sudhirc

This only shows your ignorance of India and Hindus. Hindutva literally means essence of being a Hindu. What is wrong with that? A billion Hindus with belonging to different sects and micro minorities like Parsi(they also own one of the biggest conglomerate of India) are living here since centuries.

We did not fight a 30 years religious war[0] or exterminated natives of many continents[1][2]. So shove your right-leaning and far right-fasist classification where it belongs.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War#Peace_of_W...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_genocide_in_th...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples

What is the difference between the Hindus and Hindutva. Do you even know the meaning of word?

Before posting this have you checked the state of preservation [0] in the West? The real issue IMHO that if stolen good are returned to their rightful owners, Museums will be empty and libraries will be half empty.

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgy4w221z5o

> The overhead of context switching is — if anything — higher in relative terms.

Why that is the case when we have faster CPU, RAM, and SSDs etc.

Thanks for the pointer. I will give it a read later on. If I understood correctly, eBPF is a guard rail for writing relatively bug free code. But it will still run in the processor[0] ring 0 which essentially is the same level as the kernel itself.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_ring

I am not sure why nobody talks about the fundamental flaw in the design of the operating systems. Monolithic kernels were chosen at a time when CPU context switching was a serious penalty on the performace.

So IMHO isn't it time to rethink this idea of putting every single shit into the kernel space?

In other words Linus won then, and its now time to think about Tanenbaum too.[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanenbaum%E2%80%93Torvalds_deb...

Why every life form intelligent or otherwise needs to be Oxygen dependent?

Isn't it a little bit myopic ?

I had to deal with pediatricians and Neurologists for last couple of years. My general experience is that their training is severely deficient in the empathy. I don't think it should be hard to accommodate it in their training plan.

If you have to wear the hazmat suite, think about the impact on non targetted crop plants and the farmer.

Why this shit is even allowed?

Seems like I am confused. Are you saying decline due to over fishing is acceptable? Doesn't that contradicts unlimited abundance argument?

> Nothing is unlimited. But just as we over-fished lobsters and moved onto other food sources, so we will with everything else. Don't panic. Innovate.

While it is true that nothing is unlimited and humans have historically adapted their behavior when resources become scarce, the argument of not panicking and relying solely on innovation to solve resource depletion concerns is overly optimistic and potentially dangerous.

Firstly, the comparison to over-fishing lobsters and moving on to other food sources oversimplifies the issue of resource depletion on a global scale. While localized shifts in consumption patterns are possible, the depletion of critical resources like fossil fuels, freshwater, and certain minerals poses more complex challenges. Merely assuming that innovation will provide an easy solution overlooks the significant time, effort, and investment required to develop and implement sustainable alternatives.

Secondly, relying solely on innovation to address resource depletion ignores the urgency of the issue. Natural resources are not infinite, and some of them, once depleted, cannot be easily replaced. Delaying action in the hope that future innovations will come to the rescue can lead to irreparable damage to the environment and exacerbate existing global challenges like climate change.

Additionally, innovation itself can be a double-edged sword. While it has the potential to create more efficient and sustainable solutions, it can also contribute to resource depletion when not guided by responsible practices. For example, the rapid advancement of technology can lead to increased electronic waste, which is already a significant environmental problem.

Rather than dismissing concerns and promoting blind faith in innovation, a more prudent approach would involve a combination of strategies. We should focus on both responsible resource management, such as conservation and sustainable practices, and continuous innovation to find alternative solutions. Emphasizing a diversified approach can help mitigate the risks associated with resource depletion and foster a more balanced and resilient future.

Innovation is an essential component of addressing the resource depletion. But we must not overlook the severity of the problem and the need for urgent and responsible action. Relying solely on innovation without taking immediate measures to manage resources responsibly can lead to irreversible consequences for the planet and future generations.

This paper disagrees with you.

https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/article/72/suppl_1/i7/62044...

> In modern times, most scarcity problems are supply chain not actual exhaustion, diamond mines and gold not withstanding. Rare earths aren't rare. Uranium isn't rare. We aren't running out of lithium. Erlich/Simons explores the reality of abundance in the earths crust.

Everything eventually becomes rare if not used judiciously. This mindset of unlimited supply is flawed. It leads to the eventual destruction. Probably that's why most ancient civilizations had rules to only take what's needed from the nature.

For example in Western Countries, crabs and lobsters were once seen as "poor man's food". They are now a gourmet luxury item.

What exactly are you ranting about? What connection your statement has with Ayurveda?

That ancient wisdom from many societies. Hindu Ayurvedic advise to eat slowly until satisfied not full.

Thanks for the advise.

Am I contesting the historicity of Shah Jahan? On contrary, I am contesting the statement of the article which tries to portray that India was made rich by Mughals.

Silliness actually lies in your knee jerk reaction.

Instead of proselyzing you should present some references. Start with justification of a millennia dark age in Europe.

> The eventual abolition of slavery in England was driven directly by Christian beliefs, however much they'd evolved in the ensuing time.

You do need to provide some evidence to support this claim. AFAIK slavery became unnecessary in the industrial era. So it morphed into Indentured servitude. Bible followers didn't hesitate from pillaging the world.

> Women were considered to be "in the image and likeness of God."

Could you quote something from Bible on this topic.

> the Romans didn't care how much you suffered. It was the Roman Empire where Christianity took off first.

Christianity tool off when Roman king understood it's political power and decided to use it. He then forced it down the throats of unorganised pagans who got eliminated brutally.

> But the tendency for many donors to use such legal instruments for self-glorification, personally advantageous politicking, and the conservation of family wealth did little to help larger numbers of the destitute in growing Roman imperial cities.

If that is the case then why GDP of Europe was declining?

I am simply responding to your assertion that world before Christianity was a dog eat dog uncivilized wasteland and Jesus taught it morally.

On the contrary, before the advent of Christianity Greek and Romans had dialogs on various topics. IFAIK Science and Philosophy came to a stand still for a thousand years till renaissance happened. If you evidence to the contrary, please do share some references.

Bible divided the world in believers and heathen so claiming it promoted universal brotherhood is laughable. World was never a perfect place, Christianity made it worse.

> "His moral lessons are mostly facile and poorly explained and similar ideas were expressed by the greek philosophers earlier.

Read any Hindu upnishads especially Bhagwad Gita[0]. Chapter 16 especially defines the code of conduct for good peoples. Here is the opening statement.

श्रीभगवानुवाच |

अभयं सत्त्वसंशुद्धिर्ज्ञानयोगव्यवस्थिति: |

दानं दमश्च यज्ञश्च स्वाध्यायस्तप आर्जवम् || 1||

अहिंसा सत्यमक्रोधस्त्याग: शान्तिरपैशुनम् |

दया भूतेष्वलोलुप्त्वं मार्दवं ह्रीरचापलम् || 2||

तेज: क्षमा धृति: शौचमद्रोहोनातिमानिता |

भवन्ति सम्पदं दैवीमभिजातस्य भारत || 3||

renunciation, peacefulness, restraint from fault-finding, compassion toward all living beings, absence of covetousness, gentleness, modesty, and lack of fickleness; vigor, forgiveness, fortitude, cleanliness, bearing enmity toward none, and absence of vanity.

Bible on the other hand is directed responsibility for the dark ages in which people were tortured for having different beliefs, women were burned for witch craft, believers in other gods were eliminated brutally. Scientists were killed for stating their theories. Remember Bruno was burned on stake for merely saying earth revolves around the sun. World history is filled with divine crimes sanctioned by Bible. There are hundreds of examples to read from history. For example Goa inquisition in which is Indians were tortured to death not because they didn't believe in Jesus. But because they also continued to believe in the gods they used to worship[1].

There are enough references in the Bible. One only needs to read it critically.

[0] https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/16/verse/1-3

[1] https://archive.org/details/FrancisXavierSJTheManAndHisMissi...

I can understand your pain. I too recently lost a loved one who passed away much young. Now I seek refuse in this book. I feel ashamed that I didn't read it despite being a Hindu till I turned 40.

You can refer to the following link. True philosophy begins at shloka number 2.11. However, I will recommend reading from the beginning to understand the context.

https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/

May be this is why Bhagwat Gita suggests living like a Yogi. Dispatch all your duties, do everything but never get attached to anything, not even your kids.

नैव किञ्चित्करोमीति युक्तो मन्येत तत्त्ववित् | पश्यञ्शृण्वन्स्पृशञ्जिघ्रन्नश्नन्गच्छन्स्वपञ्श्वसन् ||5.8|| प्रलपन्विसृजन्गृह्ण्न्नुन्मिषन्निमिषन्नपि | इन्द्रियाणीन्द्रियार्थेषु वर्तन्त इति धारयन् ||5.9||

Those steadfast in karm yog, always think, “I am not the doer,” even while engaged in seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, moving, sleeping, breathing, speaking, excreting, grasping, and opening or closing the eyes. With the light of divine knowledge, they see that it is only the material senses that are moving amongst their objects.

Ancient Indians divided the life into 4 phases namely Brahmcharya(learning phase), Grihasth(family life), Sanyas(detachment), Vanprasth(leaving for Jungle).Last phase emphasised on living and dying alone in the Jungle away from family and fame. Modern Indians have lost these messages primarily because they have stopped reading.

Watch classics like Janjir or Sholey to understand it yourself. Some jems:

- Batch no 786 saves life but Hindu idols are lifeless with no power.

- Namaz is good but idol worship is waste of resources.

- Muslim are true to their religion but Hindus are greedy.

- Any Sikh has to be joker.

Why a Marxist would need to defend Muslim invasions? He is one of the many charlatans who posed as Marxist only to advance their agenda of Muslim glorification.

There are many such examples. Famous script writer Javed Akhtar propagated his faith,degraded other faiths and yet declared himself an atheist. How convenient?

Both senior and junior Habibs are known to whitewash the Islamic invasion and paint a rosy picture of their rule. Their body of work is full of their own biases. Most of the time they fail to provide the primary sources.

What they do not explain this: Let's assume invaders(Muslims and Christians) came from outside, attacked, raped,killed only to make India a prosperous nation. But why they failed to do it to their native place?

Who in their right mind would believe this fiction propagated by the apologists?

> The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.

India's GDP share was much higher before the invading Mughal invasion started so they were part of the problem. See Angus Madison's historical list of the ten largest countries by GDP.

> "Ksha" (क्ष), "Tri" (त्र), "Gya"(ज्ञ) in Brahmi script character ?

You claiming these to be the part of Sanskrit sound system which is incorrect. Show me an authentic Sanskrit alphabet in which these sound listed. For your information these letters aren't representing unique sound so they can be expressed as combinations of 2 letter while writing.

क् + ष = क्ष

त् + र = त्र

ज् + ञ = ज्ञ

All the various Sanskrit sound combinations and its nuances cannot be written down in any script, not even devnagri. Basic sound such as अ can have 18 different variations when spoken. Which script will have the capability to represent such richness. Hence it is an oral first language.

> * Hathi Bada Ghoshundi is Pali in Brahmi script again which is a Buddhist language not Hindu, there is no actual manuscript of this photograph so it could be a hoax. None of the Museums have the inscription for all we know it was on wood. and it got destroyed no one actually ever dated it only this photograph exists.

Make your mind. It is a hoax or it is a Buddhist inscription? Refute Heliodorus_pillar too as hoax.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodorus_pillar

> You must stop with these claims and point to some actual archeological evidence.

If Brahmins came late then birth based caste system was a Buddhist invention?

https://www.jstor.org/stable/29757366

You also didn't refute Buddha's statements from Ariguttara Nikaya (II.35) in which he clearly seems to discriminate based on the birth. On the contrary you also did not produce evidence of birth based caste from 4 Vedas, 18 Upnishads, Ramayana, Mahabharata, or Bhagwad Gita.

> So you must first tell what is the actual name of this religion

Names are not that important. But since you asked it's called Sanatan Dharma. It's also called Hindu Dharma.

> The persian dictionary define "Hindu" as "Thief",

References from pre Islamic Persia please. Don't give the usual Sindu to Hindu explanation. If Persians don't have a S sound then why salaam didn't became halaam? What about Persia itself? Why not Perhia? Word Hindu is a thoroughly Sanskrit word. It define the region from Himalaya (हिमालय) to the Indian Ocean(इंदु सरोवर).

> Brahman priests he met said they have not written it yet.

Vedic tradition is called श्रुति (heard). It's transmitted for thousands of years through the oral method. I have replied you else where on the importance of oral method in Vedic tradition. So what exactly is your fascination with writing down? Writing down makes it authoritative? Then respond to the clear defence of birth based caste and discrimination against women in Buddhism. Refute this please.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/29757366