Recently, I had a technical problem with NPR’s website. I emailed them and today - after three days - the product manager of that department personally got back to me and said he is working on fixing it. I have not had a remotely similar experience with Apple, Google and a few other companies, and I am not even paying them (directly) for their services.
“We know all the so-called aid workers,” they read. “We promise to kill them, wherever they are.”
I don’t know how to say this but please read this.
Rest in peace dear Khosro Shakibai.
If I meet a guy from Atlantis at a party, I’d be like “Dude, what happened?”
Is there such a thing as fate? Or do we need to believe in god to believe in fate? Let’s define fate such that we don’t. I’ll call something fate when some scenario comes out of the blue where you did not expect it and something just blows up in your face and you just have to suck it up and take it in stride. One of those things recently happened in my life and I have been asking myself “what does it mean and why does it happen?” Tonight, I think I found the answer and I want to share it with you. I think the answer is a lesson in humility. I feel much more humble since then and it has made me a better person.
There’s a poem that translates to “The times are constantly at odds with the free.” This is from the Raze No album. This had baffled me for three months. Until tonight, when I found out that it means that life will teach a lot of lessons of humility to the free ones.
LAWS OF BACKGAMMON
1931
PREPARED BY THE BACKGAMMON and
CARDS COMMITTEE of the
RACQUET AND TENNIS CLUB
NEW YORK CITY
APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING CLUBS:
The Brook
Calumet
Cavendish
Hope (Prov.)
Knickerbocker
Knickerbocker Whist
The Leash
The Links Pacific Union (San Fran.)
Philadelphia (Phila.)
Piping Rock
Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh)
Racquet (Chicago)
Racquet (Phila.)
Racquet (St. Louis)
Racquet and Tennis Rittenhouse (Phila.)
St. Nicholas
Tennis and Racquet (Boston)
Tuxedo
Union
University
Whist
I used to believe that my biggest asset was my sanity, that is my ability to reason, my ability to apply logics to problems. I have recently started to think that sanity only takes me so far, but what could take me even further is perhaps insanity, the ability to transcend reason, to make a leap of faith, to go where the logic would not take you. Perhaps Occam’s razor need not be true in all cases. Perhaps there is more than meets the eye.
In the world of start-ups, everybody talks about exit strategies. The venture capitalists provides the seed money, the business grows, breaks even and after about six years, venture capitalists want to cash out of their investment. Usually there are two options: initial public offering (going public in the stock market) or getting acquired by a bigger company.
I was thinking about the analogy between a start-up company and a person’s life. It seemed to me that planning for one’s death is like planing for a start-up’s exit. The very relevant question here is whether we believe in life after death or not, because the answer to this question can dramatically change one’s plans for one’s death. Is it possible to have an exit strategy that is independent of the answer to this question? Is it possible to prepare oneself for one’s death such that at the moment of death - assuming that there is such a moment, as in American Beauty - one can look back at their life and say “I lived a good life and I’m ready for my death”? Is it possible to live one’s life such that one could never be caught off-guard by death? To my limited understanding, it seems like it is possible. I hope I can live my life, such that whenever death visits me and I had a moment of reflection, I could say that magic phrase.
I just had this idea. Somebody should design a cart for the homeless.
Could drugs be used ethically and responsibly? Could drugs be used without harming oneself or others?
My answer to these questions is, yes. First let’s define drugs. By drugs I mean any behavior or substance that artificially makes you feel good. By artificial, I mean that good feeling is not intrinsic and it is a direct result of that drug. This is a broad definition. This includes a variety of drinks, substances, rituals, religious activities, meditation and so on. You may not agree with me for putting alcohol and meditation in the same category, but I see a similarity here and I would like to talk about what all these things have in common: the fact that they make you feel good artificially and temporarily. I believe if one is careful enough not to harm oneself or others, they should be free to use whatever drugs they want. How is this possible? There are several conditions that need to be met for this to be true:
1. The origin of the substance has be more or less ethical. Sales of cocaine, finances a lot of other crimes such as organized prostitution and human trafficking. That makes cocaine an unethical drug.
2. It should not harm oneself or others. By this token regular use of cigarettes due to all its health risks is unethical. Getting drunk and becoming abusive with others is also reprehensible.
3. Should not interfere with a healthy lifestyle. This rules out alcoholism and heroine addiction and using drugs that would lead one to miss appointments and deadlines.
4. Its side-effects should not outweigh its advantages. By this token getting extremely drunk is not right.
5. It should not put oneself in a position of doing wrong. By this one drunk dialing your exes could be wrong.
As you can see, I don’t consider addiction by itself unethical. A healthy daily dose of meditation or prayer could be very beneficial.
If you can add to the above list, or disagree with me please chime in.
