Gluten cannot be digested by human stomach

Disclaimer: I am no doctor. This is not dietary advice. This is not a treatment schedule.

    Modern foods are made to appease and fool the human processing system. So, instead of using a tried and tested eating habits which has trickled down over humanities existence, the food shelves of these days are a far cry from the shelves of the yester years. The human digestive system is being fooled as the brain is being fooled. It is what the facebooks and googles are doing for the brain. Give more of what it wants. Every human brain is unique. 

     There will be preferences. But, then for the overall development of the human being there should be variety. Instead, these companies feed on the nature's most important rule, the rule of least resistance. Feed the least resistance path. So, what do you gain. Well, you get the attention of the brain. If you get the attention of the brain, you have the individual hook, line and sinker. The foods are going the same way. It is well understood that opioids are addicting more people than the addiction which the governments across the world are worried of. Just because opioids come in nice packages, with good printing and excellent colors, dont mean that they are doing any good. But designing food to do the same as these is criminal. Food is quintessential part of the life of a living being.

    It was shocking for me to know that we are not growing wheat as we used to in the good old days. ie, we have tampered with the "natural" variety of wheat which our previous generations have eaten. Instead we have edited out and added information in genome sequence which will yield wheat having more of the properties multinational business houses want. Not what humans want. It is very difficult to fathom the profit making prospects of these big businesses, or for that matter smaller businesses. By harming the health of the consumer, when profits are made, then it is a vicious cycle. The thing is these decisions are not made by one single business.

    The treatment business and the problem origination businesses are hand in hand. The treatment business can always come out against the food producing businesses highlighting the issues with such vociferous volume that the businesses will have to rethink their strategies. Alas, that is not happening. Both are running their own businesses. Both know they are feeding of each other and both in turn feed of the individuals. The most shocking truth about wheat is the gluten. The wheat originally grown by our past generations did not have this element in large quantities as of now. The genetic blue print of wheat is changed and edited by multinationals to include more gluten in the produce, in turn making "soft" "chewy" bread. Why did they do so? Why didnt the consumers worry about questioning this practice. Well, one answer is in the farmer producing it. He is now not worried about the storage of it. The multinationals have found huge markets for all his produce. They are resistant to insects. They can be stored for a longer time. 

    So, if there are any issues arising out of this gene editing, the treatment industry will take care of it and will survive. This methodology of doing business is the same as how cancer cells do business. These cells dont produce energy the "correct" and "efficient" way. They do it the wrong way. They suck in lot of inputs and produce very little amount of energy. This makes them sick in turn. As an extension many will die. But these dead cells stay there. They disrupt already wrongly made up blood cells. There it is you have the perfect example of a tumor. So, what does the present medical profession do about it? Well, they dont know. They keep trying all sorts of modern gimmickry. They try to go the way, the genetically modified food is produced. They think that they can start manipulating the cancer cells to start working like healthy cells by trying to edit the genetic material of cells which make up the cancer cells.

But, the human genome is not a joke. People dont know the repercussion of editing one portion of the gene and replacing it with a different chemical formula. The same applies to gene editing of wheat. Gene editing might have given us wheat which has more gluten. But, we dont know how this is going to affect in the "synergistic" point of view of the entire gene. Now, getting back to gluten, it is clear that the human stomach cannot digest gluten. So, it is passed on to the intestines. There starts the complications. If the complications are so clear, why should we continue eating it. I dont see any reason whatsoever. This should be a prime reason to reduce this protein. Let the chapatis crumble. Let the bread be a little hard. Let the bread by a different color than white. 

 

     The gluten free group is a bigger fad. They take up the same wheat produced with the maximum possible gluten in them and chemically try to remove the gluten in it. Now, nobody is telling exactly what all nutrients get removed by carrying out this process of removal of gluten. Like we exactly dont  know the total effects of editing the wheat gene to produce more gluton, we exactly dont know what this de-glutenising process results in. So, suit yourself

    What is this obsession of human beings with white. The obsession is that white is associated with purity. With this, you can pass the most impure substance on earth, until it is white. Why are we not eating food as we were eating just 20 - 30 years ago. It is not late. The human race has to make a decision. All farmers dont farm with good intentions in their mind. Majority of the farmers have gotten used to just putting the seeds and seeing them grow. They just want the yield. It is like earth is a machine. No, sir, it is not. So, how do we make the farmers understand this. Well, start supporting farmers who are doing the right thing. Farmers are very susceptible to success stories. Make a success story of one farmer with ethical practices, you will see that others will follow.

    I for one dont think that stopping eating wheat, is going to do any major issues with the human body. Consult your dietician and spell out your wish and definitely there will be a positive answer. What about ones who cannot afford a dietician. What about people who cannot afford anything other than wheat. This is a very tricky situation. The problem here is the person cannot afford the treatment for the issues in his food. He will consume what he can afford, not what is healthier for him. So, whom do you turn in these situations. God, or the government which does the job of God on its behalf. Ensure that the food is produced in the most traditional manner. Ensure that research happens to store food in its most pristine form instead of converting it to some non-nonsensical chemical formula. It is not that the human should be modified to eat this modified food. Ensure that the food is at its pristine level. Forget about making it look pleasing. Whoever wants to have such food, can create a demand and many producers will answer. Let us keep the poor people away from this since they dont have options. As for people with options, it is left to them to choose what is better for them.

Save democracy with "Participative democracy"

    Many models have been designed to ensure that the elected representatives of the people in democracy represent the complete mix of the people they represent. Yes, that sentence was a mouthful. But, so is the word democracy just, by itself. Of late I have been intrigue by how the residents of huge apartments are running their own country. The apartment is a perfect example of a democratic crowd. The crowd can be extended to include secular based on its geographic location. It has all the problems of a small country. In a country like India, few of the apartment can house approx 150 families. That is a definitely a small district in few other countries. These apartments are managed by a participative democratic system which existed in ancient Greece. Which was the point of contention between Socrates and the state of Greece. This case of Socrates v/s the state of Greece is one of the most interesting court cases. Oh, I am getting carried away. This is the result of not planning your writing. However, let us continue with apartments.

    A lottery system is utilized to select representatives to head activities related to the upkeep and maintaining the day to day activities of the apartment. Nobody can escape from this participative democratic system of governing the apartment. For once, everybody is equal. For once all the citizens are to participate and help the elected representative in carrying out its duties. So, though, you are not the elected leader for a specific task, if you are supposed to help, then you have to. You are participating as a leader as well as a supporter. You are always "in" the daily polity of the apartment. You are participating in one way or the other. For once, it is everybodys damn responsibility to ensure the smooth functioning of the apartment. I am not going to go through the nitty/gritty of running an apartment. It is no less than running a small country.

    What I am suggesting is the implementation of this methodology in grass root governing in a democratic system. In a democratic system, the non participants are huge. Nearly 99.99% of the population. This makes this major population, alien to the working of the governing mechanism. This makes the governing mechanism take total undue advantage of the major population. This is the other sharp edge of the democratic system. This makes the majority population not participate in the day to day running of the country. So we have three classes in this majority. One which likes the present governors, one which hates it, one which doesnt care. There is another group which is part of the corruption or tries to take advantage of this system, though they know that what they do is hurting the majority of the population. These are pretty complicated. These mostly end up in the governing seat. So, the vicious circle repeats.

    It is time to repair democracy, instead of looking at other models. There are no other forms of governance which have the word freedom mentioned as  much as in a democratic system. The majority rule is a recent development. In the ancient greek times when, democracy was at its peak, "participative"  was the buzzword and citizens not participating were labelled "useless". Everybody has to know how to govern. Everybody knows how to govern. Everybody governs themselves. The apartments are running this model, even without knowing they are doing so. The term of the representatives is the same, approx, an year. However, there is one problem. Poor people were not involved, However, now we can include everybody. The grass level can be divided into smaller divisions particularly based on the population. This ensures that the representatives are not overwhelmed. This will be the case for the first few. Once everybody understands the concept, it will become common place. The representatives must have lived in that environment for a certain number of years, so that they represent the population better and understand the job at hand.

    There will always be people who are waiting for their turn. Everybody believes they will better the previous fellow. The present fellow does things, which he believes nobody can better. The representative has to be careful in all his decisions, since he will land up as a commoner after his term is over.

    This should work. I am excited. Whenever we had discussions regarding alternate forms of democracy among friends, the discussions shifted to other forms, except democracy. People go back in time to compare the good old times. When it comes to governing, I dont know why the present crop forgot the fantastic "participative" democracy from ancient Greece. So, you are asking me to develop it further. I will tell you, this is not a theoretical concept that is being put forth. This is a time tested and an in execution methodology. It has just to be implemented. So, what are we waiting for?

    The most important of all in any governance system is the ownership of the responsibilities. This has been so rare in the present majority system, wherein the elected candidate does not consider the vast minority whom he believes have not voted for him. But, in this case, the ownership comes from within, without anybody coercing. Though somebody is not in that chair, all the others who are not in that chair know that one day or the other they will land up in that chair. They will be compassionate with the present representative, which they hope to receive when they sit in that chair. This synergy between the leader and the team being led is so strong and fantastic, you have to be a part of that system to understand it. In the present majority setup, there is a certain dis-connect between the elected individual and the electors, which happens once in 5 years. With the present advancement in technology, 5 years is a very long time. Leadership change should happen every year, at the least. This keeps the leadership above the grassroots on their toes. 

    Every change in the grassroots brings with it, an aura of the elected individual, who has been seeing all things happening around him. Since he is a part of the receipience of the older system, he knows what things were done right and what were done wrong. He will first attack and try to resolve what he believes are being done wrong. It is like, the system is in sync with the rapid changes happening in the technological, political and the economical setup. With the present connectivity, the grassroots are connected, in, real time. It is very easy to borrow the "best practices" in one area and try to implement it in full or modify it to meet the particular place.  and a sense of commitment. 

  One more important aspect is the information on the candidate. In these closed circles, the particular individual will be know because of his past deeds. Or a new person can go about familiarizing the electorate since the size of the group is not as large as it is today. This makes the electorate more knowledgeable about the candidate. They will remember his every move. The duration is short and the electorate can correct their mistake at the earliest. Consider the situation now. Majority of the voters dont know the candidate. They vote for the political party. Now, once the candidate wins, he might land up in the opposite party. Now, the majority voted for the party to which the individual belonged. Now, the candidate has defected. He will now have to act according to the whims of the new party. Now, the voters have to wait for the next election to correct their mistake. By that time, people would have forgotten the past and would associate the candidate with the latest party he has joined. This is horse shit.

    The concept of making a quick buck and running away dont work because his family is a part of the system and all wrong decisions are going to affect him all the same. The election system should borrow from Estonia, since the electoral territory is now very small. This is perfect for both villages and cities. In this inter-connected world, it is difficult for anybody to be aloof. In fact, the aim of the system is not leave anybody aloof. It is to try and make everybody responsible for themselves and their surrounding environment. This is unlike a system, wherein decisions are taken in huge buildings and taken by the majority wins, not one with the representatives who really represent the grassroots. 

    Enough of everybody talking politics and staying away from it, thinking that it is a dirty job and has to be done by dirty people. It is like, everybody is thinking that the other fellow will do it. This is to bring everybody on the execution roll. Everybody is responsible. If something is wrong, a person who stays quite should face as much problem as he is vociferous about it. Yes, we cant wait for "the" person who knows how to do the "job". There is nobody who is "the" person to do the job. And Yes, Socrates, you are wrong.
 

The revolution, can start.

The Hateful Eight :- "The" movie experience

     Film making is an art. Watching more so. But, watching as an art is the result of watching what is on offer. Is watching an art? How so? Well, It is the immersion of one's conscience for a certain amount of time in the film maker's conscience. Film makers cannot put constraints on the audience to come with a certain frame of mind. The film should mold the watchers mind from inception of the movie and kick start that exact frame of mind. Many film makers do this by adapting a style of film making. So, when an audience who knows the style of making, there is already a certain frame of mind ready for the make to start with. It is like the make has created a small world which the audience is already familiar with. This makes the job of the maker much simpler. This allows the maker to take certain things as known. This allows the audience who knows a little about the universe to jump right in. So, should a maker continue to weaver stories in that universe? Maybe, until the universe is the same, the pacing, the style stays, the maker can still make plenty of stories in that universe or a time frame in that universe. He can expand the universe and travel in time in that universe as per the story he wants to tell.

    Well, what do I know about film making, nothing. Watching, yes, a little bit. Let me be clear as to my kind of films. Let me start with what kind I am not. I dont like the Tree of life. I liked the Thin Red line. There you have it. Now, you know where we are headed. Would I have liked the maker of the Thin red line to continue in the same line. No, what if he had made the thin red line and then stayed in that universe. I might have loved it. But, what if the maker only that much. He didnt want to prod that universe further. No mistake of his. But, I did not like the Tree of life, which wanted to encompass "everything", which is impossible. There is not theory of everything, not yet. Now, what I am telling is I did not like the Tree of life. I did not tell that it is bad. Let us not get into good and bad.

    I like film makers who dont make this distinction between good and bad. The film maker should tell a story. The characters can make their own reasons for all their actions. But, the film maker should stay clear of offering judgement regarding good and bad. This makes for an independent view for the viewer. Re-Watching The Hateful eight after watching it when it was released, is the reason this post is created. The characters, the music score, the premise, the execution transformed me to wyoming, again. This is a grand success for a film maker. Transforming the viewer, again, to the same place is a major win. I take a bow to the maker, Quentin Tarantino. Here is a maker who has been consistent in his style, but still making stories in varied setups. 

    But did I like Once upon a time in Hollywood, No, Please. I want to forget that I did watch this movie. It is not in the Tarantino universe, which he has built painstakingly and has been digested by the viewers, effortlessly. So should the viewers complain when shown a complex plot. Should we put on our Science and Mathematics cap before we watch a movie. Hell, No. That will not be a movie, but a glorified documentary. It is better to watch a documentary which explains the concepts well, than an attempt by the filmmaker to take a part of the concept and pour plenty of fiction to cook the movie up. How about shooting a movie linearly and then editing the film non-linearly. It can be entertaining with the awe factor. But, still the non-linearity should be simple enough so that you still have the audience with you.

    The Hateful eight has all the ingredients to be played out as a play, live, in a theater. I would love to watch one, if anybody tried it. Maybe Quentin might try it after he finishes the films which he wants to make. The lines are well written. The non-linearity comes in the dialogues. Very interesting. The viewer is frequently taken back in time on occassions and also made to extrapolate in time just by the characters talking. All the characters talk their linog, their thoughts, their limitations. No character is God like. No character is an all-know. Every characters stays that very character. This give the viewer a consistent interface. This does not cheat the viewer. The heightening of tension, the hallmark of Quentin's writings is intact. 

    The drama is heightened by the music score. There are very rare occasions, wherein the music score elevates the movie experience. Satya, a Hindi movie, comes to the mind. The camera work is not jarring. The film is laid back in its execution, but makes the audience blood to race, an unusual combination. The pace of the movie and the blood rate surge have been equal, on very rare times, like watching the Matrix. The artists are at home. Their attire, their accent, is consistent. Every character has the mix of survival and ego, going together, while situationally, only one of them comes on top. It is a text book movie for film-making. It is a text book movie, for movie watchers. With movie makers creating huge structures for making one, this movie gives a complex to all those elaborate setups.

    The Hateful eight is one more example of the cohesiveness which can be achieved when the story creator and the executor are the same. There is that tight grip on characters and what they speak, how they re-act. All these things cannot be written by the writer and fully transferred to the director. Such well written characters can only be justified if the director also is the same person. The hateful eight is a movie, which made me think, "what a time to be alive".

    Once upon a time in Hollywood is the movie made by the same director, but, which has been passed on to this dimension of the universe from a parallel one, which does not have the tag line "what a time to be alive"

Why are people obsessed or made to obsess about culture

Of all the chains around the present humans, no chain is stronger than the chain of culture. Culture has grown to such a level that it "is" the way of life. It is the "benchmark" with which you compare all your actions and thoughts. Benchmarking your actions is ... but benchmarking your thoughts which in turn would result in your actions is the dangerous thing. The narrowing of ones thoughts by culture is stifling. 

     The freedom from the chains of culture can be best expressed by a person who lives his country and settles in another country. The initial freedom experienced by the individual, cannot be expressed. He love it, he relishes it, he compares it. he sees that the culture in that country is so different. He is forced to compare it. If the foreign culture even give a little leeway to the existing tight cultural chains around the individual, the individual feels euphoria. What if there is a place with pure anarchy and the individual lands up in this planet. What would be the result on the individual is an interesting case study, and we have to wait until we accidentally step into such a planet. So until then ......... 

     Why should an individual and the society behave in set ways for any action from any constituent of the society? Why should all the actions and activities be so strictly established. Why does culture change across groups of people in one single society? Why is there no common culture among all the humans? Why do individuals who go from an older culture be "relieved" when he lands in a country with a recent culture or a country in which the culture has not been made "dogmatic"? The feeling when an individual transforms to a culture on the other way round, all that relief will reverse to stifling. We have seen the evolution of right and wrong over the years. We have seen human sacrifice justified and the entire society feeling that is right. We have seen that slavery was also justified and in certain cultures it was found to be right. Right and wrong have also evolved, but there is no right and wrong freely available for an individual. Should the individual not have his own morals, his ethics, his behaviors?

    Cultures are giving birth to robots. But the thing is there are certain individuals who have a feel that this is happening but somehow have a different explanation for following the culture. This group of individuals are more dangerous. Because these people have reasons for why the culture is so, and that reason is never upgraded. But continues to get more "dogmatic". If there are people who want to question, they will be termed impure and alienated. Once this is done the idea and the questions which arose in that individual dies with him. So, we have to wait several generations for another individual to come up with the same sets of questions and may be solutions. 

    The change in culture over the years have been brought about by bright individuals who had the grit and the knowledge of changing the perception of the entire race, while many more tried their best to hold on to the classic culture. However, the present days with un-paralleled information flow we have barriers which have not been seen over the entire human past, that is the number who want status quo has increased and have become vociferous because people can now read and write. This reading and writing ability has been turned on its heads by powerful people and have started to use this ability in controlling people. 

    Culture is the bottom line of all the changes over the history of a particular group. However, the changes, ideas have been weighted with the more weighty ones overruling the lessor weighed ideas, though they may be better. The same strategy is being used now. The more weighted idea is weighed by the reach it has. The more the reach the more the weight. So, do i suggest that all individuals with similar ideals be grouped together. I would say yes here, but we are talking about the most intelligent animal on the planet. 

    The individual is not the same tomorrow. Tomorrow his thought process might change something in his belief dictionary which does not warrant his stay with the present group. This does not stop any other individual with the thought process of this group join this as on date. However, ......... Well, you are spoiling the joy of anarchy. No, I am stressing anarchy in its purest form. You cannot tell that anarchy has to follow rules. If you follow that you will end up with another America. If we follow pure anarchy will we end up as our pre-historic society? Is that good? Is that the best? Will that save this planet from extinction? 

 

My rants on the sars-cov-2 pandemic

Disclaimer: The words below are "my" rants. I am not a Doctor, chemist or a  Biologist. I am an Engineer. So, there may be mistakes. Do your homework like I have done mine. I dont vouch for authenticity of the matter in the links provided.

     Plenty has been written about the birth and spread of Covid 19. Plenty more than any other pandemic the earth has ever seen. There are already books on the origins and the spread of the virus. They also speak of the spineless governments of the world. The pandemic has had its share of false news and conspiracy theories ranging from 

1. The virus was already existing 

2. It is the same as the normal cold virus 

3. Pharma companies along with the governments have blown it out of proportion

4. Pharma companies wanted to move the people away from usual way of administering medicines to RNA/DNA medicines 

5. Some other businessmen wanted to reduce the population of the world 

6. Pharma industry was not getting enough grants from the governments of the world to shift medicines to RNA/DNA based and ....... 

https://www.livescience.com/common-cold-coronaviruses-t-cells-covid-19-immunity.html 

    The above link tries to explain why the sars-cov-2 virus does not impact certain people. It also talks about our immune system and how it gets trained by one variant of a similar virus and can produce the necessary actions required to nullify the effects of the virus. So, what about a human who has not contacted any related virus. Well, as per the link, that particular person is at risk. If that is so, Americans normally had a vaccine every year for the influenza virus and yet they are one of the most affected countries in terms of percentage of death and infections. First thing is the influenza and the covid virus are of a different class. The antibodies developed for the influenza virus will not(may not) help in fighting the covid 19 variant. 

https://www.britannica.com/story/what-is-the-difference-between-influenza-and-covid-19u 

There, lets us stop the discussion regarding the similarities between them. What about the class of corona virus, were they already existing? Yes. As per the link below 

https://www.healthline.com/health/coronavirus-types

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2021/01/covid-19-will-likely-be-with-us-forever-heres-how-well-live-with-it/

     There have been two well known and documented class of "corona" virus. When we talk about corona virus, we are talking about a class of virus, with a spiked protein cover around the viral payload. These two instances have been contained by isolation and quarantine. These were not spread by asymptomatic humans. If we already know about the corona virus and we contained the previous two, how did we end up in a global pandemic. 

    This can be attributed to the carelessness of the governments of the world. The governments governed by the corporations decided that the aviation industry cannot be stopped. They decided that, the best way to cover this up is to remain silent. May be in many other cases, it might have worked. However, it did not work out in this case. When all the nationalist/jingoist mindsets have been satisfied, the news was allowed into the open. 

    By now SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes covid 19 was taken everywhere across the globe. The main attribute for this wide spread is that the asymptomatic people were the major spreaders. This aspect of this variant, is what makes it stand apart in the corona series. The damage by the viral load are very similar and attack the respiratory system, the most, with other aspects being discovered as we move ahead in time. If the virus spread was isolated at origin, like the previous two cases, we could have stopped the spread and this blog post wouldn't have existed. 

    Time is a *^%^h. This would be one more instance of a corona virus isolated in a particular geographic place and affect a few 100 people. It is very difficult to gauge the importance of an individual in this business minded planet. It is like this planet has been outsourced and business has to run at any cost, even if the last human is erased. It is like the next batch of humans are toiling somewhere else in a similar manner and all the business will shift to the next planet after the end of the last human on this planet. 

    The lockdowns, or worldwide isolation and quarantine appeared like an eye wash and half hearted, last resort plan. People were moving and the virus was already taken to all the countries across the globe. This isolation and quarantine works only if applied on a scale taken up on the previous known variants of the corona virus. Lockdowns are "face savers" for the politicians and the businessmen. There is no scientific/economical backing for a global lockdown except a political/business perspective. 

    Now, let us come to the treatment. I dont know why the medical companies gave up on treatment and focused only on a vaccine. I dont know the logic/economical aspect of this decision and we dont have a treatment as of date. But, vaccines have been cleared and have been administered to lakhs based on studies on thousands in a very short time. Majority of the vaccines are like proof of concept and highly advanced science of gene editing and precise chemistry of RNA. Reading about the RNA/DNA vaccines, is like reading a fantasy book. It reads like science fiction. If we can do this much for producing a vaccine, how difficult is to use the same technology to do something bad. Dont get me started by denying this. We are not far away, wherein, DNA/RNA jabs with blueprints of all the known viruses will be injected into the human body. It is like an attack dictionary on Missile warning systems. The approach for these vaccines is to generate antibodies for the spike protein. Now, this approach can fail once there is a change in this, in a drastic way. Yes the virus can mutate in many ways. What if, the spike mutates?

    The medical industry took this route by telling that the traditional way of making a vaccine by killing the virus and then injecting this into the human body is time consuming. This is totally %#^*^t. We already have vaccines made from this method and also cleared for use. The major advantage with this approach is we are giving a hint to our immune system about nearly all the properties of this virus. So, this would generate antibodies for many of the chemical combinations present in the virus. 

    The RNA/DNA methodology of making medicines is a great method for big pharma for getting a tight grip on the medicines. This will nearly kill the generics industry. Two recently cleared DNA/RNA vaccines make a statement that the DNA/RNA in the human cells are not touched. Can a normal human, know whether this is true? If DNA/RNA is the methodology of administering medicines, then, governments need to wakeup and ensure that enough competition is fostered and all the developments are available in public domain. It is not wrong, even if the governments start investing in state owned research facilities and upgrade them to the same capabilities as big pharma. In this way we can ensure that there is a lot of testing and availability of these advances are available to the common man. 

    The most interesting take from this pandemic is the polarization of people across the world. The main reason is that big pharma is not good at explaining the cause and the effect. It is like explaining light to the last animal in evolution which had not felt light around it. Our belief systems, our blind beliefs, our limited education, our limited brain usage, our limitation as a human being, has showcased beautifully. It is very interesting to listen to all the conclusions and the reason for these conclusions regarding the pandemic. No two individuals in the same home share the same idea about the pandemic. Many people are convinced that Europeans and Americans are dying of Covid 19 because their immune system is not as strong as their Asian counterpart. This class is forgetting that it originated in Asia and the highest number of deaths happened in Asia. This would have made Russel peters so angry that he would have to change the portion of his standup comedy where he talks about an instance of him landing at Mumbai Airport for the first time and welcomed with smell of shit. 

    We have politicians feeling for the dead, at the least. No corporation has stopped working or repented for any death of their workers. The politicians feel for the dead but are not ready to consider universal healthcare as an option. What is the use of feeling for the dead, when you did not feel for the living? This is the same in all businesses. The plentiful Human resource at its disposal make the business not at all concerned about the people dead with a known reason. People die every minute for a plenty of reasons, but when they die for a reason which the whole world knows may happen is what makes the death more sick. In fact majority of the work available in the world is broken to such an extent that you just have to plugin a new human to do that job. This is what is making the corporations not to take any serious thought towards the pandemic. 

    The medical profession is also at its most liberal best. Any complication can be labelled a "covid 19" case. Stop, dont draw your daggers, this statement was for medical practitioners who have done it or on planning to do it. How am I making this statement so confidently. Well, nobody is allowed to see or touch the patient. He is packed completely and burnt without any second opinion. So, what I am telling is it is very much possible, has been done and can be done. 

    There is one more issue regarding non believers. They are so pissed off by the care taken by the people who believe that there is a virus. Like the non believers who throw the caution to the wind, there is a population who believe that yes, we have a pandemic at hand. Of course there is another population which is exactly in between. They wear their mask below the chin. Never was their hands. These people will wear the mask when they hear some bad news regarding people whom they knew. It will be momentary, maybe for a few days. These people are not bothered about the complete believers or complete non-believers. The problem is with the non-believers. They will make fun of the middlemen and the complete believers alike. The believers will not make fun of the non-believers but are worried that this group will get them affected. They believers are angry on the other two groups. 

    The reason for the hue and cry created by the spread of sars-cov-2 is that, the human body might not detect it as a virus and fight it with enough fervor similar to a virus database it maintains. As time passed we got to know that a major portion of humanity had this virus in their immune database. However, one more issue which caused such widespread attention and lockdown is the fact that asymptomatic people were spreading it. And the virus once in the air, lived a very long time. All this information led to the situation we are today. 

    The good news is that, contrary to initial belief, the human body did fight the virus and many people did develop immunity. Now, the vaccines are here to help people with lesser immunity by adding the info of this virus into their database. This is the reason, I am of the opinion that recipients of the vaccine should be checked for antibodies and the situation of the immune system for this virus before vaccinating them. If they have already developed sufficient amount of immunity, it is of no use to vaccinate them. And we dont know what would be the result of such an action. But, nowhere this is being tested. In fact, every person to be vaccinated should be checked thoroughly for his medical history and compare it with the side effects of the vaccine. Based on satisfactory study and heuristics, the person should be suggested for vaccination. 

 

    Proteins are made of amino acids. And the "some" amino acids on the spike of sars-cov-2 virus are similar to the ones found on the placenta. In fact "some" of these amino acids can be found in other proteins in the human body. A vaccine based on this protein might induce antibodies against the protein with "some" similar amino acids. There is no proof for this. Hence there is no proof to stat that a similarly designed vaccine will induce antibodies attacking the placenta and in turn render woman infertile. There is no proof for this. 

    The human genome is made of DNA. The mRNA vaccine is not supposed to enter the nucleous of the cell. The DNA based vaccines which put the DNA of the spike protein into the cell are not supposed to interfere with the Human DNA. The chances of the vaccine altering the DNA is nearly nil. We dont know what will be the result of that small chance and we dont have any proof if it might happen at all. 

     Whatever be the truth, The wearing of re-usable masks have man advantages. During your commute you are going to filter out at least some of the dust. It will protect your face from the cold breeze. And of course, you are going to be protected from other viruses floating in the air. The other aspect we are practicing is what is difficult to maintain and that is physical distancing. But it is also has many advantages. This will avoid crowded meetings and only the required personnel will be called. This will require plenty of advance planning and to the point discussions. And please kindly use re-usable masks. The planet is already strained to the max with the plastic piling up. 

Media player daemon: Playing music with mpd and mpc

My love for the Media player daemon is clear if you have gone through my other blog posts. I like its concept. It is simple, straightforward and does what it is supposed to do. Play music. The combination of mpd and mpc is awesome. It is akin to watching a good buddy movie. They are just so perfect together. If you are a person who would like to "see" the song list and control the music by visual controls, you are also covered. There are a plethora of clients for the mpd. In terms of simplicity an curtness, there is nothing closer to mpc. 

 This post is about the barest minimum required to start playing music without the screen filling up with the file names. Installing mpd on arch is as simple as a, b, c.... really. 

pacman -S mpc mpd 

copy /etc/mpd.conf to .config/mpd/mpd.conf Overwrite the file with the information below 

--------------------------------

# Recommended location for database 

db_file "~/.config/mpd/database" 

# Logs to systemd journal 

log_file "syslog" 

# The music directory is by default the XDG directory, uncomment to amend and choose a different directory 

# I like to symlink all my sources of music to the default Music folder. Ultimately, tell the directory where # your media is stored. 

music_directory "~/Music/music" 

# Uncomment to refresh the database whenever files in the music_directory are changed 

#auto_update "yes" 

#These are my choices for the requisite files. Al these files are required. So, if you would like to change the locations, do so. But ensure that these directories are user accessible with write permissions. 

playlist_directory "~/.config/mpd/playlists" 

pid_file "~/.config/mpd/pid" 

state_file "~/.config/mpd/state" 

sticker_file "~/.config/mpd/sticker.sql" 

#This is if you are using pulse audio. If you are using also, change accordingly audio_output { 

type "pulse" 

name "pulse audio" 

} 

----------------------------

Save the file. reboot 

Now, the first step ensure that mpd is running.

mpd 

On success, the above command will not spit out anything. Now, the daemon is running and waiting to server you music. Let us now, build a database of songs available in our directory we specified in mpd.conf. 

Now we have to populate our database. Before doing this step, I suggest you to check whether your music has good metadata related to track names, albums, etc. If not, it is always good to invest some time in editing the id3 tags of your music. This will help us in getting "that" song to play. 

Once you are sure of your metadata. Go ahead and build the database. 

mpc update 

The above command will take some time. Give it a few minutes. To know whether all the songs have been added to the database run the command below. If you see that the last song is the same when you run the command below, multiple times, then you know that the database is completely built. 

mpc listall 

Of course, your database is going to be huge. And depending on your mood, you would like to pick and choose. Let us now create a playlist based on certain criteria. You are now in that retro dance mood and would like to listen to the evergreen Jackson. There are multiple ways to search for Jackson songs in your database based on how your id3 tags are created. If you would like to add all albums with the name Jackson in your album name then you would do 

mpc searchadd album jackson 

I know, Now you want to see what is the playlist which is create by the above command, For this you would 

mpc playlist 

Now, you remembered that there are certain files with Jackson in their names but are not part of an album with jackson in them. Then to add all the songs with title containing jackson 

mpc searchadd title jackson 

Now, check your playlist again 

mpc playlist 

The nerd in you is glowing. You now have all the titles you want to play in your playlist. Hit it. 

mpc play 

Of course, you have got used to seeking music with other command line players by hitting the arrow keys. However, the command for seeking in mpc is(Again, you can map keys and what not.....) 

mpc seek +00:04:00 

The above command is for seeking the song by 04 minutes. I think the logic is clear. This works both for individual files or if you have a file with multiple songs. If you have individual songs in files then 

mpc seek +80% 

would be better. 

 In the middle of your listening pleasure, you would like to know the details of the song being played now

 mpc status  

will give you information regarding the present song and plenty other data related to the present playlist.

For seeking back change the + sign to -. An alias for all the above would be best. 

The post is not complete without gratitude to all the devs and users who make all this possible. The GNU/Linux land and the BSD universe have not stopped surprising me.

 

 PS: Just, one more thing.

 mpc searchplay title jackson

 which will create the playlist and start playing.

GPG: Encryption and digital signature for the masses Part II

Disclaimer: This is a very serious topic. The observations made here are for a starter. Kindly refer to the man pages and other text books which specialize in guiding for advanced and high stake uses. I am not responsible for any unwanted results by following the notes below. Understand the seriousness of the job on hand and read enough.

 So what is stopping you from creating a key with 

name: Joe biden
email: president@america.gov

Nothing. But you are not going to go a long way with this. The thing is, gpg is not your answer to everything. It is just a tool to sign documents and encrypt the documents. The authenticity of the person sending you the document is still to be checked by going out in the open or from other trusted sources on the public network.

Trust and untrust a key

We have already learnt how to trust your friends public key and record that trust in your keyring. Let us now assume that you want to share the public key of your friend with another of your friends. Now, you extract public key of your friend from your public keyring and save it in an armored format file. Now, if you open the file created for viewing, you can observe that the file also contains your public key also!! How did it land there. It landed there when you "trusted" your friends key. You can forward this file to your another friend who wants the public key of your first friend. The presence of your public key in the file is like you are confirming that the person whose key it belongs is someone you know. This is all good. This is how a "web of trust" is built up. However, this is a two edged sword. When you share the file in question to your second friend. You are also hinting to your second friend that you are "communicating" with that person. This is something that privacy purists will oppose. So, choose wisely. If possible remove your public key from the file your created to share with your second friend.

Let us assume we signed a public key signed@dd.com

Now, we have arrived at some information doubting the key above. So, we have to remove the "trust" we endowed on the above key. Let us remove our signature on the above key

gpg --edit-key signed@dd.com

on the gpg prompt

revsig

go though the queries and revoke the signature.

end the prompt by typing

save

at the prompt

Now, your signature is not on the public key signed@dd.com
If the original public key signed by you is on any key servers, now is the time to push the updated key without your signature on it.

PGP/GPG/OpenPGP

When we talk about asymmetric encryption we come across three abbreviations PGP, OpenPGP and GnuPG(GPG)

PGP is a commercial offering. OpenPGP is an open standard which anybody can implement in code. One such OpenPGP implementation in actual code is GnuPG(GPG). GPG is "free as in freedom" software and is the one to be used by the general public. GPG is licensed under copyleft GNU GPL. So any commercial usage in a tinned product should ensure that the GPL is complied with. For the general public, it is as easy as using GNU/Linux operating systems.

Safeguarding your keys

The key pairs have different exposure levels. The public key has to be made as much "public" as possible and the private key should be kept as private as possible. The "privateness" for your revocation certificate is the same as the private key. Ensure the safe upkeep of these two keys. Guard it upto your life and just below it.

Print your private key and your revocation certificate on good quality paper, store it on storage device, store it on a cdrom and lock it up in a bank safe locker. That is the amount of care you should take care of these two aspects of GPG. If you want to take it with you, ensure that they are encrypted on your storage device and better if the entire device is having file system which is completely encrypted. So, you get two levels of encryption.

Information in your keys

The next thing is the creation of your key pairs. Should you use your "real" name as in "your" name? Should you use your "real" email id? Should the keys expire? If so, what is the optimum expiry age? Should we enter any comment?
These questions have subjective answers. As per the answers for the questions on the public network, the most answers ask users to provide their "real" information. 

This helps in getting you into the "web of trust" which is like the phone book of GPG users. I would suggest, again, a suggestion only, that you should use your real information to bring credibility to your public key. So, yes use your "real" name, "real" email id and also a comment which would make you stand out if your name is more generic. As for the expiry of keys, it is recommended by many experts that you should be expiring your keys at "regular" intervals. Doing so have many advantages. Easy revocation since after the expiry it is of no use to anybody. Keeps your public key ahead of technical obsolescence. 

Dont forget that you can add an image to the created key. This can be your real photograph or any image left for you imagination. Just be careful about whatever decision you take.

More on keys

The last 08 digits of the fingerprint is also called the keyid.
The email id and the name information will be the userid or the UID.

When you want to specify a specific key on the gpg command line, you can use the UID or the keyid.

If you use

gpg --list-keys friend@friendship.com    or
gpg --list-keys A2E43218 ( If using the keyid of the key )

it does not print the fingerprint.

To print the fingerprint of a key

gpg --fingerprint friend@friendship.com

A public key could have been signed previously by other gpg users. On import of a new public key, you can check out all the signatures on the public key by

gpg --list-sigs friend@friendship.com

Keyservers

If you are using keyservers then

1. If you signed a friend's public key after downloading from the keyserver, then you can update the friend's public key with a copy of which you signed.

gpg --send-keys friend.friendship.com --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net(Enter the address of your key server here)

2. To receive a key from the keyserver

gpg --recv-keys friend.friendship.com(Here as usual, you can use the keyid)

3. Keep your keyring updated with any updates to the keys which you have downloaded from the keyserver. There would be changes to the public keys you downloaded a long ago from the keyserver, in terms of UIDs, email ids, the number of signatures on a particular public key

gpg --refresh-keys --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net

Privacy & Anonymity

Though, gpg keeps the information you want to share as private, it does not make you anonymous. But it can "help" you if you are serious on anonymity and you belong to the press. When you send encrypted information through regular public network channels like email, it is still possible to know who has sent the encrypted information, without knowing what is in the encrypted information. 

The public key is advertised publicly. It is trivial to find out the owner of a public key. If you dont want to share the public key with others, then how do you send personalized and encrypted information? One possible way is to encrypt your public key with the public key of the specific recipient. Send that encrypted key to the recipient, who in turn can get your public key by decrypting with his private key. The Tor network can be used for sending gpg encrypted information including the gpg encrypted public key.