Viswanathan K's Thoughts

Last December, the chaos and flight disruptions created by IndiGo were enormous and terrible. The penalty imposed on them was a paltry ₹22 crore (no prizes for guessing what must have transpired behind the scenes).   The root cause identified by the DGCA (Directorate General for Civil Aviation) though did make sense: “an overriding focus on maximising utilisation of crew, aircraft, and network resources”. Such an (over)emphasis then “significantly reduced roster buffer margins” and “adversely impacted operational resilience”.   But, while the above reason is valid, it wasn’t complete. IndiGo had clearly assumed the new regulations (on rest hours between flights) would not be enforced by the government and therefore had not prepared to meet them (by reducing flights or hiring more pilots/crew). And why did they make that assumption? Because they held a 65% market share, and they assumed that if they couldn’t/wouldn’t meet the new regulations, well, surely the governmen...

Tomas Pueyo wrote this excellent post on how metals shaped human civilization. A “mix of history, geography, physics, geology, and chemistry”, as he calls it. The first 3 metals used by humans were… he points to the Periodic Table!   Gold, silver and copper. Why those three? Because, to recap chemistry, same column (group) = similar chemical properties. The similar property of relevance here is that they can all be found in “native” form, i.e., pure form. ~~   When rocks erode, the heavier and inert gold gets left behind, which is why we found gold first. Gold was valuable because it is rare, malleable, doesn’t oxidize, found in nuggets, and yes, shiny. All those characteristics meant it became a store of value. But it was too heavy, too malleable, so it was of no use to make tools.   Silver is more common than gold. But it tarnishes (it reacts with other things). Which is why it is harder to find in native form. Again, not of much practical use.   ...

In an earlier blog , we saw how a coin tester was responsible for the “discovery” of Ashoka. The story we know today goes like this. Conquers Kalinga in a brutal war. Experiences extreme remorse. Converts to Buddhism. Spends the rest of his rule in positive acts of governance.   But is that what really happened? Devansh Malik explores the question. One , Ashoka lived 2,300 years ago and there are very few sources of info. Two , those famous inscriptions on rocks and pillars, well, Ashoka got them done, so can we be sure that they weren’t just “ancient press releases - public messages carefully crafted to shape his image”? Three , Buddhist descriptions of him were written centuries later, so how accurate were they?   To make matters worse, the different sources don’t always agree. In fact, they often flat out contradict each other! One thing they do agree on is that as a prince, Ashoka was very capable at administration and at military strategy. But he wasn’t the favou...

It was a British coin tester who found out that the emperor Ashoka even existed! His name was James Princep, writes Devansh Malik. Before 1837, sure, there were references to Ashoka in some Buddhist texts, but were they historical fact? Or just stories? “There was no historical proof, no documented history, nothing.”   Princep was born to rich parents and seemingly destined to be an architect in Britain. Then, at age 20, a severe eye infection struck damaging his eyes so badly that architecture was no longer an option. His father used his wealth and connections to get James the job of testing coins in Calcutta. It was at the Calcutta mint that Princep met Horace Wilson, a Sanskrit scholar who had translated the Rig Veda. “Through Wilson, James developed a deep fascination with Indian history and culture.”   When he moved to the mint in Varanasi, Princep began to notice something about the older coins of India. First came the punch-marked coins (any odd shape, but ...

K N Hari Kumar, a former editor of Deccan Herald wrote 3 articles on how/why India has manged to stay a democracy. Take all our neighbours, he says – Nepal’s Gen Z triggered overthrow of the government, Bangladesh ousting Sheikh Hasina, Pakistan in eternal army rule mode, the meltdown of the Sri Lankan government, and Myanmar always under military rule – and you see why the question of the stability of Indian democracy arises.   He then turns to the US. The very man who refused to accept an electoral defeat, initiated riots, came back to become President again 4 years later. So much for a “centuries-old, stable democracy”. And everything the man is doing now disproves the idea that “the advanced Western nations were immune to the kind of instability and radical transformations”.   Sure, he acknowledges, there has been a lot of “democratic backsliding” in India in recent times – Ram Mandir, lynchings of Muslims, CAA act, the purge of “urban Naxals”, removing Article 37...

Why did humans develop hierarchies? Why couldn’t everyone stay equal to everyone else in the group? Brian Klass looks into the commonly accepted theories on the topic in his book, Corruptible .   The first theory is the one most of us are familiar with. Once humans discovered agriculture, they began to have surpluses. By definition, some people had more surplus than others – inequality had gotten started. Further, agricultural surpluses in turn required storage systems, accounting systems (to maintain records of who had how much excess), and protection systems (to protect the surplus) all of which led to specialists in different roles – hierarchies had begun. Klass calls this the “peas theory” (pun intended) – it all began with agriculture.   The other theory is more nuanced. Assume two groups of hunter-gatherers. One lived in the Amazon basin where food was plentiful in all directions. If someone forced you off your land, no big deal – you just moved somewhere else an...