Language, Personality and Google

"Dude, pass me the book" or "Could you please give me that book?". Which of the two phrases do you prefer, and which one would make you awkward? To me, both of them would be awkward if uttered by the wrong person, which would convey the wrong intent. If my co-worker (who I'm not friendly with) uses the first phrase, that would signal a lack of respect. If a friend uses the second one, that would signal aloofness.

However, this analysis of intent is often wrong. Both, my friend & the co-worker might be preoccupied with something else. In all honesty, I don't care about which phrase is used, they might not care either, but there are people who do. Your friend circle is a small group of people who don't misplace your intent, and then later start harboring good feelings towards you. As mentioned in my earlier blog post, difference in societal stratification and economic status plays a big role in perception of malcontent in the language. If a billionaire friend (Bill Gates is not my friend... yet) were to suggest that we get a chartered plane to some remote island, I'd have to decline and be sad about it. If someone from my circle suggested it, we'd start talking numbers and try to come up with a plan to either make it happen, or laugh at the idea as a joke.

Language and the words we utter, the grammar, plays a big role in how we are perceived by other human beings. The rule of the game is to use the language according to the setting and the person/people you want to impress or at the very least, not alienate. There is a reason Steve Jobs was the face of Apple Inc., even though Steve Woz designed and developed the computers. Enthusiasm is contagious, it is a positive life force that gets everyone excited around you. Conveying enthusiasm with words is an art form. Engineers(like me) are typically succinct and to the point, not a great quality to have in a social setup. However, being Spock like logical and terse, is an occupational hazard. This leads to the perception of mal-intent by others who do not communicate in a similar way (which is why most friend circles have people with one dominant occupation)

Enter, Google Mail's Smart Reply. Smart Reply in it's current form and the planned future upgrades (http://www.kurzweilai.net/ray-kurzweil-reveals-plans-for-linguistically-fluent-google-software) is going to change the way we (or rather I) communicate.

This is how most of my gmail group threads look like:
Alice> Hey Guys, We were thinking of doing a potluck this Saturday. Let me know if you guys are in.
Bob> Sure.
Carol> +2
Dave> +2, might be a bit late

With Smart Reply, here's what it'd look like:
Alice> Hey Guys, We were thinking of doing a potluck this Saturday. Let me know if you guys are in.
Bob> That sounds awesome. I'm in.
Carol> Sure thing. Do you want me to pick something up on the way.
Dave> Sounds good. We'll be there. Might be a bit late.

If you were the fifth person (Eve), which meetup would you go to? The people are the same, the event is the same, the intent is the same. Google's Smart Reply just made Bob, Carol and Dave sound a lot more affable and enthusiastic. In the absence of body language, written words are more likely to be misconstrued. Google's smart reply takes the intent of Alice/Bob/Dave, which is just "yes", and dresses it up in a way that is palatable to a majority of people. It changes a conversation with neutral tone to a positive one. Pretty soon one would have to work to convey apathy and antipathy in their conversation, and not have it introduced due to lack of time for the device in use (replying to a mail on phone).

One could also argue that as conversations get more positive, the net morale of the human race might improve (or at least amongst the people using Gmail). I don't think I should extrapolate this any further and guess the emergent properties or this cultural change. Small apps and features have changed human interactions in unpredictable ways (Twitter/Facebook have very well toppled/made governments, Uber/Lyft have caused a dip in Car ownerships). Let's hope for the best.

A new era in technology..

If you have tapped the pulse of the tech industry, you would have smelled the winds of change. This is an exciting time to be in the bay area.. rarely does anything makes me come out of my blogging slumber (blame it on twitter). 

Let me list a few facts to start with and then we'll extrapolate the trends (just google them to verify):

• Intel bought Infineon's wireless division.
• Newer Android smartphones sport 720p hdmi ports, 1GHz processor, 20GB memory (more or less), 512MB memory, some have a separate graphics processor. A phone with a dual core processor will be a reality before the end of this year.
• Google is pushing forward on web apps, use case of these is still not obvious.. they don't really believe that someone will open a browser and then click on a button rather that type the web address. 
• Google is working with Verizon and Motorola to push out new android phones.
• Google worked with Verizon to support net neutrality *excluding* wireless networks.
• IP TV/Hulu is becoming more and more popular.

Clearly all the big wigs are in on this (whatever this is).. everyone except Microsoft that is. Google has positioned itself as the next Microsoft.. not by coming up with a new OS and trying to displace Windows from the computers, but by just making Windows irrelevant. Android is now what Windows was 20 years ago.. By making Android freely available to the hardware vendors as the kitchen sink mobile OS that can run on any hardware (by totally leeching off Linux, but that's not the point here), Google has made sure that Android will go farther than what WinMo or iOS can ever dream of.

Most of you reading this blog will agree that the phones we have now are more powerful than the first computers we owned (even if that was just 10-12 years ago).. ofcourse we don't need a 1GHz processor to make phone calls or play small games.. where is this all going?

I believe that smartPhones ( or lets call them just phones because single purpose phones might soon be in museums) are set to displace our computers and even our cable connection. Why would we need a cable connection if we can view all the content online? and if we can view the online content on TV?! Why would we need an internet connection if our phones are connected via 4G(in a not too distant future). What if when connected our phones to our television sets and desktop environment were to magically appears?!

Let me describe a device that has been cooking in my head (not too radical). This device is an android phone.. just a run off the mill evo or droid. As soon as you connect it to your TV (via some micro usb dock), you desktop automagically appears.. running android or some variant of chromeOS. You can run android apps or some apps that are not suited on a cellphone like google Docs, photoshop etc. I'm guessing Google will be releasing a web app store just for this platform. Open the verizon Vcast app or some app from one of the network houses to watch streaming television (maybe via some sort of "tv" mode).. Throw in a bluetooth keyboard/mouse if you wanna use it like a regular computer. Once 4G becomes prevalent, this sort of device can easily be as pervasive as a toaster.

Google has positioned itself well.. It owns the whole content delivery mechanism and if Google and Verizon's recent proposal is accepted, it's own content will get preferential treatment. In one fell swoop it would have monopolized multiple markets.

Intel knows this very well.. it also knows that majority of its revenue comes from desktop market, so it acquired Infineon to get itself in the mobile game. It went a step further and acquired McAfee. If android's market penetration reaches the same level as that of MS Windows.. it will unfortunately suffer the same fate.. which is.. become the main target for malware/viruses etc. Acquiring McAfee was just a logical step to ensure that it has a safe ride when android has its "Windows 95/Windows Me" phase :) .. plus since more and more of our data is moving onto the cloud, cloud security is still a new and emerging market.


Well.. all you can do now is grab some popcorn and enjoy the ride.. some day you'll be telling your kid about computers that just sat on a desk or that needed a separate bag.

So.. what's next??

Unless you live under a rock.. you know about the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Here are the events that happened prior to that:

• November 26: Mumbai terrorist attacks kill over 100, 287 injured
• October 30: Explosions kill at least 64 in north-eastern Assam
• September 30: Blasts in western India kill at least seven
• September 27: Bomb blasts kill one in Delhi
• September 13: Five bomb blasts kill 18 in Delhi
• July 26: At least 22 small bombs kill 49 in Ahmedabad
• July 25: Seven bombs go off in Bangalore killing two people
• May 13: Seven bomb hit markets and crowded streets in Jaipur killing 63

(Source: http://www.andhranews.net/India/2008/November/27-India-eight-bomb-attacks-76148.asp)

Do you see a pattern? Apart from destabilizing Kashmir, terrorists have attacked the other three corners of India (North:Kashmir, East: Assam, South:Bangalore, West:Mumbai and Center:Delhi). What the hell is the Indian Intelligence Service up to? But I won't rant on the state of Indian Union and the politicians, or the eminent lack of crisis management. I want to ask why.. why on earth did the terrorists do it? Was there something they needed? When they held hostages at Taj in Mumbai, they didn't ask for money.. they didn't mention Kashmir, they didn't mention religion.. then what might they possibly want??

Now, am not an intelligence expert or a conspiracy theorists, but I do have a brain which constantly needs to connect the dots. Can't anyone see that these are not terrorist "attacks".. this is an act of war. No.. not between nations, but between India and the "terrorist" (if that's what they choose to call themselves). These are well known guerrilla tacts to overcome a bigger, more sophisticated army. The kind of war which we never have seen before. Of course.. they won't challenge us in a "real" battle. The art of war is to play according to your strengths, not weakness, which is exactly what they are doing.

Let me take off my Indian hat, and look at the situation from a perspective of a third person. (you get good at it if you play AOE/Caesar et al.). Lets call the terrorists X. Now we have to work the facts and have a strategy to understand what they do and why they do it.

Lets have some facts:

• America is to increase its military presence in Afganistan.
• India doesn't hate anyone. It has a neutral attitude, ergo it doesn't hate the west, so it is not on the good books of the terrorists.. I mean X.
• India and Pakistan have a very sensitive border.
• India and Pakistan are densely populated and diverse, plus being from the same chunk of the continent, its hard to differentiate Indians, Pakistanis and Xs from each another.
• X is loosing its stronghold in mid-east and Afganistan and is being forced into the Indian subcontinent.
• India is doing absolutely nothing to resist this.. and seems unaware of this incursion.
• Pakistan appears to be doing something, but is overwhelmed by religious extremism.. for every forward step it takes, it seems to go back two steps.
• The whole world is suffering an economic depression and doesn't want to be bothered.
• High profile outfits remain untouched while their human-bombs, the pawns, continue to wreak havoc on the whole world, continue to get caught, continue to die. Just imagine a chess game in which you have unlimited pawns to gambit..
  
• India, Pakistan and US are the most visible players in this game, and they should each verify the authenticity and innocence of the other two countries and ascertain if they are being double crossed.

Feasible actions that can be taken (if and only if none of the major players are helping X out):

• Put India and Pakistan on a state of war with X and declare emergency in both the countries. Dispense any logistical bureaucratic crap, that has so often hampered progress in both the countries, till the issue is resolved.
• Let India and Pakistan co-ordinate attacks with USA. Let USA push the X overlords from the west periphery while India and Pakistan do it from the east end.
• Put the whole world on vigil in case one of the X overlords try to hole up in one of the other countries. (I wish it would be as easy as sending a text message to get some action taken)

Well.. it's all easier said than done. I hope that atleast a common enemy brings India and Pakistan closer to resolve their personal conflicts.

Changing times...

1998:
me: Hey am getting a new computer.. 8.1 G hard disk, 64 MB ram for about $1000
friend: What!! are you gonna live inside it?? Why would you need that much storage??

2002:
me: Hey am getting a new computer.. P4, 40 G hard disk, 512 MB RAM for about $1000
friend: neat man.. NFS will rock on that.

2005:
me: Hey dude... I got a new laptop.. P4, 80 G HDD, 1 GB RAM for $1000
friend: I guess that should be enough for a student.

2008:
me: Hey I got a laptop for my uncle: Dual core Pentium centrino 2 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 160 GB 7200 RPM with collision sensors for about $1000
friend: Good deal... will that be enough though?

Based on above conversations, my corollary to moore's law: Human expectation and dependence on technology is directly proportional to the rate of growth of technology.

And on a totally unrelated note.. I have already decided on my next desktop that I will be purchasing next year: a dual quad core Intel Xeon with atleast 4G of RAM. This is the sweetest machine at my workplace and should be inexpensive this time next year... but based on my proposed corollary above, my friend might declare me a retard.

Problem 1: IP

I have started a small series about the problems I think about regularly and have found no answers yet. Here's the first installment:

For all the non-ComSci folks out there, IP= intellectual property. Its the buzzword used by everyone these days to protect their innovation.

Intellectual Property is the basis of patents, licenses, copyrights and everything guarding unauthorized use of knowledge. If I be audacious enough to proclaim that knowledge should not be hoarded and should be made freely available to all, the age old argument of "reward for innovation" crops up.. nobody can innovate with an empty stomach and it would definitely be bAAAAd to have some smart ass marketing guy steal your years of research and create a million dollar startup out of thin air.

The situation is worse than it seems to be. This became visible to me when I left the academia. Without the academia's massive library at my disposal I need to have ACM and IEEE subscription to get a decent article on any advanced topic. If all the work done by the academia is such a closely guarded secret, how can they even complain about the growing divide between the industry and itself? I refuse to pay $20 for a single paper!! I have been meaning to check the latest in digital search trees and all google, ask.com and yahoo search engines leads me to is some totally shallow ppt or to citeseer, which inturn redirects me again to ACM/IEEE.... Arrrghh

Let me stop picking on academia for a second and focus on the rest of the world. Piracy (of ideas, content) exists when supply does not match the demand. Apple is cribbing about fake iPhones in China, had they launched it there(one of the fastest growing economies), they wouldn't have lost the market . Software piracy falls in the same category.. its very rampant in India, being an Indian I can tell that no one would pay $300 for a genuine copy of Windows on $400 machine that they assembled at home. Most of the sales guy tend to concentrate on only the local markets.. bad strategy in my opinion.

We live in a predominantly closed society. If everything was open, we would have a better chance of surviving the future... Just like Maemo and Ubuntu were spawned off from Debian, some new and better OSes would have spawned from Windows(XP?) and OSx. We would have better algorithms and the knowledge distribution would have been uniform rather than spiked throughout the world. This is not to say that you wont have cheap knockoffs of a Macbook pro.. but atleast it will give Apple/MS an incentive to innovate.. it will be a tougher competition, not lack of it.

Apple: fishy fishy...

Earlier this month Apple released Safari for Windows. Why this sudden generosity from Apple? Why did Apple suddenly jump into the browser market.. I mean sure Apple had its browser on the market for a long time but it was more of a passive player. Even the most ardent apple fanboys used firefox on Macs. The great Stevo himself confessed that he used firefox, so why put all the time and effort porting the browser to a different platform??

At the WWDC Steve Jobs mentioned that they would like to have a sizable market share in the browser market. In fact he predicts that IE7 and Safari would be the only two browsers left in the market. Call me a conspiracy theorist.. but I think thats a load of crap. Knowing Mr Jobs, I don't think he had the browser market on his mind. If you have a Windows installation, give safari a shot and you'll know what am talking about.

Safari on Windows is definitely faster than Firefox and IE. I am a huge Firefox fan but the superkewl interface of Safari makes me wanna boot into Windows. Although the font rendering is not crisp, just the speed and Apple's zen like interface designing approach makes browsing a totally different experience. To top it all, apple went through all the trouble of retaining the tiny special effects like rollover in their browser. I have a big appetite for effects and beryl on Ubuntu takes care of that pretty well but you gotta give Apple the credit for putting those effects where its least intrusive and least expected.

90%(maybe more) of the Windows crowd do not have access to a Mac and have never heard of Linux. By providing a windows app, Apple is using Microsoft to advertise its technology. These simple effects are enough to blow the socks off any casual Windows user. Most computer users just want an eye candy pc for browsing or word processing... Apple computers do that and look good too. An app as simple as a browser showcases Apple's technology and their capability. Its a perfect setup to woo Windows users. In my opinion Apple's not eying the browser market.. but the OS market. The timing couldn't be better.. MS is trying to change its product line and challenge Google. We are witnessing a clash of titans, Google, MS and Apple. The evil geniuses of Bill Gates and Jobs, and the combined minds of thousands of geniuses employed by Google makes the outcome totally unpredictable.

I guess we can grab our bag of popcorns and watch the show.