Padmavati and freedom of expression1 min read

“Intellectuals” in TV studios argued for artistic freedom of the makers of the movie Padmavati. Let’s take a look at some of their arguments.

1. You cannot limit artistic freedom

If I decided to make a film on some prophet and show whatever my take on that person is, will you support me? Could you guarantee that I won’t be in jail?  Could you guarantee that I would be alive?

Freedom of expression is not equal to all, right? Hypocrisy?

 2. What if somebody makes a movie that offends you? Make another one which you think is true.

This is the one that annoys me the most. How can I do that idiots? I am not a creative or established filmmaker and I am not rich enough to pay somebody else to do this. What should I do?

How dumb can you be, to come up with this argument?  If Mike Tyson comes to me and beats me up. You expect me to beat him up in return? Well guess what I am weak and I am incapable of doing that. Do you get it?

If you understand Malayalam, watch this video.

TG Mohandas about a book written by Perumal Murugan on a particular community –

Next two points are different versions of the first one.

3. There are different versions and interpretations of history.

Now if you are claiming something to be history, do not hide behind artistic freedom when you are asked for proof. Prove your claims and everything is fine. Also this standard should be applicable to all. I should be free to talk, write or do any kind of creative work about some “prophet” or some “mother” if I have the proof.

 4. Nooo, Noooo… there can be artistic imaginary versions of history that may not be fact based.

OK fine, but be consistent.  Do not deny my freedom to create imaginary stuff about some prophet or mother or father or anyone I want.

 

To Anand Narasimhan and Times Now – Destruction of Babri musjid = destruction of Ram temple?2 min read

In a debate in the Times Now channel the anchor said something like “some Muslims destroyed Ram temple and some Hindus destroyed the Babri musjid, so both sides are equally guilty”.  And the anchor (I believe his name is Anand Narasimhan), dares to say that it is logical.

OK Anand, I hope you agree that logic should be consistent. Let me prove that your logic is inconsistent and just DUMB!!!.

Here we go…

Pakistan has taken a chunk of land by force from India, we call it the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). Now one day India decides (Ehmm…) to take its OWN land back by force.  With your newly found logic, both sides are equally guilty and a settlement has to be arrived at by “talks”. From what I have seen from you, I assume that you are not going to say that. You are going to celebrate India’s victory. Inconsistent?

Now you may argue that the contexts are completely different and may even accuse me of saying Indian Muslims are the same as Pakistanis.

I just didn’t say that. If your logic works in one context and doesn’t in another, it is just inconsistent. The contexts need not be exactly the same.  Now what you did was strip all context off and say that one party destroyed another’s structure and the other party did the same. So both parties are equal.  But you don’t agree with the same logic when applied to India and Pakistan.

I can create plenty of examples like this to prove your inconsistency.  But lets leave it at that.

Now do I think that Indian Muslims are the same as Pakistanis. No I don’t.  BUT if some of the Muslims identifies with Babar or glorifies his deeds, then I think they have the potential to become Pak agents or terrorists. Why? Because if they believe this it just proves that they are easily susceptible to Pak propaganda.

Let me try to analyse you and find the origins of your inconsistent logic. Where does it come from? The answer is simple. You just want to portray yourself as an “impartial independent secular” observer by saying that Hindus  and Muslims are equally guilty on this issue, which is clearly not the case. Not for sure with the logic that you presented.

So was the destruction of Babri musjid worng? Yes legally it was wrong. One can argue with the circumstances that lead the the destruction, including killing of karsevaks.  But legally it was wrong. But was the destruction of ram temple also legally wrong. Yes it was. So we can only talk about whether it was morally right or wrong. Because if India on independence, created a law which said mosques built by destroying temples should be taken down and a temple should be built, the case would have been different. Slavery was legal at some time in history, but it doesn’t make it morally right.

So, you have two options Anand –

  1. Agree that you logic is wrong
  2. Agree that you are a hypocrite

Good luck.

Learning something new : RUST lang PART 32 min read

Error Handling

In the previous one where we built a guess the number game in rust, we did not handle any errors. The obvious error was that if something other than a number was inputted the program would crash.

Now that I have learnt how to correct this, lets change the code a little bit.

This was the code without error handling.

use std::io;

fn main() {

    println!("Guess a number");

    let stdin = io::stdin();
    let mut guess: i32;
    let mut line = String::new();

    //get user input
    stdin.read_line(&mut line).unwrap();

    //Parse input string to integer
    //Not error handled
    guess = line.trim().parse().unwrap();

}

The parse() method returns a result object. The result object would have Ok() and Err() values. So if it is OK we can run a function with the parsed value passed to it. If it is an error we can handle it gracefully and say “Listen idiot, you have to enter a number. A NUMBAAA”.

For this we use the match function or statement or whatever it is called. It seem to act like the switch statement.

So here is the update code for the number guessing game.

use std::io;

fn main() {

    println!("Guess a number");

    let stdin = io::stdin();
    let mut guess: i32;
    let mut line = String::new();

    //get user input
    stdin.read_line(&mut line).unwrap();

    //Parse input string to integer
    //Error handled 
    guess = match line.trim().parse() {
        Ok(num) => num,
        Err(_) =>{
            println!("Please enter a number");
            return;
        }
    };
}

With the loop and game –

use std::io;
extern crate rand;
use rand::Rng;

fn main() {
    //Generate a random number
    let num = rand::thread_rng().gen_range(0, 10);

    println!("Guess a number");

    let stdin = io::stdin();
    let mut guess: i32;

    while ( true ){
        let mut line = String::new();

        //get user input
        stdin.read_line(&mut line).unwrap();

        //Parse input string to integer
        //Error is handled
        guess = match line.trim().parse() {
            Ok(num) => num,
            Err(_) =>{
                println!("Please enter a number");
                continue;
            }
        };

        //If the guess is correct exit the loop
        if( guess == num ){
            println!("Correct the number was {}", guess);
            break;
        }
        else{
            println!("Wrong. Not {}", guess);
        }
    }
}

There you go rust book, I beat you at your own game.

//Also instead of using

while( true ){
    //code
}

//You could just do this

loop{
    //code
}