Avinash Atreya's Journal

Amazon EC2 introduced two new features recently: Elastic IP addresses and Availability Zones. With these two much awaited features, I strongly believe that cloud computing has arrived. If you haven't started using EC2 yet  because you thought cloud computing was too bleeding edge and unreliable for your liking, it's time to take a second look. If you have been using it, but were seriously worried about not having a phone number to call when an instance goes down, your calls have just been answered.

Elastic IP addresses are loosely equivalent to round robin DNS addresses/ multiple A records for a domain. In some ways it's even a step ahead because you don't need to worry about wrongly cached DNS entries and propagation. Clients continue to send requests to the same IP address and once the request enters the EC2 network, it's mapped to a different server.

Availability zones are analogous to having multiple co-locations/ data centers. The idea is that a network/power outage (or in even more extreme cases physical calamity) won't mean that your application is completely down -- an isolated set of servers in a different co-location/ data center continue to serve requests.

These two features are very important because they make up for the inherent reliability issues with cloud computing instances and take cloud computing a step closer to being a serious alternative to conventional server infrastructure.

Cloud computing has the potential to make reliable web scale infrastructure a commodity available to everyone, as opposed to an exclusive expertise available with a few large companies. And that means companies can focus on building applications without losing sleep over infrastructure reliability and scalability issues -- a huge step forward.

Engineer: I'm having trouble getting feature y to work with Y, all the documentation I find is for making it work with X
Manager: We'll, at a high level, X and Y are the same, so I don't see why feature y doesn't work with Y when it works with X
Engineer (Murmurs to himself): How I wish feature y wasn't actually at the murky depths but was instead at your awesome high levels!
Engineer (actually says): Yeah! Makes sense... I'm trying to get it to work.

One more...

Manager: Can we also add (insert innocuous looking esoteric feature) to the current release schedule? I think it should be a small change...
Engineer: Hmm... yea... err.. I mean no... it'll need some design changes
Manager: Oh! I think it is very similar to (insert feature that manager thinks is huge but is a two line change) that you already did. We should make our designs more flexible, extensible and modular.
Engineer (murmurs to himself): When was the last time you wrote any code? And how flexible, extensible and modular was that? And how much time did you give me to write this?...
Engineer (actually says): Yeah! Makes sense... I'll work on the design

There are so many more, but I somehow can't remember them right now. What are your favorite Dilbert style engineer-manager stories?

... has the following characteristics?

• involves a lot of problem solving and constant challenges
• involves a lot of learning and articulation (reading, writing and communication with co-workers)
  
• the required output is more conceptual
  
• pays within +/- 20% of the salary product based IT companies in Bangalore pay
• has a chance (even if the probability is very small) that you will hit gold and make a lot of money
• people with only a graduate degree are also welcome
• is based out of Bangalore

Based on my experience in the industry so far, that's how I'd describe my ideal job. But I just don't know if such a job exists or not. Does it?

Alternately, if I had to relax the above constraints (get a degree, accept lesser pay, move out of Bangalore etc..),  what would maximize the possibility of leading to job with the other constraints in tact?

Pointers?

PS: This is not in anyway a reflection of my current job situation and/or of what is present/absent in my current job. It's just a thought.

[Part I - The Aussie Way]
There has been a lot said about the umpiring in the Sydney test, and for the most part, ICC -- just like it's umpires -- has got it all wrong. There was a whole deal that went wrong with the umpiring in the Sydney Test. Everyone agrees on that. But the issue of what exactly went wrong, and how to set it right, seems more complicated. With the ICC ruling that Bucknor is not going to stand in the third test, the storm seems to have blown over. But this is not only a dangerous precedent that's been set, but also something that demonstrates how unruly the cricketing world is.

If Bucknor's sacking by the ICC on the basis of his performance seems preposterous, doing so on the insistence of the BCCI is even more so. The ICC is not saying that, but they aren't denying it either. Either there should have been statement questioning the intent, and institution of match-fixing inquiry against Bucknor, or, he should have been allowed to continue. Otherwise, the logical thing to do would have been for Bucknor to step up and say that he is not in the frame of mind to continue, after the allegations. As bizarre as it may seem, there has been no such indication from the man. He obviously believes that it's no big deal that he's had yet another bad test match against India (he's used to it in his long illustrious career) or that he co-incidentally fashioned in another Australian win (to add to the last three world cup finals, as the conspiracy theories have been suggesting).

Strangely enough, the man who committed a more serious mistake -- Mark Benson -- seems to have gotten away for the moment, thanks mostly to the fact that he won't be standing at Perth. Bucknor gave wrong decisions, many of them, but I don't think any of that was a more dangerous thing for an umpire to have done than taking the fielding captain's word on a catch. That's just not done. The fact that he didn't even ask Bucknor (some would say he can't be blamed for that) or the third umpire (read 'didn't waste time on a man already proven to be blind in the first innings'), is a blatant violation of law. If he ain't gonna be pulled up for that, he ain't gonna be pulled up for nothing.

The lesser said about the third umpire, the better.

It just beats me how India agreed to play under Bucknor, given the history. Once they'd done so, crying foul after he had had a bad test match was no good. Even though it was against broad-based Indian sentiment, the correct thing for the ICC to do would have been to stand firm and take on the BCCI head on the Bucknor issue. If this is the level of backing the ICC is going to give its officials, I can't see too many people queuing to up to fill Bucknor's rather large n' pinching shoes.

The question of technology

The oft-asked question about using technology to aid umpires propped it's bent finger up, quite inevitably. Personally, I find the arguments against not using technology, rather weak. One part of the argument seems to be that it's not fool proof. But are your umpires fool proof? If you have lived with 90% umpires for so long, wouldn't 99% technology be better? I am still not a big believer in using the hawk eye (the snicko-meter seems much better though), but you could use plain old television replays. Even for line calls, there are so many decisions that would depend on the missing frame. The benefit of doubt goes to the batsmen. Similarly, if there is inconclusive evidence that a catch is taken, the batsmen play on. Simple as that, no?

But for technology to be put to good use, and reduce the human error, there needs to be an appeal system in place. A simple replay would've told you that Symmonds was out, but not if Bucknor had anything to do with it. I think the referral system in tennis has worked wonderfully well and there is no reason not to adopt it in cricket. Teams get to appeal till they make two (or three) incorrect appeals, per innings. On an appeal, the third umpire would be able to tell, just as the viewers and commentators are able to tell today (assuming of course that the gentleman who was the third umpire in the Sydney test is not going to hang around for too long).

I think the cock-and-bull story about decisions averaging over a career is utter nonsense. If Australia were to have a similar bad test match in India when they tour, that'd make matters doubly worse, not better. Sport today is associated with a nations' pride. It's an economy. The repercussions of these bad decisions could run to millions of dollars. A bad decision could ruin a career.  People who say umpiring decisions are a part of the game, and a human element which makes it interesting, are basically people like Ian Chappell, who played cricket so long ago that they seem to be stuck in a time warp. And yeah, a bad umpiring decision is not the same as a dropped catch, or being bowled off a no-ball. It's like saying a Tsunami and a nuclear bomb are the same thing. They are not the same. Get over it.

The ICC really needs to get it's act together on how it deals with its umpires. This is not the first time and wont' be the last time the men-who-no-longer-wear-white-coats will get it wrong. The appraisal process needs a good hard, re-look. And for the sake of credibility of cricket, it seriously needs to consider using technology. We've been stuck in the same, not  so ideal state, for way too long.

[Part II - The Umpiring Imbrogilo]
It belongs to the resurgent Indian mood to stand up, protest and not take things lying down -- to call a spade a spade, and pay back in the same token. At least at the moment, it seems as though we are paying a lofty price for doing so, on and off the field. Give it back to the sledging Aussies on the field, and they will complain, ask them questions in the press conference, and they'll snub you.

Amidst all the brouhaha, the Aussies actually find themselves on the brink of a momentous landmark. Another victory at Perth, and they'd have had the most successful run in test cricket ever -- no mean feat indeed. Ricky Ponting's side will be remembered as one of the greatest in the game, and statistics will concur. But who are these champions, the ambassadors of the game?

The captain Mr Ricky 'Punter' Ponting, who was caught pants down in front of the whole world, unabashedly appealing for a catch he had literally grassed, who had the cheekiness to accuse Indians of racial abuse, had the audacity to indicate that Ganguly was out, had the impudence to be rude to an Indian journalist for questioning his integrity? Someone tell the man that the best thing to cover when caught pants down is one's face. You can close the eyes of one journalist by asking him to shut up, but there a billion other pair of Indian eyes looking, even if none else from the world.

The self proclaimed conscience keeper, vice captain, Mr Adam Gilchrist, who advocates 'walking' and fairness in the game, but appeals for Rahul Dravid's dismissal being in the best position to judge the nick? Make no mistake, I am not saying people don't appeal wrongly -- everyone does, Indians do too -- it's a part of the game. But at least other people don't walk around supposedly keeping the conscience of the cricketing fraternity and claiming that they "walk". Let's just stick to keeping wickets Gilly, shall we?

The burly Mr Andrew Symonds, who just can't get over his roots for some reason, the abundant sun screen notwithstanding. Every time someone refers to a monkey even indirectly, he thinks it's him! Indeed, his behavior was laughable - like the neighborhood bully, who wants to scare you by his size and words, but the moment you retaliate, he runs to papa to say that people are targeting him. Sure enough, papa Punter lodges a complaint! Gimme a break. Things can't get any more preposterous than Aussies complaining about other teams for on-field sledging.

The young "pup" Mr Micheal Clarke, who has truly learned the Aussie way of playing cricket -- stand your ground audaciously when you've flogged the leather off the cricket ball into first slip's hands, and hide behind your captain after having rolled over supporting the ball on the ground, and to top it up, go to the match referee and testify that Bhajji called Symmonds a monkey? In short, he is Australian for "future captain".

Is it asking for too much to expect a side that -- numbers-wise -- has been the greatest ever, should conduct itself with more dignity? Is it time to tear apart the ever-thinning veneer called the gentleman's game, set aside expectations of sporting spirit and stare right in the eye at the ugly face of competitive sport and gamesmanship? The answer, very sadly, is going to be an emphatic yes, if teams start to play this the game the Aussie way -- something that they seem to want so badly.

There comes a time, very rarely, when words just stop short of being able to express, statistics just pale away into being mere numbers, extra-ordinary albeit. When, as opposed to words being personified, a person being wordified is the only way to express a phenomenon. "Bradmanesque" amongst cricket aficianados, is one such expression. One man, has risen even higher than the highest echelons of tennis and now it is time to coin another:
Federeresque
- adj
Pure Swiss perfection.

"I think it only makes sense to seek out and identify structures of authority, hierarchy and domination in every aspect of life, and to challenge them; unless a justification for them can be given, they are illegitimate and should be dismantled, to increase the scope of human freedom. That includes political power, ownership and management, relations among men and women, parents and children, our control over future generations... Naturally, this means a challenge to the huge institutions of coercion and control; the State, the uncontrollable private tyrannies that control most of the domestic and internal economy and so on...

The burden of proof has to be placed on authority and it should be dismantled if that burden can't be met."

This articulates a lot of what the rebel in me thought since I knew I could think. I would add religion to the list too.

Who could've imagined that a Farhan remake of a Big B classic with Shahrukh in the title role could actually put you to sleep? Don does. The film just fails to grab your attention and moves at a painfully slow pace; it is logically incoherent at times, and the action scenes are anything but hair-raising.

The obsession with foreign locations just beats me. This one is caught between a rock and a hard place trying to force-fit the old tale in a new setting. As a result, the very memorable Khaike Paan Banaraswala feels hopelessly out of place: Banarsi paan and bhang in the middle of Malaysia, whatever the screenplay writer was smoking.

There are a couple of twists in the tale which set it apart from the original. But very disappointingly, some of the most poignant moments of the original film pass off as few more stereo-typical Shahrukh moments. They just don't pack a punch.

Shahrukh, well, plays himself(what's new?). He is also known as Don in the film. Don't even try to make those seemingly inevitable parallels with Big B. Really not worth your time.

The ladies are more than disappointing. Kareena flaunts loads of adipose in Yeh Mera Dil, her overacting just put me off completely; Ishaa Koppikar plays yet another meaningless blink-and-you'll-miss role and Priyanka Chopra is just about bearable in a role woefully short on characterization.

Bomman Irani does a valiant attempt at playing the bad guy, but I somehow felt that his funny guy image got in the way too much. Is it just me? Arjun Rampal though, comes up with yet another creditable performance.

Trust me and value your Sunday afternoon nap more than this disappointing flick. If you don't, you have only yourselves to blame.

If you have been wondering what the heavens I have been upto all these days, well that is it. I've been hacking on Ugenie for the last two months and a bit and it has been one heck of a ride.

I have tonnes to write on the experience, leaving yahoo, and life in general, but just didn't want to let the moment go without posting. Will hopefully post on all that soon.

Do play around with the site ( it is for the US market only right now ) and let me know your feedback.

Release early, release often may be good or bad. Release broken, fix often is definitely bad. How different are the two?

My friends are such retards. Most of them work on most Saturdays.

Here is a question on probability that a colleague and I had great fun arguing about, when I was in the US recently. Calling all the probability gurus...

If you were to toss a coin <your-favourite-big-number-here> number of times and it always ends up heads, what is the probability that it turns up a head the next time you toss it?

Note that it's not known whether the coin is fair or not.

For starters, tell me if it is less than half or greater than half or exactly half, and then tell me why.

Writing this post on board Lufthansa from Frankfurt to SFO, 36,000 feet above ground level… (the monitor says local time at destination is 10:00 AM 23rd January)

Given my erratic posting habits, it’s quite a time and place to make a post again! Unfortunately, it’s not quite a post, only as much as a draft, because there is no way I can actually post this to my journal. The fact that there isn’t a way, to connect to the internet on board flights, is a tad disappointing, isn’t it? Or is there?

It’s going to be another short trip – like last time - just about two weeks. I get one weekend, and a half, to go around, if I manage to get myself off my backside and actually go somewhere. It isn’t so much about laziness; lack of company, the weather, my immobility (nope, I am not driving this time either) all add up to it. However, there is a good chance that I’ll manage to find people to take me around, like last time. Fingers crossed.

This is the first time I am flying Lufthansa, had heard a lot about them before. The flight is a little more spacious compared to the others I have been on and hence is very comfortable. Food is manageable – Asian Vegetarian Meal for Mr. Atreya hasn’t been half as bad as their pronunciation of it. Lack of a personal TV is a big let down, especially on such long range flights (both legs have been more than ten hours) Slept a bit, spent some time re-reading ‘A brief history of time’ (quite some book that is) and some more reading the 200th edition of GQ – a British Magazine (for the uninitiated, its an, ahem, men’s magazine). It was a fun read.

Compared to last time, I am very well equipped this time: my hotel is in a much better location and closer to office (weather permitting, I plan to walk back from office a couple of times - the distance is about 1.5 miles); I am told it’s got a nice kitchenette; I am oh-so looking forward to cooking- have quite a few varieties of noodles and soup, and some rice and pickles as well! I have a laptop and also a phone this time from office (will post the number shortly)

Not a bad start, given the fact that I was far from excited about it this time. Hope to have a good time and as usual, hope to post more often.

Food beckons.

Auf Wiedersehen.

The possibilities are mouth watering: Flickr, My Web, del.icio.us all under one umbrella. Blessed we are, to live in such interesting times in Y!.

Though I honestly believe that its good for either party, the flip side is that yet another flagship Web 2.0 company goes the acquisition way. Along with webservices, ajax and community, an attribute common to all these so called Web 2.0 companies is the lack of a sustainable business model. The irony is that they need a veteran - and now in hindsight called Web 1.0 - company to buy and foster them.

On a related note, people often ask me in my webservices orientation classes about what the business model is for webservices. And I can't help but say 'tell me if you know one'. Honestly, there isn't any - at least it isn't obvious. The business model, or lack thereof of one, is perhaps the biggest reason why Web 2.0 is being dubbed Bubble 2.0.

Three success stories of our times, sites that our generation - at least the geek community - has probably spent a lot of its time on, all three of them Web 2.0 companies, have now been bought: livejournal, flickr and delicious.

It remains to be seen if any of the remaining ones (who?) can sustain on their own.

Interesting times, nevertheless.

Be careful what you wish for. Wishes are granted in all shapes and sizes!

The best years of one's life are often spent trying to figure out what one has to do in life!

...from my LJ sabbatical. No reason or rhyme, just didn't feel like it.

Just realized that it's been more than year since I've been here. It hasn't rained posts or comments but LJ has a very special place in my life, because of the people I have met through this medium - the kinds that I never thought I'd meet.

I've been reading all your entries, and yes, I know I haven't been commenting. Thankfully, I am not off too many people's friends lists in the meanwhile.

I just vowed for the zillionth time to post more often.

Well, let's see.

Way to go GOOG, all the best in your efforts to become more and more like Y! :P

I am a proud owner of a brand new Canon powershot S1