Schipol

"Strong protest lodged with Dutch envoy"
http://www.hindu.com/2006/08/26/stories/2006082607600100.htm

This is an example of the Indian Govt going a little too far diplomatically when the arguments are not in the favor of the passengers. I don't know the exact details of what transpired on the Northwest flight that prompted the actions on behalf of the crew and it is possible that the crew went a little bit overboard in handling the situation. But the alternative in them not taking any action at "suspicious" behaviour has possibly worse consequences.

Also, I fully expect crews of commercial flights to be extra cautious even somewhat skittish due to the happenings over the past month. And the passengers should expect this too and behave accordingly.

Getting up from the seat when the seatbelt sign is still on and using cell phones is behavior that has been overlooked in the past; that doesn't mean it is acceptable.

Further, interpreting actions towards 12 of roughly 150 passengers of which I expect the majority to be Indians, as racial profiling is hardly justifiable.

PhD

In an earlier post I expressed the interest in someday pursuing a PhD program. I have spent much thought from the time of my visit to IISc over the past some years in thinking about it and I am happy to say that over the past few months things have clarified enough for me that though I have not made a decision one way or the other , I feel I understand it very clearly - an understanding I wish I had earlier.

A large percentage of my friends have either earned a PhD or are in the process of earning such a degree and conversations with them have not only had the effect of keeping the thought process going (I have compared their inquizitive questions about my plans in this regard to the throwing of a pebble into a calm lake disrupting the peace on the surface) but also I have learned a lot about the program itself and the research career beyond it from their experiences.

Here are a few points for an undergraduate engineering student in India considering joining a PhD program who would like to know whether it is the right step.

1. You are in awe of technology. You are good in math and analytical thinking.

2. You have a very basic understanding of the sub-fields within your field and how they interact with each other.

[Taking the example of Computer Science, the sub-fields would be Algos, Automata Theory, Progg Languages, Architecture, OS, DBMS and Networks. By the end of the first year of graduate study, you should be qualified to take the Advanced GRE or the Qualifying exam. To reach the level, there are standard textbooks - one each for each of the sub-field that if you read it well enough, you should be good to go. Studying 10 textbooks in three years when you can use the same knowledge for your undergraduate studies as well is not a big deal at all.]

3. Take at least one rudimentary research project and one implementation style project before and see it through completion to demonstrate to yourself that you can keep a commitment.

4. Read trade magazines to understand what problems technology companies encounter all the time. You might not understand much, but knowing even a little helps immensely.

[Example: "Energy consumption is a big challenge in microprocessors especially those built for mobile applications." is a rough industry-wide problem.]

With the above four qualifications, an admission to a PhD program and enthusiasm to work hard, you are very well positioned to earn a PhD in 4 to 5 years.

Now, the thousand dollar question -

Will you have a satisfying career in research after you have earned your PhD? One that is much more satisfying than a career in engineering or applied science implementing solutions?

Not necessarily. You might, you might not. A PhD is no guarantee of that. In fact, many students in PhD programs look for a different area of research once they graduate and many do not have very satisfying careers, but many also do. Many find a niche and learn to love their work later on in their careers. Many end up doing administrative or engineering jobs that could be done with other educational qualifications. Going into a PhD program, there is a 50-50 chance of it going either way just like any other degree.

A couple of things about research careers:

+ An overhwhelming majority of research is incremental and takes the field forward (possibly for a very narrow application) by a very small step. Some steps might lead nowhere. You can become an Einstein, but it is highly unlikely for most mortals.

+ Many (including me) find it incredibly rewarding to solve challenging and different problems every day although the problems are neither unsolved nor uncommon. And I don't have a PhD.

+ Sure, the lifestyle afforded by research labs and university campuses is attractive in some ways but that should not be the guiding factor for this decision.

+ Research needs a source of funding. In fact money drives research and funding sources can be unreliable, so you have to open yourself to the reality that what you are working on today which you like might not be something you have to work on tomorrow due to the shift in funding direction and the different work might not be to your liking. Research directions can be temperamental, although less so than industry directions. New entrants to non-research careers expect this going in, whereas in research they don't - at least not as much. You should have the foresight to delve into an area that will be "hot" for a few decades at least. Either that or you should be willing to change to a different field or different type of work.

+ Even after a short while in research, it might become difficult for one to listen to a manager about the direction that their research should take.

+ Networking with people in your own field is more important for a person in a research career than any other, though people in this career, I believe, are not prepared well enough for this aspect of it. A lot of money gets spread around among "collaborators" and this term actually refers to a group of people who scratch each other's backs.

The important thing is not as much whether you are right for such a career, it is whether such a career is right for you.

The comparison I'd like to make is that although you might love to hear a certain kind of music and know all the great performers and songs and styles and tunes and even be a skilled musician yourself, it is a whole different ball game when it comes to turning professional and playing to an audience and being successful at that. You have to know yourself well enough to make the judgement which group you would like to be.

Of course, you might decide to join a PhD program for the short-term financial advantages and leave it with a Masters degree for greener pastures. If you decide to do this, I turn my head away and say "Hmmmfff..."

New York New York

There have been several odes to the city of New York in the form of articles, short stories, documentaries and feature films and I recently (re-)read one by John Steinbeck. I had always thought of Steinbeck as "West Coast" writer probably because of his more famous work "Grapes of Wrath" and his association with Salinas, CA, that is until I received as a gift a much thumbed through copy of a selection of his writings by Penguin called "America and Americans and Selected Nonfiction" which includes a piece called "Making of a New Yorker". This piece is masterful in its composition and feels more like a short-story than anything else and much like any of Steinbeck's works is more an ode to people, in this case New Yorkers rather than to the city itself.

I bring up Steinbeck because reading his work has prompted me to keep writing in this blog at a time when the few blogs I read seem to be afflicted by some sort of drought. As possibly Greenspan or Bernanke might comment, we can say for sure that the "frothiness" around blogs has dissipated.

Back to the city of New York, the one salient feature of New York among all the world's cities is its clear geographical definition. New York city although for administrive purposes consists of the five burroughs - Manhattan, Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island; it is the island of Manhattan that is usually thought of as New York City.

Thus, it is easier to think of and comment on a city that is geographically confined. In contrast is the city of Bombay back home in India which has spread so far and wide that it is unclear where Bombay ends and the smaller city of Pune starts; Pune officially being a good 100 miles away.
Manhattan and as a result New York City is far smaller than most people who have not been to the city might assume. One can walk the length and the breadth of Manhattan in one day. To make such a statement of any other city is not possible precisely because it is not clear in those cases what the length and breadth of the city are.

When I have seen the city on numerous occasions from the top of the Empire State Building, I try to imagine how it would look from the air and I think it would look like a narrow long area of a Porcupine or a Hedgehog's hide with irregular quills and with a smaller rectangular area in the middle where there are no quills. The quills being the skyscrapers and the rectangular patch being Central Park.

The tall buildings create a tunnel effect and so the cool winds that stream through Manhattan can be equally refreshing in summer as vicious during the winter. My amazement at the city is much the same as a kid's awe at discovering an ant hill. So many people, so much activity, so much prosperity contrasted with poverty and homelessness inside this what effectively turns out to be a tight cuboidal space. Vendors, cultures, visitors, limousines, ads, buildings, people and more people - many in suits, many in the coolest fashion trends, many with cameras, cats and dogs, filth and garbage, sewers and puffs of steam arising from the sewer grates with the shudder and clamour of subway trains claterring so close beneath one's feet, buildings and concrete, smokers and cops and and the sounds of sirens eerily far off yet so close. So much orderly chaos and chaotic order. Such ease of navigation among the grid like streets if only you knew where you were going. A sudden turn and you're in an alley fresh prey for a mugging. Another turn and you're gawking up at marble lions guarding the majestic Public Library. A few blocks down are Van Goghs and Rembrandts scattered around. Down the steps of the museum and you are in a park filled with sunbathers and people playing frisbee.

At some times, it feels like a crowded room where everyone is going about their own business and ignoring everone else. Whether it is the intensity of the work, the neccessity of living in a city or a studied indifference practiced so often as a defense mechanism that it becomes part of oneself - I might never know since I never got to live or work in the city itself.

When I was in grad school on Long Island, I made it a point to take the train into Manhattan once almost every month or two and it was a refreshing change. Now that I'm in the midwest, I try to do the same with Chicago and while Chicago is a wonderful city by its own right and does some in creating the sensation, it doesn't come close to New York in the way I get the sense of adrenaline and the heart thumping as I enter the city. Every time I went into Manhattan, I liked to stop for a few minutes in St.Patrick's cathedral on 5th Ave just because it provided such a marked quite from the outside. Chicago downtown feels like the inside of St. Patrick's cathedral on Fifth Avenue.