[silk] Charitable Giving
I would like to pick the list's intelligence on an issue I have been facing. CRY approached me this month for a contribution, and I gave them six thousand rupees without very much thought. However, the following points arise: 1. Five days ago, my pay review kicked in, and I can now afford to set aside five thousand rupees a month for charitable donations. I would like to do this. 2. Having done this, I would obviously like to make sure that my donations get the most bang for their buck. This means the efficacy of the charity I am donating to needs to be certain. 3. In addition to the organisational effectiveness of the charity, I also want to discriminate in the type of charities/ projects I donate to. Again, this will be determined by what (I think) leads to the most positive results. So if I have to choose between giving CRY six thousand rupees for supporting mentally handicapped kids, and six thousand rupees for educating slum dweller children in Yeshwanthpur, I would rather give to the education project because while the mentally handicapped kids will remain mentally handicapped, the education project can assist the slum dwellers in getting out of the slums - theoretically. Other people may be able to enlighten me if this is belief is sensible or not. On the same lines, I would rather donate to medical research projects than healthcare projects, primary healthcare than hospices, primary education than tertiary education, and so on. 4. There is also the temporal aspect. Rather than give five thousand rupees a month away now, I could invest it, get a return, and give larger lump sums later. Which in your opinion would make more sense? 5. Point #4 also ties up with how much a particular donation should be. Are large lump sump donations better or worse than regular monthly donations? There would be transaction costs and processing costs involved, but how important are these? This is more about deciding the criteria for donation, and the process for it, than picking any particular charity, though that itself will be important. Would appreciate your inputs on this. ~Aadisht
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Aadisht Khanna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Having done this, I would obviously like to make sure that my donations get the most bang for their buck. This means the efficacy of the charity I am donating to needs to be certain. If you don't care about getting tax subsidies, find a person in your neighborhood who really needs the money, like a few kids who need help with their school fees, or help with the down payment on an auto rickshaw or some such. This is really easy to do in India, and goes a long way. 3. In addition to the organisational effectiveness of the charity, I also want to discriminate in the type of charities/ projects I donate to. [...] It sounds close to the proverb about teaching a man to fish rather than feeding him. It's a subjective judgment call that I think only you are best placed to make. Do whatever makes you feel good. 4. There is also the temporal aspect. Rather than give five thousand rupees a month away now, I could invest it, get a return, and give larger lump sums later. Which in your opinion would make more sense? You would have to be really sure that your investment is going to do a far better job of growing in value than what someone in need can do with it. 5. Point #4 also ties up with how much a particular donation should be. Are large lump sump donations better or worse than regular monthly donations? There would be transaction costs and processing costs involved, but how important are these? It depends, transaction costs can be important depending upon what you decide to do. Cheeni
Re: [silk] QotD
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I share some of your distaste for the critical venting of spleen, Deepa, but I think in this case the fault lies with me, for quoting the most eye-catching part of a free-wheeling and catholic review of a well-judged book, and not with Turin and Sanchez. I don't think they dismiss scents on a popularity basis. *Slate* carried a review last week which carries a couple of nice things they say about famous perfumes: http://www.slate.com/id/2190277/ Their snappy reviewing style is interesting to me for the reasons Udhay mentions above. To my blunted sense of smell, the simile-laden strings of press-release perfume descriptions mean zilch - the emotional and intellectual consideration attached to [some of] these reviews keeps me more interested. Supriya. Hey Supriya! First of all, nice to e-meet you...and I do agree, what's biting is MUCH more interesting than what is polite! (I have just been re-reading some Jane Austen, and this is so true even in the more gentle form of her wit! The visit (by relatives) was ideal in being far too short. And while I hold some opinions on how opinions should be expressed, I don't think that everyone should, or would, do things the way I want them to be done, unless of course I become Supreme Potentate of the Universe. I *am* working on that... Cheers, Deepa. On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Deepa Mohan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 12:32 AM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turin and Tania Sanchez' book of perfume criticism is something I have wanted to read since the minute I read this review of the book http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/03/10/080310crbo_books_lanchester?printable=true . That, it turns out, is relatively mild, as their criticisms go. Consider 212, from Carolina Herrera: Like getting lemon juice in a paper cut. Amarige, from Givenchy? If you are reading this because it is your darling fragrance, please wear it at home exclusively, and tape the windows shut. Heiress? Hilariously vile 50/50 mix of cheap shampoo and canned peaches. Princess? Stupid name, pink perfume, heart shaped bottle, little crown on top. I half expected it to be really great just to spite me. But no, it's probably the most repulsively cloying thing on the market today. Hugo, the men's cologne from Hugo Boss? Dull but competent lavender-oakmoss thing, suggestive of a day filled with strategy meetings. Love in White? A chemical white floral so disastrously vile words nearly desert me. If this were a shampoo offered with your first shower after sleeping rough for two months in Nouakchott, you'd opt to keep the lice. Lanvin's Rumeur gets a one-word review: Baseless. Admire and appreciate that Turin is apparently a biochemist specialising in the creation of new smells. I suppose these are maestros of scent who know exactly what they are talking about...but such destructive criticism, while it sounds very witty, makes me, personally, very uncomfortable, because it posits a stance of only my viewpoint is valid and the people who use these scents are idiots. Scents are so subjective that I cannot understand how any one opinion can be the only valid one. And I am with the snobbery of I am so expert that I can slate every perfume which is popular. If this were a shampoo offered with your first shower after sleeping rough for two months in Nouakchott, you'd opt to keep the lice. Oh, come ON! This sounds so clever and mordant...but Mr. Scent Expert, I would NOT opt to keep the lice after two months in Nouakchott, wherever that may be. Does expertise only mean looking down (looking down one's nose is an apt image here!) on others? I understand that some of us have much more highly educated noses than others..but surely every scent under the sun has its place somewhere in the Universe! I don't like it is acceptable to me, No one should like it is not. In fact, the same fragrance may affect one differently depending on the context. When I was walking through the State Forest at Devarayanadurga, the scent of the wild jasmine was everywhere. It is a strong and heady aroma, and I loved it; my memories of the day are completely tinged with that scent. But I would never buy such a strong scent as a perfume-in-a-bottle. My earliest memories are of Tata Eau de Cologne (applied to my forehead in a folded hanky, whenever I was running a high temperature), and I always associated the smell of Tata Shampoo (remember that annular bottle those-who-were-brought-up-at-that-time-in-India?) with clean hair. They were, probably, very hoi polloi scents; but I cannot change my Tata Aroma memories.
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Srini Ramakrishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Aadisht Khanna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Having done this, I would obviously like to make sure that my donations get the most bang for their buck. This means the efficacy of the charity I am donating to needs to be certain. If you don't care about getting tax subsidies, find a person in your neighborhood who really needs the money, like a few kids who need help with their school fees, or help with the down payment on an auto rickshaw or some such. This is really easy to do in India, and goes a long way. 3. In addition to the organisational effectiveness of the charity, I also want to discriminate in the type of charities/ projects I donate to. [...] It sounds close to the proverb about teaching a man to fish rather than feeding him. It's a subjective judgment call that I think only you are best placed to make. Do whatever makes you feel good. 4. There is also the temporal aspect. Rather than give five thousand rupees a month away now, I could invest it, get a return, and give larger lump sums later. Which in your opinion would make more sense? You would have to be really sure that your investment is going to do a far better job of growing in value than what someone in need can do with it. 5. Point #4 also ties up with how much a particular donation should be. Are large lump sump donations better or worse than regular monthly donations? There would be transaction costs and processing costs involved, but how important are these? It depends, transaction costs can be important depending upon what you decide to do. Cheeni Hi Aadisht...not a cool thing to say on an express-independent-opinions forum like Silk, but...I think Cheeni is right. This is your call to make. Each of us has to decide what form of financial help would be most suitable for us. But meanwhile, my two paise...if you ARE giving to an organized charity, you might also want to look at how much of your donation/s would go for admin costs, and how much actually to the cause. I found that, for example, Asha For Education (http://www.ashanet.org/) makes sure that all their efforts are voluntary, so that 100% of the money goes for the cause. Of course, the cause, the work done, the location...a lot of factors would play a part in your decision. But I also happen to think that money given NOW is always more useful than more money given later. NOW is when so many people really need it. Good luck with your planning, and I hope it is both useful in what it's trying to achieve, and that it gives you satisfaction. Our generation was not taught to include charitable gifting as a regular part of financial planning, though that is a traditional expectation. I am happy to see your generation thinking actively in these terms. Deepa.
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
But I also happen to think that money given NOW is always more useful than more money given later. NOW is when so many people really need it. which follows by exactly the same logic: the more money you may give later is, when discounted to net present value, the same as the amount you could give now. -Dave
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Srini Ramakrishnan wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Aadisht Khanna: 2. Having done this, I would obviously like to make sure that my donations get the most bang for their buck. This means the efficacy of the charity I am donating to needs to be certain. If you don't care about getting tax subsidies, find a person in your neighborhood who really needs the money, like a few kids who need help with their school fees, or help with the down payment on an auto rickshaw or some such. This is really easy to do in India, and goes a long way. I think the approach suggested by Srini is the best one... most non-profits waste more money in transaction / administrative costs than actually putting the money to good use. ashok
Re: [silk] QotD
*beam* It's great to meet you too. I've long been a lurking admirer of your posts to this list. I see what you mean about snark, when you said in your first post that it was destructive. It's too unilateral, and that's always a danger in written media. I was reading this old ranthttp://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2001/07/myers.htmby BR Myers on modern literary fiction last night, and I was enjoying myself thoroughly at how rude and dismissive it was, but a third of the way in it got thoroughly monotonous, and I kept saying Yes, and? to it. Austen's humour is amazing, to me, because of how she manages to work it into her writing in such a non-cynical way [for the most part]. What have you been re-reading? I just got back home from a three-month stint in Calcutta and the first thing I did was to crack open Persuasion, which is full of hideous characters, and still manages to tolerate and accommodate them. It's a marvel. A marvel! Supriya. On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Deepa Mohan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I share some of your distaste for the critical venting of spleen, Deepa, but I think in this case the fault lies with me, for quoting the most eye-catching part of a free-wheeling and catholic review of a well-judged book, and not with Turin and Sanchez. I don't think they dismiss scents on a popularity basis. *Slate* carried a review last week which carries a couple of nice things they say about famous perfumes: http://www.slate.com/id/2190277/ Their snappy reviewing style is interesting to me for the reasons Udhay mentions above. To my blunted sense of smell, the simile-laden strings of press-release perfume descriptions mean zilch - the emotional and intellectual consideration attached to [some of] these reviews keeps me more interested. Supriya. Hey Supriya! First of all, nice to e-meet you...and I do agree, what's biting is MUCH more interesting than what is polite! (I have just been re-reading some Jane Austen, and this is so true even in the more gentle form of her wit! The visit (by relatives) was ideal in being far too short. And while I hold some opinions on how opinions should be expressed, I don't think that everyone should, or would, do things the way I want them to be done, unless of course I become Supreme Potentate of the Universe. I *am* working on that... Cheers, Deepa. On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Deepa Mohan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 12:32 AM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turin and Tania Sanchez' book of perfume criticism is something I have wanted to read since the minute I read this review of the book http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/03/10/080310crbo_books_lanchester?printable=true . That, it turns out, is relatively mild, as their criticisms go. Consider 212, from Carolina Herrera: Like getting lemon juice in a paper cut. Amarige, from Givenchy? If you are reading this because it is your darling fragrance, please wear it at home exclusively, and tape the windows shut. Heiress? Hilariously vile 50/50 mix of cheap shampoo and canned peaches. Princess? Stupid name, pink perfume, heart shaped bottle, little crown on top. I half expected it to be really great just to spite me. But no, it's probably the most repulsively cloying thing on the market today. Hugo, the men's cologne from Hugo Boss? Dull but competent lavender-oakmoss thing, suggestive of a day filled with strategy meetings. Love in White? A chemical white floral so disastrously vile words nearly desert me. If this were a shampoo offered with your first shower after sleeping rough for two months in Nouakchott, you'd opt to keep the lice. Lanvin's Rumeur gets a one-word review: Baseless. Admire and appreciate that Turin is apparently a biochemist specialising in the creation of new smells. I suppose these are maestros of scent who know exactly what they are talking about...but such destructive criticism, while it sounds very witty, makes me, personally, very uncomfortable, because it posits a stance of only my viewpoint is valid and the people who use these scents are idiots. Scents are so subjective that I cannot understand how any one opinion can be the only valid one. And I am with the snobbery of I am so expert that I can slate every perfume which is popular. If this were a shampoo offered with your first shower after sleeping rough for two months in Nouakchott, you'd opt to keep the lice. Oh, come ON! This sounds so clever and mordant...but Mr. Scent Expert, I would NOT opt to keep the lice after two months in Nouakchott, wherever
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 7:04 AM, Aadisht Khanna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to pick the list's intelligence on an issue I have been facing. CRY approached me this month for a contribution, and I gave them six my father used to donate to CRY and in return they used to send us nice looking brochures, pamphlets, stickers (all of which he felt was a waste of money), pictures of kids and suchlike. As i grew older i too started wondering if taking out half-page adverts in local dailies and magazines was the best way to use donated money and whether i can even call the marketing/PR events (with celebrities to boot) as charity using OPM (other peoples money). 3. In addition to the organisational effectiveness of the charity, I also want to discriminate in the type of charities/ projects I donate to. Ask the charitable organisation if you could get information about how your money is used, if you are very particular about it. IIRC there are some causes where you could specify where the donated amount should be used but i dont know any Indian charities that facilitate such demands from donors. If you dont care about tax benefits your monthly (small) amounts can make a BIG difference than an accumulated lumpsum. Maybe the latter gives more satisfaction of having made a difference ... not sure :-) Alternatively if you have the time, just visit the local kannada medium government school and talk to the principal to find out if any kids have dropped out because they cant afford the fees, uniform, etc.. and do the needful. If you are the type that likes getting involved then there are such groups too. I know an organisation that works with the visually impaired and disabled. The latter sell products manufactured by them as the sole means of supporting the disabled as it gives them a sense of self-worth. I agree since i find the disabled folks very friendly and eager to share their knowledge and they take pride in their work. So echoing others here : it is _your_ money and _your_ call :)
Re: [silk] WiFi in Chennai
On 2 May 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Though I needed a sudo wvdial rather than a plain wvdial to get it to connect. Add yourself to the dialout (might also be called dip) group. $ sudo adduser `whoami` dialout -- Alok The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a necessity. -- Oscar Wilde
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
On Friday 02 May 2008 11:34:46 am Aadisht Khanna wrote: . Rather than give five thousand rupees a month away now, I could invest it, get a return, and give larger lump sums later. Which in your opinion would make more sense? 5. Point #4 also ties up with how much a particular donation should be. Are large lump sump donations better or worse than regular monthly donations? There would be transaction costs and processing costs involved, but how important are these? Like others said - a lot depends on what you want to do. If you are looking for a tax write off, then monthly donations to a suitable charity with receipt etc are useful. Saving up 5000 a month does not amount to much after 1 year - but after 5 years a sum of 3 lakhs plus could do something like put a child through college, or build an extra room or other facility for a school. My personal choice is to let money slip out to people (usual casual workers) who depend on me for some of their income in the first place. Pay for a cellphone here, a school entrance fee grant there, medical expenses somewhere else. That gives me the freedom to give as much as I think I can afford at a given time without tying me down to a fixed figure. shiv
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
Ss wrote: My personal choice is to let money slip out to people (usual casual workers) who depend on me for some of their income in the first place. That's a good idea .. what I tend to do is donate to a charity that my cousin helps run (a dharmashala / free hostel for the Adyar cancer hospital) .. that hospital attracts some very poor patients indeed, and drugs like cisplatin cost quite a lot. My wife on the other hand prefers to give to temples, for what they term annadhanam .. sure, that gets 80G deduction too, like the charity does. At least with the charity I know its well run, having seen it for myself.
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ss wrote: My personal choice is to let money slip out to people (usual casual workers) who depend on me for some of their income in the first place. That's a good idea .. what I tend to do is donate to a charity that my cousin helps run (a dharmashala / free hostel for the Adyar cancer hospital) .. that hospital attracts some very poor patients indeed, and drugs like cisplatin cost quite a lot. I consider my taxes a form of charity with very high administrative costs since I don't really see anything in return, but then nor does anybody else. Cheeni P.S. I prefer giving to individuals than charities
Re: [silk] QotD
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see what you mean about snark SNARK!!! The very word I was looking for. *beam* It's great to meet you too. I've long been a lurking admirer of your posts to this list. * head swells up visibly* What have you been re-reading? I just got back home from a three-month stint in Calcutta and the first thing I did was to crack open Persuasion, which is full of hideous characters, and still manages to tolerate and accommodate them. It's a marvel. A marvel! I yam reading Yemma. I find her sense of the superiority and inferiority of certain classes has a lovely echo in the Indian society of todayand that whole females.and- fate-worse-than-death hypocritical morality, which I see all around me now...I have a 25-year old friend whose father is in the US, and is telling her mother not to leave her alone for 4 days and go to Chennai, as she will go out of control! My other Austen favourites are PP and SS. And if you want to get to the original scent-se of this thread... this is what a drift smells like! Deepa.
Re: [silk] QotD
Deepa Mohan wrote, [on 5/2/2008 6:36 PM]: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see what you mean about snark SNARK!!! The very word I was looking for. This isn't even close to Turin's personal best as far as snark is concerned. Here's a better example: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silk-list/message/13467 Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Re: [silk] QotD
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Deepa Mohan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a 25-year old friend whose father is in the US, and is telling her mother not to leave her alone for 4 days and go to Chennai, as she will go out of control! hmm... would he say the same if (let's say) she were married and her husband was to leave her alone to proceed to the USA on official work ??
Re: [silk] QotD
On Friday 02 May 2008 6:36:21 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: My other Austen favourites are PP While I hated PP as a textbook ages ago (Didn't bother reading it). I absolutely loved it as a movie (the new version) which I first saw on a long flight 2 years ago. I have since downloaded the movie and have seen it again on my cellphone. Do you want a CD? shiv
Re: [silk] QotD
On Friday 02 May 2008 7:03:32 pm va wrote: hmm... would he say the same if (let's say) she were married and her husband was to leave her alone to proceed to the USA on official work ?? Once a girl is married - she is thrown away - she belongs to the husband's family. Pop washes his hands off. All this concern is to keep he virgo intacto and save family honor. Are women allowed to think? You've got to be joking. shiv
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Friday 02 May 2008 7:45:01 am Jim Grisanzio wrote: I'm interested in the China/India dynamic in community building, and I wonder how that changes in the coming years as China embraces more English. I find the communications issues in China improving but still challenging, whereas in India, of course, English is already pervasive Interesting question. For years - for many decades, Indians have been surprised by Chinese speaking to them in fluent Hindi. Someone wrote about it in the press recently - a Chinese immigration officer welcoming a tourist in Hindi. But the opposite is not happening to a very great extent - i.e. Indians learning Chinese. India has a love-hate relationship with English. Many Indians blame the language for a lot of things and positively hate the man who is accused of pushing English into India on a large scale - Thomas Babington Macaulay. But India's relationship with English is like an Ajit joke - Ajit being a standard villainous character in Hindi movies with a weird sense of humor. Ajit asks that someone be Thrown in liquid oxygen on the grounds that The liquid will not allow him to live, but the Oxygen will not allow him to die and the man will hand somewhere between the living and the dead. India cannot do without English, but the baggage that English brings with it is hated by many Indians. Language and culture are deeply interrelated and Indians often develop a kind of hybrid English(or American)-Indian culture as a result of education in English and an Indian language. But just like India is grabbing and bending staid old cricket with IPL - india will grab and bend English for itself. shiv
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
For years - for many decades, Indians have been surprised by Chinese speaking to them in fluent Hindi. Someone wrote about it in the press recently - a Chinese immigration officer welcoming a tourist in Hindi. But the opposite is not happening to a very great extent - i.e. Indians learning Chinese. There's always a problem with generalizing from a small sample[1]. Udhay I must point out that I too have been learning Mandarin.
[silk] Canon L series lens
Hi, I am looking for a L Series lens for my Canon... the one which seems to fit my budget is this one: Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM http://www.amazon.com/Canon-100-400mm-f4-5-5-6L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B7GQLS/ any first hand opinions ?... is this significantly better than a good Sigma lens ? ashok
Re: [silk] QotD
[I find her sense of the superiority and inferiority of certain classes has a lovely echo in the Indian society of todayand that whole females.and- fate-worse-than-death hypocritical morality, which I see all around me now] Don't you find this is true of all her novels? Every time I read her work I find the romance/the happy ending more and more incidental*. The way she writes women and their relationships with their families, especially with other women, has an almost alarming resonance for me. :) It's a pity Gurinder Chadha had the same ideas. Supriya. * - Never understood the fuss about Darcy, especially the Colin Firth character in the TV series. The sort of character who, were the book a Yash Chopra film, would be played by Saif Ali Khan. Blech. [My favourite Austen hero has to be Frederick Wentworth, though, possibly because there's less of a fatherly vibe to him than there is with Mr Knightley and Colonel Brandon.] On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Deepa Mohan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Supriya Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see what you mean about snark SNARK!!! The very word I was looking for. *beam* It's great to meet you too. I've long been a lurking admirer of your posts to this list. * head swells up visibly* What have you been re-reading? I just got back home from a three-month stint in Calcutta and the first thing I did was to crack open Persuasion, which is full of hideous characters, and still manages to tolerate and accommodate them. It's a marvel. A marvel! I yam reading Yemma. I find her sense of the superiority and inferiority of certain classes has a lovely echo in the Indian society of todayand that whole females.and- fate-worse-than-death hypocritical morality, which I see all around me now...I have a 25-year old friend whose father is in the US, and is telling her mother not to leave her alone for 4 days and go to Chennai, as she will go out of control! My other Austen favourites are PP and SS. And if you want to get to the original scent-se of this thread... this is what a drift smells like! Deepa. -- Doo-bop.
Re: [silk] Charitable Giving
My approach to this is to find a charity whose goals I like, check out that they're reasonably efficient, and then set up an automatic transfer of a smallish amount every month. This has (at least) two benefits: - The monthly amount disappears from my budget without a lot of impact - The charity gets to add a dependable stream of income Development directors really like this. Every time I get a raise, I revisit the list of charities that I've got on autopay and rebalance/revisit. Best, chris
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Friday 02 May 2008 8:46:07 pm Udhay Shankar N wrote: There's always a problem with generalizing from a small sample[1]. No Udhay. These one off examples also fall into the category of generalizing from a small sample. The question is, can you live in Bangalore, or Delhi or Mumbai, in any place in India and say I want to learn Chinese or I want my son to learn Chinese and find the infrastructure to do that? That is possible for French and German and almost any Indian language. But Chinese? (Or for that matter a whole lot of other languages?) This is not just a problem of the Chinese language, it is yet another example of the decrepit state of higher education in India, apart from a similar state of basic education. Active foreign language departments just do not exist, along with courses that offer them. shiv
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Saturday 03 May 2008 6:08:55 am ss wrote: This is not just a problem of the Chinese language, Replying to my own post. As a long term strategy, India really should be investing a lot more in the study of Chinese and some other languages - especially Spanish (which should easy) I believe that in 50 to 100 years time, English as a dominant language - the language of power and money will have passed its prime. India's current advantages are purely the accidental result of having the right language at the right time. Even today there is no widespread effort to translate major scientific work into Indian languages, and there is no need, because everything is available in English which is fine. Some time down the line major scientific works are likely to come increasingly in other languages - and I am betting on Chinese as being one of them. India (and other nations) need to start setting up the infrastructure to learn and communicate with the Chinese people. However - I admit that the English speaking world will have one saving grace - an India that is hooked to English. just my thoughts shiv
Re: [silk] Canon L series lens
Hi ashok underscore. At 2008-05-02 19:43:22 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am looking for a L Series lens for my Canon... (I'm assuming you mean an L-series telephoto lens.) Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM http://www.amazon.com/Canon-100-400mm-f4-5-5-6L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B7GQLS/ any first hand opinions ? I've used it. It's decent. The handling took a bit of getting used to (it's a push-pull-type zoom, with a separate ring to adjust the tension of the zoom mechanism), but it worked pretty well. Other lenses in the same price range are the 400/5.6L (very sharp, very fast autofocus, quite small and light, no IS) and the 300/4L IS+1.4x, a surprisingly handy combination. Both are significantly better than the 100-400 in terms of image quality and handling (but of course the zoom comes with its own advantages). What are you planning to use the lens for? If it's birds, I'd recommend the 400/5.6L over the 100-400 (it's even cheaper than the latter). If it is for general photography, I'd pick the 100-400 for the zoom range. is this significantly better than a good Sigma lens ? Which Sigma lens in particular do you have in mind? They vary. The 170-500 is slow and has no IS (which Sigma calls OS, for Optical Stabilisation) and is supposed to be soft. The 50-500 is much better optically, but is big and doesn't have OS. -- ams
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
ss wrote, [on 5/3/2008 6:08 AM]: On Friday 02 May 2008 8:46:07 pm Udhay Shankar N wrote: There's always a problem with generalizing from a small sample[1]. No Udhay. These one off examples also fall into the category of generalizing from a small sample. Of course they do. That was my intention. Yet another example of irony over ASCII being a lossy protocol. Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Saturday 03 May 2008 9:54:12 am Udhay Shankar N wrote: Of course they do. That was my intention. Yet another example of irony over ASCII being a lossy protocol. Sorry. I don't understand the point of this exchange. shiv
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Aadisht Khanna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For years - for many decades, Indians have been surprised by Chinese speaking to them in fluent Hindi. Someone wrote about it in the press recently - a Chinese immigration officer welcoming a tourist in Hindi. But the opposite is not happening to a very great extent - i.e. Indians learning Chinese. There's always a problem with generalizing from a small sample[1]. Udhay I must point out that I too have been learning Mandarin. +1 Add me to the list. Learned it for a year and now am trying hard to keep practicing. Nishant -- Nishant Shah Ph.D. Student, CSCS, Bangalore. Research Development, COMAT, Bangalore. # 0-9740074884
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 6:08 AM, ss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is, can you live in Bangalore, or Delhi or Mumbai, in any place in India and say I want to learn Chinese or I want my son to learn Chinese and find the infrastructure to do that? That is possible for French and German and almost any Indian language. But Chinese? (Or for that matter a whole lot of other languages?) This is not just a problem of the Chinese language, it is yet another example of the decrepit state of higher education in India, apart from a similar state of basic education. Active foreign language departments just do not exist, along with courses that offer them. Without going into intricate details, 'yes'. In all the three cities I can furnish you with further details about university, private and international centers that administer courses in Chinese language learning. The courses are available at different levels for beginners and advanced learners of Chinese. Moreover, the courses often come with certificates that are valid and accepted in most Chinese speaking countries (except for the countries which we do not recognise) as valid proof of fluency in Mandarin. Um... if you are actually looking for a course in Bangalore, do let me know and I will give you the contact details for a fantastic instructor I have had the good fortune to know the last couple of years :) Nishant -- Nishant Shah Ph.D. Student, CSCS, Bangalore. Research Development, COMAT, Bangalore. # 0-9740074884
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
ss wrote, [on 5/3/2008 10:23 AM]: Of course they do. That was my intention. Yet another example of irony over ASCII being a lossy protocol. Sorry. I don't understand the point of this exchange. OK. Per the below quoted message, you made a claim that there is a trend of Chinese learning Hindi, and a further claim that there is no such trend in the opposite direction (i.e, Indians learning Hakka or Mandarin or whatever). You gave an example of Someone wrote about it in the press recently - a Chinese immigration officer welcoming a tourist in Hindi in order to support the first claim. I was attempting to point out that a single hearsay example doesn't constitute evidence of a trend. Looks like the means I chose to do so (i.e, Look! I can give single examples as well. So?) didn't travel very well. And like a joke that has to be explained, looks rather flat now. Udhay Udhay Shankar N wrote, [on 5/2/2008 8:46 PM]: ss wrote, [on 5/2/2008 8:35 PM]: For years - for many decades, Indians have been surprised by Chinese speaking to them in fluent Hindi. Someone wrote about it in the press recently - a Chinese immigration officer welcoming a tourist in Hindi. But the opposite is not happening to a very great extent - i.e. Indians learning Chinese. There's always a problem with generalizing from a small sample[1]. Udhay [1] http://www.jehangirpocha.com/ - note that this is out of date, Jehangir has moved back to India to become the Chief editor for Business World. -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
Re: [silk] Crazy English in China
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 2:01 AM, ss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe that in 50 to 100 years time, English as a dominant language - the English is the most convenient business language today but as far as numbers go Chinese has the highest number of native speakers closely followed by Hindi in second place Gets interesting when you compare it with the ever increasing population demographic.
