses for a few years using complex financial wizardry. But when it comes in an opaque and unaccountable manner (and same is done by other bankers as well), everyone loses trust in me, my company and overall market. The sum of individual paychecks and bonuses is less than overall loss faced by the market. In the long run, I would earn more if I (and others) believed in not cheating the system by not being transparent and circumventing the laws. Government's measures of restoring co-operation and faith help.

If I believe in god (of any kind), I am less likely to resort to atrocities, having faith in my own future. If I start creating a destructive distrust between different religious beliefs, I create a fundamentalist in someone's mind. Respecting the religious systems - mine and others' helps in cooperation and peace.

I have come to believe that the hope essentially stems from the faith in the system. I am inclined towards being agnostic when it comes to religion. But given the above analogies, I think it is better for me that I believe in a system. If more people believe in a system (not specifically religious system), mutual cooperation can produce more benefit for the society on the whole. I am more or less willing to believe in god, if it helps coperation in the system, and I think it does as shown by researchers. This article in The Economist shows through economic games that belief in group/system helps. (Read the last para for humour.)

One may compare the belief in a system to an economic cartel of producers, in both the systems there is a short-term incentive to defect from given association, but not in long term. However, there is one important difference. In a cartel, the extra value created for producer is coming at the cost of customer, making it a zero sum game effectively. In a game of prisoner's dilemma cooperation creates value but not at someone else's cost.

Few days back one of my friends was trying to proxy in class. If I don't believe in the system of x% compulsory attendance in a class, I am likely to give/arrange for proxies. I hope the above argument is convincing enough for him not to proxy in class :-)

PS: Yesterday we had a fantastic talk by Shaheen Mistry from Teach For India. I am inclined towards volunteering, but not yet sure of it. Let's see.

Friday, 9 May 2008

Would you - III

(Previously: Would you part I and part II)

After the introspection, I find myself inconsistent and irrational. For instance,
  • I would like to donate part of my fortune (II.5). However I am strongly against giving alms to any beggar (I.5).
  • Someone would not give way even when the vehicle behind honks (I.3), but he would connive with colleagues while not accepting bribe himself (II.3).
  • Someone would donate a part of lottery earnings (II.5.1), but she would not accept that extra earnings are also windfall (II.5.4).
  • Someone may hope to elect unpopular candidate (II.9), but may not choose solar energy (II.10) or may not switch foods (II.8). Yet each one of that set is a vote against a convenient choice.
  • I would not require another Rs 100 note (II.4), a beggar will be much better off with it, but I may not pick it up to pass it to him. If I am well off than average person on road, should I let others pick the note lying on road, or should I pick it up and donate it (II.5)?
  • I may want to donate a part of my fortune for social cause. How do I make sure it reaches its intended recipients (II.7)? How do I justify deliberate redistribution of wealth (I.5,6,7,8 II.1,4,5,6,7) in case it reaches wrong recipients?
Won't free markets work better than any deliberate redistribution of wealth? Why should I push my opinion strongly if I believe in free markets, and if I accept that the other person is free to believe otherwise (and both can be correct)?

I don't know. I wish I had answers that didn't prompt more questions. I would like to know whether you have thought on these lines, and if you too are short of answers.

Reasons for this apparent inconsistency, I feel are a combination of the following
  1. The questions described above are not standalone example of single phenomenon. Saving someone, saving a beautiful person, paying from your pocket and not hurting your arch-rival are a package in single question. It will be very difficult to frame such impartial questions and to answer them honestly.
  2. There is inherent limit we set to our deeds. For example - would you kill someone for Rs 100? Rs 1 lac? Rs 100 cr? for survival?
  3. We prioritize among money, sex, relations, ideas, recognition, self-actualization etc differently. Not only we see others' priorities as irrational, we ourselves are guided by different priorities at different situations.
All this effort is not to point inconsistencies in our thinking (there might even not be any and I am no one to do so). It is to make one think about self and his/her choices, to make him/her introspect.

Wednesday, 7 May 2008

Would you - II

Previously: Would you part I)
  1. Would you demand a bribe being a babu?
    • from a poor person who cant pay it?
    • from a rich person who can afford, but is known to be a philanthropist?
    • from a rich person who can afford, and is known to possess lot of black money?

  2. Would you accept bribe even if you don't want to, but because peers pressurize you?
  3. Would you connive with other corrupt people instead, but not accept bribe yourself?

  4. Would you pick up Rs 100 note lying on road
    • when no one is watching?
    • when someone is watching you, but you can act as if it fell from your pocket?
    • when no one is watching but you know that someone is looking for money lost?

  5. Would you donate a part of your fortune
    • if you picked up the above note?
    • if you won a gold coin in packet of chips as part of marketing scheme?
    • if you are earning more than you deserve (in your opinion)?
    • if you are earning more than you require?

  6. Would you live a simple life, reduce your consumption so that you can donate more?
  7. Would you stop donating if you find that your money is being pocketed by uninteded beneficiaries?

  8. Would you switch from non-veg to veg because more people can be fed from veg (or from some food to some less tasty food)?
  9. Would you vote against a popular (set to win) candidate known to be corrupt, just because your vote may matter?
  10. Would you switch to solar power even if it costs more than saving in electricity bill, but saves CO2 emissions?
Next: Part III

Tuesday, 6 May 2008

Would you - I

This is a series of 3 posts. Basically series of questions, of which I myself don't have consistent and fixed answers. In the end what I have is only more questions.

Answer the following questions. All the questions are of the form "Would you ....... (do something)". Be honest to yourself. There are no right or wrong answers. This is not a test, so there are no results, only more questions.

  1. would you skip a signal
    • if the signal just turned red and the next vehicle goes ahead?
    • if the signal just turned red and the next vehicle stops?
    • if the signal just turned red and the next vehicle stops at 3 am?

  2. Would you wait for the red signal timer (at ten) to be zero if person behind you honks continuously?
    • Would you give way to that person?


  3. Would you pick someone else's shoes outside temple if you can't find yours

  4. Would you rush an injured beautiful person, lying on road, to hospital?
    • if s/he is poor and you may need to spend from pocket?
    • if s/he is the person you hate the most?

  5. Would you give a rupee to a beggar who doesnt want to work?
    • if he is handicapped?
    • if he is fully healthy?

  6. Would you stop giving a rupee to healthy beggars because they may start to earn by working?

  7. Would you resist paying to eunuch even facing harassment?
  8. Would you resist paying ransom to an extortionist?

  9. Would you you want to be a terrorist ending up killing someone who believes otherwise?
  10. Would you criticize other religions because their beliefs contradict yours?
  11. Would you you want to be a gangster knowing that you will kill someone just like you?
  12. Would you you want to be a soldier knowing that you will kill someone just like you?
Next: Part II and III.

Thursday, 6 December 2007

Soham

This thought occurred to me a few days back.

Before that, let me give you some background on my beliefs so that it would be easier for you to reach the conclusion I reached.
1) I am an agnostic - It is very difficult for me to have blind faith in existence or non-existence of something.
2) I wonder about consistencies in different religions and philosophies - about the ultimate truth or about realizing that you carry a part of the God-ness in the universe (Paramatma or the equivalent).
3) I believe that taking an initiative (leadership so to say) is an individual decision after your own realization (the defining moment). Leadership cannot be taught or inherited (Leadcap)

Putting all this together, I think one carries a part of the ultimate power (God/Paramatma etc) BECAUSE one can decide to make a change to the world, and see it happen. To me, that is the most profound realization over some time.

In short - "Soham" - is the realization. I am him. I am the one who can change the world for good. And so is everybody else, if they wish.

Tuesday, 2 October 2007

second term

(credit - Naka , modified to suit local context)

So what does term 2 bring? A colourful marketing text book? A 'god level' finance text book? A heavier load of case studies?

What does term 2 promise? A 3-month marathon of what kind? A summer internship selection process, one too many PPTs, reams of application forms, vault guides, case-books, surprise quizzes, Vista, sleepless L²s, and an indirect rat-race till death with 259 others for a place in the sun- these all and some more.

Rats! I have to begin somewhere to fit myself to companies.


So what does life after IIM bring? Professional nostalgia for the alma mater? 'God level' finances in your bank account?

What does life after IIM promise? Decades long marathon of what kind? A job with huge load of binding responsibilities & expectations, one too many formal PPTs, losing sleep over deadlines and another indirect rat-race with thousands of others for proving the worth of the brands - these and more.

Rats! I have to begin somewhere, to seek the purpose of this life.


Though I keep rationalizing by saying "This too shall pass away", whatever comes next, will also pass away. So will life, universe and everything.....

Sigh....

That is 42.

Saturday, 10 February 2007

ततः किम्

Here is post on this blog after a long time, since most of my time is being spent in my job, music-practices and (maybe wasted in) preparing for IIM interviews. So the habit of blogging on every weekend has now taken a backseat, and doesn't seem like driving for some time to come.

Here are the reasons one should appear for IIM interviews -
  1. Irreproducible percentile
  2. IIMs calling (and a promise of bright future therefore made)

Reasons it might not make any difference
  1. Same old story of "घर से फ़ि, फ़ि से घर, बॉस का डर, बीवी का डर"
  2. It does not answer the question "ततः िम्"*
  3. The world might not exist in a livable form after only a few years due to either/combination of
  • US foreign policy and a feared chain reaction
  • Chinese space policy and another chain reaction
  • Standstills on Hosur Road in Bangalore and continuous addition of running vehicles
  • Increasing global warming and increase in natural violent activities thereof
  • Decreasing biodiversity - on land, in air and in water
  • Aliens getting frustrated of increasing stupidity on earth

And here are the reasons I would think twice before going to an IIM
  1. Need to get a haircut. And keep doing that till hair stops growing.
  2. Need to revise dept fundae, HR questions, general awareness and what not
  3. Need to learn to be a hypocrite, especially in the interviews
  4. Need to move on - Hate trying to find amicable people every now and then, especially regarding one's musical activities.
  5. Not earn financially for following two years and still face hardships.
  6. Face a stiffer and faster job-life after that.
  7. Foresee an early retirement out of exhaution, frustration and long suppression of one's non-professional penchants.
  8. If you win a rat-race, you win, but you are still a rat.

Given a choice, I would go to IIMs if haircut was not a concern, but now I am confused.
So right now I am in a moral dilemma, similar to the person around whom a typical GD revolves - "What should s/he do now?"

* "ततः िम्" means "what after that?"

p.s. there has been an update on this post to add reasons for indifference, so don't get confused if you read the post differently now.

Wednesday, 25 January 2006

Everything happens for a reason

Events in past couple of weeks have firmly reinstated my belief in the above rationale.

first, I could not score well in cat 2005 despite huge expectations of my friends and myself. Then I saw random people getting placed in good companies in the campus interviews. Sometimes I strongly believed that I (or some other fellow) was far better candidates for that job profile. Many times I almost denied the existence of God. I wondered why this was happening to me.

Then came the so much dreaded friday the 13th.... after tiring rounds of tests and interviews - there were total of 5 tests, 2 interviews and a group activity in that day (and another interview was to be conducted, but got postponed to next day) I was always unsure whether I would get through to next round. But I kept on qualifying and eventually got a job worth Rs 7.0L p.a. in British Telecom, Banglore which suited my aptitude very well. What more could I have asked for?

Just in one day all the frustration was gone... no worry that I could not get through in CAT, no dilemma whether to go for further studies or to persue a job - though this brought a careless attitude for quite a time. (hell yeah... why not?)

There should have been something serendipitious in Varadpande family's horroscope during those days. on 12'th my elder brother got through in CA finals - that too 210+190 (if you don't know how lucky is that - CA final has 2 groups I & II. Each group has 4 papers of 100 marks each. To pass the group one requires to score 40+ in each paper and 50% aggregate. If you appear for both groups together, you can offset your scores in both groups i.e. you need 50% aggregate in the 8 papers with 40+ in each.)

The next morning, on 13'th, I was just hoping that luck would strike me that day. My wingwate, Rahul Mundra adviced me to wear the "lucky" shirt and tie on that day (this tie has a 100% record - P&G, Schlums and then BT). And yes, throughout the day I had the gut-feeling - "I will make it today." I am not superstitious, but the coincidence literally rocked me.

Then came the tiring practices of ETMS and wildfire. For almost a week I slept for 3-4 hours daily (mostly in the day), missed almost all the classes. I also missed Shankar Mahadevan's show in SF while picking up bass line in erotomania. Last night practice of wildfire came out very well and we were almost sure of getting through to finals. We even chose our songlist such that better songs would be played in the finals. Then the disasters struck (very aptly described in Apro's blog). It was so disappointing, knowing that it will be difficult to play with the same team again. I just hope it would not be entirely impossible.

We did fair enough in ETMS production. The so anticipated win in Sargam had us consoled little bit. I will miss the society very much. Because of these 2 music teams, my stay in kgp got fast forward in the last 2 years.

After the wildfire finals, the disappointment rather turned into an experience - we rarely had a chance to perform on such a big stage and whenever we could have, something or other popped up in the way. (b t w Faith, Hobos and Skinny Ally were just awesome.)

In retrospcet, everything happened for a reason - I could not get a job till then, because such a better job was waiting. I did not qualify through CAT, maybe I will have another go after 2 years of this job-ex, and maybe that would be more appropriate. Wildfire prelims were disastrous - it taught us many valuable things like care to be taken to set the patches on guitar processor, need of efficient sound check, adjusting to the accoustics of a place and most importantly, accepting a defeat and aspiring for a new horizon.

Call it serendipity, call it superstition, call it faith, call it rationalisation or call it absurdity, the series of events definitely brought a more mature self out of me. For I have realized something abouth the greyness of life.... nothing is perfect nor is anything perfectly imperfect. Being rational whatver I do will always keep me satisfied, regardless of what the fate throws to me.

Espescially after Skinny ally's performance, I am very much attracted to Jazz. I hope I get along with Mohit, Apro, Mukul and Vinod again and form a band after we pass out from here. I wish...