sridca

I'm aware of that history.

The word "baggage" has negative connotations (to burdens and impediments); so my question really is by speaking English, as an Indian-born national, what burden or impediment does the speaker experience?

--

Responding inline due to lame moderation caps.

> I interpreted the OP's use of the word "baggage" not to mean a burden or impediment

But that's exactly what the word means! :-P

    bag·gage
    /ˈbaɡij/
    past experiences or long-held ideas regarded as burdens and impediments.
    "the emotional baggage I'm hauling around"

> but instead a cultural and political reason why some Indians might hesitate to consider English their national language.

And why would they hesitate if not due to feeling the burdens and impediments of their country's history?

> Indian identity was split right in the middle and was done on religious lines

Religion is only one factor. People also derive their group identity along cultural, caste and social lines.

This is not specific to India. Although religion is less emphasized in America, other factors (cultural, social, racial, economical, etc.) still continue play its role in forming the identity of its denizens.

--

Response to below comment inline, due to moderator comment limit:

> When was Indian identity split on cultural, caste or social lines?

You do not seem to have a good understanding of the word "identity". I'd consult this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_(social_science)

And not everything has to be seen from the exclusive lens of politics and religion.

--

> I am talking about splitting Indian identity on religious lines.

What do you think the word "identity" refers to?

> Last I checked, Tamil Nadu is still a part of India. Karnataka is still a part of India. Kerala is still a part of India. They haven't "split" out of India. Makes sense?

Although Kerala for instance is still politically situated in India, that is besides the point, as the word "identity" does not exclusively refer to one's political identity.

Generally, the political distinction of states, as you repeatedly bring here, has no relevance whatsover to the subject of identity which, as stated above, can be based on several factors (not just religion). Just to state a few (in general terms, for the benefit of non-Indian readers):

1. A vocational identity as ‘employee’/‘employer’, ‘worker’/‘pensioner’, ‘junior/‘senior’ and so on.

2. A national identity as ‘English’, ‘American’, ‘Australian’ and etcetera.

3. A racial identity as ‘white’, ‘black’, ‘brown’ or whatever.

4. A religious/spiritual identity as a ‘Hindu’, a ‘Muslim’, a ‘Christian’, a ‘Buddhist’ ad infinitum.

5. A ideological identity as a ‘Capitalist’, a ‘Communist’, a ‘Monarchist’, a ‘Fascist’ and etcetera.

6. A political identity as a ‘Democrat’, a ‘Tory’, a ‘Republican’, a ‘Liberal’ and all the rest.

7. A family identity as ‘son’/‘daughter’, ‘brother’/‘sister’, ‘father’/‘mother’ and the whole raft of relatives.

8. A gender identity as ‘boy’/‘girl’, ‘man’/‘woman’.

--

> Sigh! I can't believe someone will have such a big problem understanding such a simple thing. [...] I spoke about Indian identity being divided on religious lines.

You keep bringing this up as if division/ splitting is the central issue, when I acknowledged no such thing. Really, my comment is exclusively to do with identity itself. I'd suggest a re-read of my comment, from top to the bottom.

> What was once a homogenous Indian identity was split into a Pakistani identity, a Bangladeshi identity and a smaller Indian identity.

There was never a "homogenous" Indian identity in the first place. People think this because they do not fully acknowledge the various identities they themselves personally harbour. It is one thing to talk about something in abstract, and another thing entirely to intuitively feel it out for themselves.

> You are so wrong here. The creation of States was done on linguistic/ethnic/regional lines.

As I never said anything about creation of states -- only that the the political distinction of (Indian) states has no relevance whatsoever to the (general) subject of identity -- you might just as well go for a re-read of my comment?

I never understood the sensibility of the notion of imposing Hindi to others in the country. It is like say Germany imposing German to be the de facto language all across Europe!

And I do appreciate that we have one common language, English, which is tremendously useful in practical sense (not even including politics in here).

--

I'm going to post my response here as HN moderators have put a limit on my account (I think it is silly but whatever):

It is a bad analogy only in political sense. Not everything has to be seen in political light.

And my appreciation of being able to converse in English, as a neutral common language, has naught to do with the capability of people of the Indian origin in learning other languages, and more to do with not having to learn the native language(s) of fellow Indians. I'm more than happy, for instance, to merrily be able to converse with people from Karnataka or Kerala in English, instead of having to learn their languages (or them having to learn Tamil) first.

And I have no baggage whatsoever with English, as one another commenter indicated in this thread.

--

> Then don't give such analogies.

Given that not everyone sees the issue of, for instance, being forced to learn a language in political sense like you, then telling them not to give their perspective on this matter is rather myopic.

> It talks about third-language being made compulsory.

I'd not even care to have a second-language being made compulsory. And this is not an exclusive issue of politics; my parents made me learn Hindi (I passed till Praveen Uttarardh) for economics reasons; yet because I wasn't enthusiastic about speaking Hindi, my fate became that of Canadians who learned French during that 4 years or so in school.

> I don't think you have actually encountered ground reality [...] an agitation against Tamilians in Bangalore in the 90s

What has that got to do with not having to learn another language when both parties can understand and speak English?

--

> If I can accept Hindi and enjoy the language without any sort of prejudice anyone can. There is no justification for the hatred being shown to Hindi apart from regional linguistic pride. Nothing you say will change my opinion on that.

It seems you are making a big issue out of language learning, which is more of a practical matter, such as taking not being able to fully comprehend a local's driving directions (from your other comment) to be discrimination/ hatred. It might pay you to explore this issue (a commenter here called it "baggage") within you.

> You have an ego that is coming in the way of learning/appreciating the language that is all.

If anything my ego -- and I'm using the word in its psychological sense -- actually has aided me in learning a new language (French), moving to a part of the world with over 90% locals speaking it, and being successful in interacting with them in their language.

> It has a tinge of racism

Everybody is racist/classist/casteist/etc. to an extent. Do you see that in yourself as well (in regards to your driver not being able to comprehend the driving directions given by a local)? If so you might well be on your way to understanding what the word "identity" means ... B-)

--

> You know when you start saying stuff like 'a commenter here called it "baggage"' it sounds like those fascist dictators who couldn't say "me" or "I" but would in a convoluted manner refer to themselves in third-person.

Ha, given that you easily see discrimination in the simple event of being given wrong instructions (for whatever reasons), it doesn't surprise me that you see me as some "fascist dictator" now (before "racist"). Be that as it may, there is in fact a commenter (not me) who did use that word. You can use the search function of your browser to find it.

> You can throw away that ego you have in the bin where it belongs and just say "I said I have no baggage".

As I have far more intimate knowledge of the word "identity" and the word "ego" than you, I know very well that it is impossible to throw away ego (as if there is an disembodied entity throwing another entity out), be it in the bin or elsewhere. And it does not require the presence or absence of ego to be able to acknowledge, as I've done before (which apparently have eluded your attention), that I have no baggage whatsoever with English (and it is a simple matter of fact acknowledgement involving no egoistic feelings; it is just a delight to be virtually freed of one's nationalistic identity)

> You have a huge difficulty in comprehending the simple English that I am speaking. Where did I say we had difficulty comprehending local's driving directions? We caught the locals giving wrong directions because I understand and speak Tamil. So I knew that they were fooling us and when I spoke in Tamil their giggled and gave the right directions.

I see, okay. Yes, it was my error that I had overlooked your reporting of knowing Tamil. Regardless, there is no evidence (in your story) that their "giggling" automatically meant hatred and discrimination.

> I see you have absolutely zero comprehension skills because you thought my driver could not comprehend when I clearly mentioned that the local gave the wrong directions and he was caught red-handed.

Given that there are more than a few people who would rather impute malice in place of ignorance, it is not unreasonable to make that assumption. However, my overlooking your speaking Tamil still does not invalidate that assumption (as stated above).

> You are prejudiced, a racist and couple that with ego and we now have a recipe for disaster.

Everybody is racist/classist/casteist/prejudiced/etc. to an extent. And everybody harbours egoistic feelings to whatever extent. Do you see that in yourself as well (in regards to your imputing group-wide hatred and discrimination without clear evidence)? If so you might well be on your way to understanding what the word "identity" means ... B-)

Ain't life grand!

That's amusing. It does however take some time to get used another person's accent. I sure had difficulty in the beginning with the English accent of my Scottish coworker (not to mention American/Canadian accent itself when I was a new immigrant).

I think they would rather be making jokes about plant-based diets.

Ask the mods. They have flagged my account so that new comments in some threads begin with 0 points.

Agree on the upvotes thing; it is a health sign of skepticism.

I write Haskell currently, but have used Clojure in the past. I find Haskell to be superior (static typing being one reason) however it takes more persistence and effort in the beginning to get used to Haskell.

I'd recommend that people start with something "easy" like Elm, and then transition to Haskell via frameworks like Miso or Reflex. That's exactly what I did.

This project of mine used to be in Elm & Go, but now uses Haskell throughout: https://github.com/srid/slownews

How is Stoicism different to everyday psychological dissociation covered up with a nice-sounding philosophy?

Related - meat & cancer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20029519

(Ctrl+F "cancer" in that thread for amusement)

I'm surprised to see your comment in good health. Everytime I link to Georgia Ede or meatheals I get downvoted to oblivion lol, just as this comment too will (as if there is a vegan bot on HN targeting my comments?).

This one uses Haskell:

    Discrete Mathematics Using a Computer

http://www.x.edu.uy/inet/Springer.pdf

https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781846282416

I'll refer you to my last comment to you.

So if you are "more knowledgeable on this topic" than me, why are you continuing to evade my question on whether you have actually read the studies behind the "science" you claim to back up that a plant based diet is both better for health reasons than a meat based diet? Moreover, if you are "more knowledgeable on this topic" than me why is it that a scientific review by Dr. David M Klurfeld appears "like a corporate brochure" to you?

The corollary is people self-censoring news that does pertain to facts rather than over-sensationalism. Cf. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20029519 | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20052590

The upcoming X1 Extreme Gen 2 is what I'd get. If you do Haskell, and venture into FRP land (reflex), then having 32GB of RAM is recommended.

(I own the P71)

I'm referring to the studies behind the "science" you claim to back up that a plant based diet is both better for [...] health reasons than a meat based diet.

Unless you have read those studies, before seeing how much bullshit is behind them, you'd be wasting your breath away on borrowed beliefs.

But then I doubt you are capable of doing it, as even a scientific review appears as "corporate brochure" to you.

But ... but ... Hacker News says yes.

Previous discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/bbjq1o/a_type_of_p...

Have you read those studies yet? If not you are wasting your breath away on borrowed beliefs.

> But there's generally science to back up that a plant based diet it both better for [...] health reasons than a meat based diet

Try reading these nutritional studies and you will see how much bullshit is behind them. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20029519

It still amazes me that people surrender to nutritional authorities, instead of self-experimenting (cf. Asra Conlu on YouTube) and finding out the facts for themselves.

> I don't think anyone is arguing that these burgers are healthier than eating salmon and broccoli. Just healthier and more environmentally friendly than ground beef.

I can't speak for environmental friendliness, but I doubt these burgers are "healthier" than ground beef (especially from humanely raised cattle), which I eat on daily basis. Come meet me in person and tell me that I look unhealthier.

No one cares about the truth. XYZ is identified as a potential carcinogen? It is mostly used to attack a dietary group involving XYZ than to actually cure cancer. You see this liberally happening with red meat, despite questionable evidence towards it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20029519

It is all rather amusing, actually.

> We need to eat less meat

You might be interested in this submission (which got flagged so as to censor it out of the frontpage at that time): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20029519

What "meat industry"? From the quoted link:

> These organizations are dedicated to the advancement and dissemination of science-based knowledge concerning animal agriculture.

This is a scientific magazine on a particular domain (animal agriculture).

Even so, this article should be discussed on its own. And its author, Dr. David M Klurfeld, is not associated with the meat industry.

If you just want to suppress discussion of health benefits of meat why not just honestly say so? After all, that's likely the motive behind this submission getting flagged.