tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-169843632024-03-06T20:31:33.133-08:00Siva's Glob of ThoughtsMusings on life as I live it, by D. SivakumarD. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-31385597554156966382011-06-27T19:27:00.000-07:002011-06-28T08:30:10.330-07:00Deconstructing the 4-2 Gold Cup debacle at Rose Bowl<span class="Apple-style-span">I am an avid follower of the sport <span class="Apple-style-span">known worldwide as football and in the US as soccer. While I grew up playing and following the sport of cricket, I essentially gave it up when I moved from the home of the <a href="http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cricket_worldcup2011/content/current/story/509121.html">world champions</a> to a country where the word is more commonly understood to mean a member of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_(insect)">Gryllidae</a> family. About ten years ago, I became a certified soccer referee, and over the next few years I got quite good at it; however, as my kids' involvement in soccer became more s</span><span class="Apple-style-span">erious over the years, my weekend role has turned into that of a chauffeur, while my interest has evolved into analyzing the finer technical and tactical points of the game. Coincidentally, this is also the period when data-driven methods became mainstream in the analysis of team sports. Somewhat late to this trend, <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/9471db52-97bb-11e0-9c37-00144feab49a.html#axzz1QR1EgkJg">soccer is busy catching up</a> with it as well. [Aside: Some of the excellent soccer sites with this flavor include Jonathan Wilson's <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jonathanwilson">articles</a> on The Guardian, <a href="http://timhi.wordpress.com/">Tim Hill's Blog</a>, Bob Evans' <a href="http://fortheintegrityofsoccer.blogs.com/">blog on refereeing</a>, The Guardian's <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards">Chalkboards</a>, the occasional analytical article on NYT's <a href="http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/">Goal blog</a>, etc.]
<br /><p>That was a long pre-amble. This post is my analysis of the defeat of the US Men's National Team at the hands of (feet of?) Mexico in the final match of the CONCACAF Gold Cup in front of a largely pro-Mexican crowd of over 90,000 at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, CA. The popular soccer press and the blogosphere are rife with knee-jerk reactions lambasting defender Jonathan Bernstein, calling for a replacement to coach Bob Bradley, and even questioning the credibility of USSF President Sunil Gulati. In this post, I will attempt to portray with evidence what went wrong with the US defense, and how the US allowed the Mexicans to score four goals after leading the game 2-0 a mere 23 minutes into the game.
<br /></p><p>I am not saying that Bornstein had a great game or that Bradley's tactical choices were masterful; I am merely pointing out that blaming the last defender or the positional counterpart of the goalscorer is an easy and lazy way to react to a loss. It is understandable when casual fans do this, but it pains me that two days after the final, not one soccer writer has attempted to really analyze this rather excellent soccer match from a technical perspective. Hence this humble attempt at providing such an analysis.
<br /></p><p>As far as analyses of soccer matches go, please note that this is the "easy" kind of analysis -- breaking down what happened in a 30-second span of play and explaining who was at "fault" -- as opposed to the more difficult analysis that explains what happened over the course of 90 minutes or over the course of a season why a certain player or certain team is successful. Read Tim Hill's blog for various examples of such brilliant analysis.
<br /></p><p>The analysis below uses snapshots from this <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_ya-c7ekL0">YouTube video</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAHnYzjRArI">this one</a> of game highlights, mostly from the latter. My original analysis was conducted with DVR from HD transmission, with replays and pauses, apologies if the video snapshots don't adequately express the ideas. I am grateful to Aravind Sivakumar, with whom this analysis was conducted jointly; he is also the one who knows a thing or two about actually playing soccer on the field rather than from the armchair.
<br /></p><p>Goal #1 for Mexico: The score is 2-0 in favor of the US, Mexico has a throw-in about ten yards from the halfway line on their defensive side. A second after the throw-in, here's the picture:
<br />
<br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqQZc-lhF69yp8vtg8Y4s3rNSJ0xVSwHc29N1QdkM3wtOM80K2rPXKjDBqiFA2VBQtmHB7eErcmpZQRZKq84J7amSG5grX2NwQxIGB9pCS_PMCY7lGb3VGmqxwnzpserPkwZyz/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+8.59.09+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><span class="Apple-style-span"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqQZc-lhF69yp8vtg8Y4s3rNSJ0xVSwHc29N1QdkM3wtOM80K2rPXKjDBqiFA2VBQtmHB7eErcmpZQRZKq84J7amSG5grX2NwQxIGB9pCS_PMCY7lGb3VGmqxwnzpserPkwZyz/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+8.59.09+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623119361485943730" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 244px; " /></span></a></p><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Couple of seconds later, the ball is played into the center of the field:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWlnyTkonnE2m_v2HHIUT_DONDiKQz1SVqeWqw6ZIS0Uuifa6QT46koRnwtCNqHn0xOoMNJ5rcqDKlaOYmaUzNNR8c5NeMH3XvMF4HtDV31dsIZnzzenO3nGG5H1ecbEEyTWZs/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.01.45+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWlnyTkonnE2m_v2HHIUT_DONDiKQz1SVqeWqw6ZIS0Uuifa6QT46koRnwtCNqHn0xOoMNJ5rcqDKlaOYmaUzNNR8c5NeMH3XvMF4HtDV31dsIZnzzenO3nGG5H1ecbEEyTWZs/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.01.45+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623119503256125442" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 245px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">This picture tells us several things, some of which point out what went wrong:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Chicharito, only Mexico's most dangerous player, is left unmarked in the middle of the park -- he has occupied what is often considered the "soft underbelly" of a defensive formation, the space between the holding midfielder(s) and the centerbacks. The person nearest him is Michael Bradley, who is actually not goal-side of him, but is more or less marking the referee. The other holding midfielder, Jermaine Jones, is on the attacking side of the halfway line. The centerbacks have Gio Dos Santos covered, and Bornstein is loosely marking Barrera, the eventual goalscorer. A fundamental rule of defending in soccer is that at any transition, the midfielders, especially the defensive ones, get goal-side of the player in their zone. Jones and Bradley failed to do this. Admittedly, Chicharito is a forward, and thus nominally the responsibility of the centerbacks; and admittedly, Jones has the two central midfielders in front of him. That brings me to my next point: the goalkeeper and the centerbacks, who are the ones responsible for organizing the defense, completely failed in their jobs -- either to get one of the midfielders to drop and mark Chicharito, or to have one of the centerbacks step up so as not to allow him space and time. It appears that Bocanegra and Goodson, the centerbacks, had pushed up enough to keep Dos Santos offside at this moment. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">The next picture shows that Bradley caught up to Chicharito a second later, but not before he could play the killer pass to Barrera; as this picture illustrates, by this time, Goodson starts running back, and keeps Dos Santos onside, not that it matters. Captain Bocanegra is more or less ball-watching, instead of providing cover for Goodson and Bornstein, or heading in the direction of the space between himself and Bornstein/Barrera, the most likely place for Chicharito to play the through ball.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLh2VeY6lsDWjZlf4AOSdzTpNkB4vKuVhM3PBxNcGegefRNmj0Zjh2CN0OQMXxlQebUVG6S62Bp9swkl14lsZzkfVMfi8YBYzNFaulgQbvZJarTabw93jLzKcN2cudmLFrJWN7/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.17.19+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLh2VeY6lsDWjZlf4AOSdzTpNkB4vKuVhM3PBxNcGegefRNmj0Zjh2CN0OQMXxlQebUVG6S62Bp9swkl14lsZzkfVMfi8YBYzNFaulgQbvZJarTabw93jLzKcN2cudmLFrJWN7/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.17.19+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623120133295710306" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 244px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">At this point, it was a hopeless cause for the US defense. Chicharito carved the space between Bocanegra and Bornstein nearly right in the middle with a well-weightd ball, and Barrera completed a lovely goal. Was Bornstein guilty here? Sure, he was -- he didn't stay tight on Barrera, he was on the inside as opposed to goal-side so once the ball is past him, the attacker is behind him and he has no hope of making a tackle or interception. My point, however, is that the US failed in basic defensive organization at a rather "safe" point in the game -- leading by two goals, with a transition from a throw-in in the opponent's defensive half, with plenty of time to get someone to deny Chicharito time and space. In my estimate, the "blame" for this goal is on Bradley, Bocanegra, and Bornstein, in that order, let's say 0.5 for Bradley, 0.25 each for the other two.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Goal #2 for Mexico:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">It begins like this, a long ball is played from the central midfield towards the right touchline. Giovani Dos Santos is the recipient, and I can't identify the passer (Torrado or Castro). There are two US players in front of the passer -- Jermaine Jones and one more player, not sure who it is. Michael Bradley is in the central circle, and behind him is Andres Guardado, another live-wire player in the Mexican National Team.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKWzw3bbFWbbdYSoSk_nO41-oVys7-BNT6B8EEPlHzxEpynpOVZ97StPc8i1_8-_F84N9WJVV6NRB1RTDPUD0uGUNOPS_C0vyrxwVrA6DUt4xIThSt5YFTzJ125xWXbjccpO_L/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.46.56+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKWzw3bbFWbbdYSoSk_nO41-oVys7-BNT6B8EEPlHzxEpynpOVZ97StPc8i1_8-_F84N9WJVV6NRB1RTDPUD0uGUNOPS_C0vyrxwVrA6DUt4xIThSt5YFTzJ125xWXbjccpO_L/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.46.56+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623128778428411586" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 222px; " /></a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Now Dos Santos has the ball at his feet, and is looking to dribble in:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiU2RGUEx0nFC6Q9aF-Y7fMaVgO9gFEVix2mq-Z8FBOqToYVZeZ_zS0oy5ysvKjrxYZnt8qcPfkZofnzvl6FoW5a5CrdmEQcp36SoxFIJcCn3Bl9vJep_YHXEZER_KthWyyQSV7/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.53.08+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiU2RGUEx0nFC6Q9aF-Y7fMaVgO9gFEVix2mq-Z8FBOqToYVZeZ_zS0oy5ysvKjrxYZnt8qcPfkZofnzvl6FoW5a5CrdmEQcp36SoxFIJcCn3Bl9vJep_YHXEZER_KthWyyQSV7/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+9.53.08+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623129367153569122" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 246px; " /></a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">A few points are noteworthy here: Bornstein is successful in the first and foremost aspect of defending: delaying (the other two are denying and destroying, more on that in a moment). He gets goal-side of the attacker, and is in position to proceed to the next two aspects. He has excellent cover too: Bocanegra is moving in, and Goodson is providing cover to both Bornstein and Lichaj on the other side (who has his eyes on Chicharito). Jones is making a sharp run into the box (he's near the penalty arc), and Bradley, eyes on the ball, is heading in the general direction. Between the two of them, Bradley and Jones are lacking organization: who will pick up Guardado, who is by now a few steps ahead of Bradley (and close to the referee in the picture), and whether the other attacker (Barrera?) outside the box is Jones' responsibility or Bocanegra's. Bocanegra is in a good position, able to provide cover for Bornstein, or to take this other attacker, should Dos Santos lay it off to him. The confusion continues for Bradley and Jones, though, as can be seen in the next picture, a fraction of a second before Dos Santos takes his shot:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6JjHBKRutNFuvS1A72YtIf6vmGRPv-DCNJkapqcHX4QWtxn8FK_s4FrIgOY7tlO1ju4u2P114_eLR3ChFHH8OUotriHwnJyERn_QHAwpmH62Qv67cTyYvDaJ0RsHo-ZdYSO3C/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.02.59+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6JjHBKRutNFuvS1A72YtIf6vmGRPv-DCNJkapqcHX4QWtxn8FK_s4FrIgOY7tlO1ju4u2P114_eLR3ChFHH8OUotriHwnJyERn_QHAwpmH62Qv67cTyYvDaJ0RsHo-ZdYSO3C/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.02.59+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623131824251442274" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 247px; " /></a>
<br /></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">By this point, Lichaj has done an excellent job of staying goal-side of Chicharito, and keeping him tightly marked. Jones is still confused and ball-watching, Bradley is ball-watching and scrambling in the general direction of Guardado. Dos Santos takes the shot, which Lichaj steps up and intercepts, but let's see where the rest of the cast of characters are:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2CfzIOPu4FtINnWsiRdvzaBijsLYq3K15UrbpUl4BYJy-P4zF-9ezjYvD3IWi064yd9wvmDbTtMxHu2zAfci6xIlrxxAifCvIiZBFjxilCx4ZzPR7uopWFuorc2rKCyzSuorb/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.07.07+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2CfzIOPu4FtINnWsiRdvzaBijsLYq3K15UrbpUl4BYJy-P4zF-9ezjYvD3IWi064yd9wvmDbTtMxHu2zAfci6xIlrxxAifCvIiZBFjxilCx4ZzPR7uopWFuorc2rKCyzSuorb/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.07.07+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623133043647165842" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 243px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Bradley still hasn't gotten goal-side of Guardado, and neither has Goodson. Jones continues his general moral support in the area, without specifically taking on any responsibility. At this point, it's over. The ball spills to Guardado, who makes no mistake. Chicharito's general soccer awareness is simply brilliant here: realizing that he's offside, and that any involvement by him would nullify what is clearly heading to be the equalizer, he not only avoids any contact with the ball, but ensures that his non-contact is perceptibly obvious.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">So who's to blame for Goal #2? At this level of play, any attacker worth his salt will be able to beat a defender with one cut (as Dos Santos executes with his outside left foot to get space from Bornstein), so while Bornstein didn't successfully deny or destroy the shot, he is not entirely at fault. Bocanegra did absolutely nothing to position himself to intercept the ball, or to otherwise organize the defense. Goodson's case is even more interesting -- he was not the first line of defense against any of the attackers, and the least "occupied"; naturally, it was his job to ensure that Guardado was picked up properly either by Jones or by Bradley, and when neither did so, by himself. Bradley's defending was comical: when the lead pass was played, Guardado was a few steps <i>behind</i> Bradley, and Bradley had no one else to mark; yet, he failed to get goal-side of Guardado for the rest of the play. Let's chalk this one up to Bradley, Jones, Goodson, Bocanegra, and Bornstein, in that order, and respectively, for 0.3, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, and 0.1 points each. I wouldn't blame Howard for this one, though I wish he had done better.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">As an interesting aside, four names you didn't see in the analysis of Goal #2 are: Donovan, Dempsey, Adu, and Bedoya, the four attacking players for the US. Normally, the US plays a solid defensive game -- the outside forwards / wingers work their tails off in tracking down and helping the fullbacks. It was stunning to see that Bornstein and Lichaj didn't get any support, especially since Lichaj was marking Chicharito in this play. It is even more painful (for the US fan, that is) when we consider that the US was leading at this point, and some basic tactical discipline was crucial. I suspect, but can't remember, that this was a counterattack, which is why Bedoya and Dempsey (the wingers/outside forwards at this point) didn't have time to drop back.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">On to Goal #3:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">The ball is played from the touchline to one of the central midfielders for Mexico, Adu tries to put some pressure on the player, but he's looking to make a long pass across the halfway line. You'll see Bradley near the referee, he has the other central midfielder in front of him; Bedoya appears to be the US player on the far side. Can't tell if it was a Mexico throw-in, or if Clint Dempsey (the US player on the near-side touchline) was dispossessed of the ball. In either case, it's a transition, and we see Jones not goal-side of anyone in particular, which is kinda OK especially if the US had possession a second or two earlier.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><meta charset="utf-8"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDyfFqBdZdwRjicaH5Rg9RS6xKikOGVozJ3BtoiR3ks69btv6erxpnD2GhO_MrHlbrsoo2rL6YNHaf23TskFpBnxrVn5BuqPHmP8MDZZLp79P-tNtsPLMhy-TgxHk1_dXNd_Us/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.39.34+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDyfFqBdZdwRjicaH5Rg9RS6xKikOGVozJ3BtoiR3ks69btv6erxpnD2GhO_MrHlbrsoo2rL6YNHaf23TskFpBnxrVn5BuqPHmP8MDZZLp79P-tNtsPLMhy-TgxHk1_dXNd_Us/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.39.34+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623292641161231346" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 247px; " /></a></span></div></span></span>But let's see how this develops.<span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span"><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9ExhHvGIBvZbdE27GjJmuiHbJDUfn89Qwf_25sq0ckkZMNGwuWXBVM9NzaB-IgQtdGDFQuHimgjTJz-dhtQSkAMrnyAJFs59Iw2cubM6LAp-R-DNuTkPPGGY6gLwn9UpZBdFp/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.46.50+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9ExhHvGIBvZbdE27GjJmuiHbJDUfn89Qwf_25sq0ckkZMNGwuWXBVM9NzaB-IgQtdGDFQuHimgjTJz-dhtQSkAMrnyAJFs59Iw2cubM6LAp-R-DNuTkPPGGY6gLwn9UpZBdFp/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.46.50+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623143162288976002" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 246px; " /></a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">I think it's Dos Santos who receives the ball; Bornstein is scrambling to quickly get goal-side of him. Barrera (the Mexican player second-closest to the ball) is starting to make a run towards and beyond Bocanegra. Goodson has Chicharito behind him, but Lichaj appears to be headed to help mark Chicharito. In all of this, no one seems to play any attention to Guardado, whom we see at the top of the center circle.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">I love the next snapshot for how many things it tells us about great attacking and good defending in soccer:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_7Qaq3ECUSgUS-08aYWCTD5_NPXNlQEBJ5ZFgN-XSIei-qVnQjBSfv_h3aaGegF-u9hzfz-zhtJHqSDSnEpaemvRj4c9FfYWFzL7mxnBAo-1dJgMa7kxQAWFIwm8KcUKKOMao/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.51.14+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_7Qaq3ECUSgUS-08aYWCTD5_NPXNlQEBJ5ZFgN-XSIei-qVnQjBSfv_h3aaGegF-u9hzfz-zhtJHqSDSnEpaemvRj4c9FfYWFzL7mxnBAo-1dJgMa7kxQAWFIwm8KcUKKOMao/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+10.51.14+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623144381485101890" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 245px; " /></a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span">Barrera is headed towards goal, Bocanegra keeps him on the inside, somewhat questionably. Guardado has his arms stretched wide, and he wants the ball passed to him across the swath of space left open in the middle by Jones, who is facing the ball, and not dropping in to cover Guardado's possible run into the middle. It isn't clear if he got instructions from Howard and Bocanegra about having to pick up Guardado's run; for now he just seems completely ineffective, especially if Dos Santos makes a slightly diagonal pass into the triangle between Jones, Chicharito, and Barrera, a pass for Guardado to run into. </span><span class="Apple-style-span">However, Dos Santos has other ideas but, as we shall see, Guardado will still get his wish. </span><span class="Apple-style-span">If Guardado's run into that space, asking for the ball, is brilliant, Chicharito's positioning is simply genius. He is directly on the straight line between Goodson and Lichaj; he's got Lichaj in two minds. If Chicharito is further inside, he would be Goodson's mark, and Lichaj could focus on Guardado's run, but Lichaj has to be open to the possibility that Chicharito will make an outside run, in which case he, and not the centerback Goodson, would be the man to mark him. This keeps Lichaj undecided (for now), allowing Guardado to continue his run unchecked.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">The next picture introduces a new character into the picture, the player that Bradley was previously goal-side of. Dos Santos has lobbed the ball over Bornstein, and Bocanegra is about to intercept it with a header; Bradley's mark has outrun him and entered the screen between Jones and Guardado:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2A7LYGgYMdieBNKguuIaQm5zSVsCGNR_GO6xzXN4SJNX17rVdsRNPtOIjOfu4ZUWN7NFe0MNY4X5Imsogts8tBXEgIqLgIyUAdozpOTMD7HFLPnBaUIz1o5pN4pOTi53BFv9y/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.03.03+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2A7LYGgYMdieBNKguuIaQm5zSVsCGNR_GO6xzXN4SJNX17rVdsRNPtOIjOfu4ZUWN7NFe0MNY4X5Imsogts8tBXEgIqLgIyUAdozpOTMD7HFLPnBaUIz1o5pN4pOTi53BFv9y/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.03.03+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623147298955877218" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 247px; " /></a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Bocanegra heads the ball down, Bradley has sprinted and has noticed that Guardado is the man about to receive the ball, and has a chance of getting goal-side of him. In the meanwhile, Chicharito decides to go inside, and Goodson, correctly, decides to be the cover man (since there is now a chance that Guardado might receive the ball and run straight toward the goal), and leaves Lichaj to pick up Chicharito:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhc_KspMQ5OuZ1DFASqKdUV2bHoVVqNxzkxizGu9NmJOg3VIDFXpZn_Jc6rUHW_fTsps77_b9K3gFQboSoxHqwWShollXU9L_veOuTixlCcFT1pBt5Amvw-y95WnGo8NxXb6hw0/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.07.11+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhc_KspMQ5OuZ1DFASqKdUV2bHoVVqNxzkxizGu9NmJOg3VIDFXpZn_Jc6rUHW_fTsps77_b9K3gFQboSoxHqwWShollXU9L_veOuTixlCcFT1pBt5Amvw-y95WnGo8NxXb6hw0/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.07.11+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623148864048178386" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 247px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">For inexplicable reasons, Bradley twists his run, and goes <i>behind</i> Guardado, allowing him to trap the ball with his chest, and bring it forward with his momentum, leaving us with this:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWOuCM7Yi-478wwMI0Sd85nLXWiJW9cy_FIR2dqiQJ65FhqNiB9GinRTswV0778BOO35ocNHpKgcCn0G-L3bXaAnWmrBAj1DxDVxEBn2JbYCY37C7AzpSGH32aI1B7bb17kD4t/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.12.36+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWOuCM7Yi-478wwMI0Sd85nLXWiJW9cy_FIR2dqiQJ65FhqNiB9GinRTswV0778BOO35ocNHpKgcCn0G-L3bXaAnWmrBAj1DxDVxEBn2JbYCY37C7AzpSGH32aI1B7bb17kD4t/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.12.36+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623150151302673298" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 249px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Notice that with respect to the previous picture, two very subtle things happen: Bocanegra, aware that Guardado has successfully trapped the ball in the center, moves in toward the middle to offer cover for Goodson, and, at the same time, Barrera instinctively shuffles a couple of steps away from the middle, creating a lane 3-5 yards wide for Guardado to stroke the ball into. He does that, and Barrera pulls off a fantastic strike (outside of the right foot) to the far post.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Oh, and Jones was an eyewitness to all of it. Not much else.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">What should've happened? Seeing the acres of space in front of him, Goodson should've decided early on that Chicharito was Lichaj's responsibility, and screamed at Bradley to hand off his mark to Jones and go pick up Guardado instead. There was ample opportunity for executing that. There were two players to be picked up during this attack -- the player that Bradley was marking (Torrado or Castro), and Guardado. Unfortunately, Jones and Guardado were on either side of Bradley, so it called for a switch of responsibilities: Jones to take over Bradley's man, and Bradley to press Guardado. In the seven or so seconds, Goodson, Howard and Bradley failed to execute this. Jones, as the player with no immediate responsibility, could've, should've initiated the switch, but he was caught ball-watching. Bocanegra, as captain and the most-experienced defender, couldn't be involved in organizing the defense because he had his hands full with the initial clearing header and tracking Barrera. Add to this tricky situation the fact that Chicharito and Barrera played with impeccable instincts, and it's hard to blame anyone too much. If anyone, I'd go with Jones as the main culprit here, for the full 1.0 in the points system.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">And finally that magic goal by Dos Santos. This goal was significant for an important reason: until then, the score was 3-2, and the US was just one goal away from getting back into the game. But this sublime goal put the US <i>mentally</i> out of the game. It started with a tussle near the corner flag, where Chicharito was trying to burn some time, and Bocanegra was fighting to win the ball (and he did that successfully). While the tussle was going on, another Mexican attacker (Zavala, who came on for Barrera, I think) got there, along with his marker Bornstein. Jones left his mark, Torrado, and went to the corner flag as well, to lend extra support and hopefully win the ball for the US. Lichaj has Guardado to mark, Goodson picked up Torrado, and Bradley dropped deep into the box, marking Dos Santos. All very well so far, except that we have an extra defender near the corner flag, and the ball gets kicked toward the box, where Torrado accepts it gratefully. This extra defender means that Bradley's mark, Castro, is likely lurking unmarked, but that turns out not to be a problem. Situation reasonably under control, and Bocanegra is already back near the box:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZFJmEhzUCUtVyNwvcpkN36U4ZgcVJlLhkQh6FlsMWSyxlaEa16KDjWcCKDBxmXYaAI_qHT-GvZDR6AbtL00-dMUisV_OM6VFM6GiLOA7XTWTlEp6Dkr_DR3xcZbjJD_CajsDQ/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.35.28+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZFJmEhzUCUtVyNwvcpkN36U4ZgcVJlLhkQh6FlsMWSyxlaEa16KDjWcCKDBxmXYaAI_qHT-GvZDR6AbtL00-dMUisV_OM6VFM6GiLOA7XTWTlEp6Dkr_DR3xcZbjJD_CajsDQ/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.35.28+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623156951110060354" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 244px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Goodson's positioning couldn't be better: he's cutting Torrado's angle toward the middle, and Howard should be responsible for any attempt at a near-post shot on goal. What he fails to account for is the fact that Bradley is going to let Dos Santos <i>behind</i> him and Torrado is going to play a simple pass on the <i>outside</i>, behind Goodson, not a pass splitting the defense:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPiojHvMNwPPUCb1YaImxBU7rBQdBrVmHk5Hju1iBuhPvrGYd2y4M5uLFVflfawtG5yXfQQcZWiw0Hb-b__AUW7KHxE_fpHPom9aU-zb5r75Fwe2oLXjmnUP-2YB4HDmZVWrbM/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.46.02+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPiojHvMNwPPUCb1YaImxBU7rBQdBrVmHk5Hju1iBuhPvrGYd2y4M5uLFVflfawtG5yXfQQcZWiw0Hb-b__AUW7KHxE_fpHPom9aU-zb5r75Fwe2oLXjmnUP-2YB4HDmZVWrbM/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.46.02+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623158386766432002" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 245px; " /></a>
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">By any stretch of imagination, Bradley should get to this ball first, but Howard calls for it, and charges out, leaving Bradley to do the only thing he can do: get on the goal line, in case Howard fails to save. This he starts to do:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><meta charset="utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_FVu16ebarVq18eooTYSiBkt19Gc_GLJnMjzDMQq4cW448FfDEV1J3mGjvmnh-oMD3msQeIoHVoA_B3WkJHXmQ7pRTdgBys2V34gyL7mfmf4TAP_9uUT5h9OxBMJX7a6E-YNI/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.47.46+PM.png" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_FVu16ebarVq18eooTYSiBkt19Gc_GLJnMjzDMQq4cW448FfDEV1J3mGjvmnh-oMD3msQeIoHVoA_B3WkJHXmQ7pRTdgBys2V34gyL7mfmf4TAP_9uUT5h9OxBMJX7a6E-YNI/s400/Screen+shot+2011-06-27+at+11.47.46+PM.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5623158834014915522" style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 245px; " /></a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">However, the call by Howard turns out to be wrong, and Dos Santos gets to the ball first, with six US defenders in the box with him (from the nearest to the furthest: Jones, Bocanegra, Goodson, and Lichaj, besides Howard and Bradley). Of course, he scores, beating Lichaj, who gamely gets to the far post and tries to head it off, after first easily beating Jones and Bocanegra. Jones' mechanics, as he tries to defend this play, are laughable, and Bocanegra's defending isn't much better. We'll give this one primarily to Howard, for 0.6 points, with Bocanegra and Jones with 0.2 points each.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">In sum total on the points system, we have Jones at 1.4, Bradley at 0.8, Bocanegra at 0.65, Howard at 0.6, Bornstein at 0.35 and Goodson at 0.2.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">To me this analysis says a few things.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">It's time for Bocanegra to be left out of the MNT. He shares at least part of the blame for three of the four goals; as the most experienced defender and captain, we should expect better. Given the recent sloppy performances of Onyewu and newbie Tim Ream, we are really, really thin at the centerback position, but Goodson's performance is a silver lining. Perhaps he will play the role of the experienced defender for the next World Cup cycle. Also, it is important to qualify for the next Olympics and identify the most promising young central defenders (Ream, Opara, et al.).</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Michael Bradley had a poor game, and Jermaine Jones had a horrible game, two facts not called out adequately in the mainstream media and popular soccer blogs. In all four goals, we don't see the midfield working as a unit/tandem; the lack of understanding and communication they demonstrated was deplorable.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Bob Bradley didn't get through to Michael and Jermaine Jones adequately at half-time. He didn't put enough support for Lichaj (who was dealing with one or the other of Chicharito and Guardado, two of Mexico's most dangerous players) into his game plan for the second half. By contrast, the Mexican coach had a clear adjustment: any time Freddy Adu got the ball with space, he was closed down by two defenders, forcing him to make a tame back pass.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">
<br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span">Finally, I hope that we see more technical and tactical analyses in the US soccer media, rather than have blogs turn into talk shows where somebody is always calling for the coach's head.</span></div></span></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-91643522951184318772010-01-28T22:34:00.000-08:002010-01-29T00:03:44.807-08:00On the iPad as a consumer device<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div>When Apple's Steve Jobs unveiled the iPad, expectations were high -- no, scratch that, expectations were enormous. Everyone more or less knew that it was going to be a tablet -- a tablet that very likely will be based on the a touch-screen, a tablet that will offer electronic book reading, etc., etc. Expectations were so high that there was no way Apple could live up to it -- after all, they <i>couldn't </i>possibly top the iPod and the iPhone, could they?</span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">Unsurprisingly, the reaction in the media has been mixed. Numerous newspaper columnists and bloggers have written critically about various features that were less than optimal or were lacking, starting with the bezel, the lack of support for Flash, yada, yada...</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">I had a very different reaction.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">In fact, I wasn't going to blog about it or anything, but when I saw the NYT headline "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/technology/companies/28apple.html?">With Its Tablet, Apple Blurs Line Between Devices</a>," I decided that I will, after all, present a simple point that seems to be missed by geek bloggers and mainstream journalists who generally seem to parrot some of what the geeks and some Wall St. types say.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">The iPad is a device for <i>consuming </i>Web content -- information as well as entertainment.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">It is not for programmers or professional photographers or bloggers or journalists or music makers or the guy who will be writing the next Great American Novel or the amateur videographer. Or, at least, it's not for them when they are creating content.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">It is for the rest of us who, for the most part and for most of our lives, are consuming information or entertainment. It is for those of us who don't know or don't care what Flash support is or multitasking is or what Firefox is. It is for all of us when we just want to curl up with our book or our Web, preferably on our couch.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">Experiencing the Internet doesn't have to be done crouched in front of a desktop and a keyboard, or lugging a 3 lbs. or more device on your lap. If all you're doing is consuming Web content, you might as well sit back, relax, and enjoy it. That's precisely what the iPad will let you do.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">To be sure, you can do quite a bit more (write short emails, tweets, interact with web sites, fill forms, etc.), and with a few tweaks, it will let you do even more: Stick it into the keyboard dock, fire up Google Docs on your browser, and you can write your book report or term paper or maybe even a chapter or two of the Great American Novel; plug in your headphones, fire up Skype or Google Voice and you might be able to make phone calls as well. Yes, you could do these, but they are not the primary intended use case.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">And this is where the NY Times headline is so wrong: Apple has not blurred the line between devices, it has made the line very clear. Consuming information and entertainment is a very different activity from producing it -- your interaction with your device can take full advantage of a lovely touch screen and speech interfaces where meaningful, but for the most part you don't have to actively do anything beyond simple, lightweight, gestures. Relax. Take a deep breath. Enjoy the Web!</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">When the Kindle came out, I was excited like never before (my father and grandfather are in the printing business, and I grew up with alloy typefaces, a bazillion font names, heady-smelling printing ink, language like "galley proofs" and "offset" and "treadle" printing machines and such). And since I am a computer scientist, I could imagine a lot more: I could see the Kindle completely revolutionizing the book experience -- textbooks would no longer be the same, there would be videos and animations and high-definition images that would teach our kids and their kids in a very different way.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">Except it didn't.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">The dull-gray background is painful to read on; it's a royal mess to find the meaning of the word you encounter -- you push around a teeny-weeny joystick to highlight the word and click on it; there is just one font -- one lousy font -- in which you can display content; the e-books often butcher pictures and superscripts (for chapter notes). At least the iPad will fix all these. And it will make reading on a device a joy.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">So I hope the geeks will stop whining about minor issues -- yes, you can't listen to Pandora radio while you read your email, but can still listen to music on the iPod app; yes, it doesn't come with Flash support, but come on, that's a matter of software, and will more likely than not be fixed and patched even after the device is bought; yes, there is no camera, but surely somebody will come up with a tiny camera that sticks to the iPad so you can do video chat, etc., etc. Instead, it would delightful if the geeks would find novel applications to write for this new form factor (the size of a Mead composition notebook) that has a gorgeous touch-screen and an accelerometer.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;">There's a time for unleashing creative energy. For all other times, there is the iPad. Enjoy!</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"> </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-5363729693030890062009-10-30T19:04:00.000-07:002009-10-30T19:19:53.609-07:00$2400 in 24 Hours, Please Donate!<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">I am delighted to be conducting a fundraising drive for $2400 within 24 hours starting now (Friday, October 30, 2009, 7pm PDT). The funds are for the <a href="http://ashanet.org/siliconvalley/index.html">Asha For Education</a>, a </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">non-profit voluntary organization dedicated towards increasing literacy among children in India.</span></span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Please <a href="https://www.ashanet.org/siliconvalley/marathon/runnernet2/public.php?2009TASV1171">go here</a> to donate online through a secure web site.<br /></span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Some facts about Asha for Education that appeal to me:</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Asha for Education is entirely volunteer-driven (no paid office-bearers), sponsors <a href="http://ashanet.org/siliconvalley/projects.html">a variety of projects </a>all aimed at bringing change to the underprivileged children of India through education. These projects are as diverse in scope (from non-formal education in rural areas to formal schools in violence-troubled areas, from state-wide quality-improvement projects to the adoption of small schools that educate children of farm laborers).</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Asha for Education has received <a href="http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=7630">the highest-possible 4-star rating from CharityNavigator.org</a>, buoyed by the fact that 98.3% of funds raised go to the projects.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Asha for Education chooses the projects on a completely secular basis, regularly follows up with the projects, and has a rigorous and transparent process (including accounting -- see web page) for funding.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">I am hoping that my circle of friends, family, and other acquaintances will spend a few moments reading about this wonderful organization and generously contribute (any amount, please consider a minimum of $25).</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">I am privileged to be part of the <a href="http://www.ashanet.org/siliconvalley/marathon/">Team Asha Marathon training program</a>, who, through their excellent endurance training program that has trained over 1,000 marathoners, helped me through the summer and fall of this year, culminating last week in the Silicon Valley marathon event, where I completed my first marathon run.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">If you have any questions, please send me an email, or comment on the blog article.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;color:#333333;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div></div>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-24786697083283220002009-08-18T15:00:00.000-07:002009-08-18T15:09:29.944-07:00Fundamentally unsound<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />Reading submissions for a conference that I shall not name, I was hit by several inane, content-free sentences that bloat the importance of the papers using incomprehensible jargon... and it struck me, PGW <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=tLtw51x0eyUC&lpg=RA1-PA240&dq=bertie%20wooster%20florence%20craye%20nietzsche&client=firefox-a&pg=RA1-PA240#v=onepage&q=&f=false">had said it best</a>:<br /><span style="font-family:georgia;"></span><blockquote><span style="font-family:georgia;">I had got as far as this in thinking the thing out when that `Types of Ethical Theory' caught my eye. I opened it, and I give you my honest word this was what hit me:</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-family:georgia;" ><blockquote>Of the two antithetic terms in the Greek philosophy one only was real and self-subsisting; and that one was Ideal Thought as opposed to that which it has to penetrate and mould. The other, corresponding to our Nature, was in itself phenomenal, unreal, without any permanent footing, having no predicates that held true for two moments together; in short, redeemed from negation only by including indwelling realities appearing through.</blockquote></span><span style="font-family:georgia;">Well --- I mean to say --- what? And Nietzsche, from all accounts, a lot worse than that!</span></blockquote><span style="font-family:georgia;"></span><br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-81076634243303690422009-06-04T14:12:00.001-07:002009-06-04T14:14:07.305-07:00Q: Can you make "air quotes" while talking on your mobile phone?<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial;">A: Yes, if you use a bluetooth headset.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial;">I am not making this up -- I actually saw a woman do it at a traffic signal!</span></div><div><br /></div>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-78484514011619795892009-04-15T15:43:00.000-07:002009-04-15T15:48:51.210-07:00Dominant Strategy?<span style="font-family:arial;"><br /><a href="http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/conferences/stoc2009/registration.shtml">STOC Registration</a> fee for non-members of SIGACT is $100 more than the registration fee for SIGACT members. <a href="https://campus.acm.org/public/gensigqj/siglist/gensigqj_sigdesc.cfm">SIGACT membership</a> is only $18. What gives?</span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-8561653706198588422008-02-05T12:48:00.000-08:002008-02-05T13:03:39.075-08:00A strategic vote from the heart<span style="font-family: arial;"><br />So it came down to two issues for me -- the level of detail and thoroughness of various plans (esp. universal health care) and the candidates' stand on (the Iraq) war.<br /><br />Clinton clearly has the better resume on the first count -- meticulous and well-crafted plans all around, reflecting her experience and how deeply she cares about issues. For example, see this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/opinion/04krugman.html">Krugman article</a> (timed slightly poorly, coming as it did the day before Super Tuesday, compared to the Kennedy family endorsement, which gave voters some time to let it sink in) for a nice analysis on how the Clinton health care plan would cover nearly twice as many people as the Obama plan would.<br /><br />On the Iraq war front, Obama had the clarity of thought to step up in October 2002 (on Gandhi's birthday, in fact) and <a href="http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm">call it a dumb and rash war</a>, adding:<br /></span><p></p><blockquote><p> I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.</p><p> I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.</p></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">In a matter with complex details, Obama (and his team) didn't possibly have the best analyses of their health care package, but that's something that is fixed at a smaller cost: the studies of the kind Krugman points out might lead to Obama's plan being revised, Obama might simply incorporate several elements of Clinton's health care proposal, etc. However, in a matter of international significance, in a matter that involved serious cost (and not just in dollars) to the country, Hillary Clinton failed, where the junior senator from Illinois displayed tremendous foresight and levelheadedness.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">For this reason, I voted for Obama.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">The vote is also strategic, to some extent: my thinking is that McCain (or any of the other Republican candidates) might find Hillary an easier opponent to defeat simply because I think that America is less racist than it is sexist. And that is an outcome that I wish to avoid entirely.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"></span></p>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-36398575123365474812008-02-05T10:35:00.000-08:002008-02-05T10:49:57.419-08:00How to increase your odds of winning the Turing Award<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />Consider working in some area related to the broad theme of correctness:<br />formal verification of software/hardware, model-checking, program correctness, program specifications, etc. I can count 8-10 Turing awards in these fields (algorithms/complexity is up there as well, though not in recent years).<br /><br />The <a href="http://awards.acm.org/homepage.cfm?srt=all&awd=140">2008 (or is it 2007?) A. M. Turing award recipients</a> have been announced -- Ed Clarke, E Allen Emerson, and Joseph Sifakis have received the award "[f]or [their] role in developing Model-Checking into a highly effective verification technology, widely adopted in the hardware and software industries."<br /><br />Congratulations to the winners!<br /><br />It is clear that the theme of correctness of programs and hardware, etc., is fundamentally important to the evolution of CS into a sound scientific discipline. However, an outsider to these fields (I should know - my programs and theorems have bugs more often than I'd like), I must complain that I find it hard-pressed to find examples of work by these Turing award winners that have made it to the "mainstream" (say, a typical Masters or a strong undergraduate program in CS). This is the opposite of the situation in algorithms/complexity (despite some counterexamples like Yao's work on pseudo-randomness).</span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-61531277423970697502008-02-01T11:27:00.000-08:002008-02-01T12:04:17.956-08:00Where will Edwards supporters go?<span style="font-family: arial;"><br />John Edwards did a very responsible thing by dropping out of the contest for the Democratic party nomination. He had little chance of winning the nomination, but held the support of a non-trivial fraction of Democratic voters (see the <a href="http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/primaries/democraticprimaries/index.html">NYT Dem Election Guide</a> for fractions that go up to 17% in NH and SC). Given the tight race between Senators Clinton and Obama, it may very well be the case that where the Edwards supporters go will be a decisive force in the contest.<br /><br />In this <a href="http://http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/opinion/01krugman.html">article praising Edwards</a> for his "unabashed populism" and "campaign based on ideas", Paul Krugman explicitly articulates this question:<br /></span><p></p><p></p><blockquote><p>And so Mr. Edwards won the arguments but not the political war.</p><p>Where will Edwards supporters go now? The truth is that nobody knows.</p></blockquote><p></p><blockquote></blockquote><p> </p><span style="font-family: arial;">Here is one crude analysis of where they'd go:<br /><br />Look at Jan 2008 Google Trends for "<a href="http://http://google.com/trends?q=clinton+obama+-edwards&ctab=0&geo=US&geor=all&date=2008-1&sort=0">clinton obama -edwards</a>" -- (I think) this means volume of queries that mention Clinton and Obama but not Edwards -- this could be taken as a measure of how many people are comparing Clinton and Obama, without mentioning Edwards. Now look at the Trends graph for "<a href="http://google.com/trends?q=obama+edwards+-clinton&ctab=0&geo=US&geor=all&date=2008-1&sort=0">obama edwards -clinton</a>" (queries that mention Obama and Edwards, possibly comparing the two) and for "<a href="http://google.com/trends?q=clinton+edwards+-obama&ctab=0&geo=US&geor=all&date=2008-1&sort=0">clinton edwards -obama</a>". The interesting fact is that when you look at all <a href="http://google.com/trends?q=clinton+obama+-edwards%2C+obama+edwards+-clinton%2C+clinton+edwards+-obama&ctab=0&geo=US&geor=all&date=2008-1&sort=0">three graphs</a> or just the <a href="http://google.com/trends?q=obama+edwards+-clinton%2C+clinton+edwards+-obama&ctab=0&geo=US&geor=all&date=2008-1&sort=0">latter two graphs</a> (for a closer view) you'll notice that there are a lot more queries that "compare" Obama and Edwards than there are queries that "compare" Clinton and Edwards. This "implies" that a lot more of Edwards supporters will likely vote for Obama than they would for Clinton.<br /><br />So you heard it here first - be sure to pat my back after Super Tuesday :-)<br /><br />Of course, Edwards supporters might be Edwards supporters for a variety of reasons (can't stand a woman being President, can't stand an African-American being President, don't like Clinton, like his anti-poverty policies, much better haircut than either of the other candidates, etc.), and this "analysis" doesn't take into account any of these -- it's just a crude interpretation of relative query volumes. However, to the extent that search queries are a reflection of the society's thinking at large, this just might be a sound basis to predict an Obama victory.<br /><br />ps: as I type this post on Blogger, its built-in spell-checker stupidly underlines the word "Obama" (but not "Clinton" or "Edwards") -- little does it know...<br /><br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-46068540984105494422008-01-08T22:17:00.000-08:002008-01-08T22:27:02.207-08:00Two Americans<span style="font-family: arial;"><br />One of my favorite "lateral thinking puzzles" that I pose to young children is this:<br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Two Americans are standing in front of the main library in London; one of them is the son of the other one, but the second one is not the father of the first one -- how could this be?</span><br /><br />Surprisingly, the fraction of girls that solve this is roughly the same as the fraction of boys that solve this, and in both cases, the fraction is low.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html">This article</a> by Gloria Steinem in the New York Times revisits this bias in the context of the elections for the Democratic party's Presidential candidate, and includes this gem of a sentence: <span style="font-style: italic; font-family: arial;">"...</span><span style="font-style: italic;">he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex".<br /><br /><br /></span></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-32742234589458662662007-10-29T09:32:00.000-07:002007-10-29T14:15:03.922-07:00Softball data<span chatdir="" style="font-family:arial;"><div class="bz_msg"><div><span chatdir="" style="font-family:arial;"><span class="bz_history_info"><br />From an IM conversation...<br /><br />...<br /></span></span><b style="margin-left: 3px;"><a href="http://research.yahoo.com/bouncer_user/69">Ravi</a>: </b><span chatindex="BE37679CB952D4F163">Next time you write a paper with simulations, you can cite <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fema27oct27,0,913215.story?coll=la-home-center">these guys</a></span></div></div><div class="bz_msg"><div><span class="bz_history_info">Sent at 11:05 AM on Saturday<br />...<br /></span></div></div></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-44600204199275198842007-10-04T13:38:00.000-07:002007-10-04T13:46:21.931-07:00Klawe on math education, teaching...<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />An <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_7059870">op-ed piece</a> in this week's Mercury News by Maria Klawe.</span><span style="font-family:arial;"> See (Listen to?) also <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14594340">this interview</a> by Klawe.</span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-84164448193485120752007-10-04T13:36:00.000-07:002007-10-04T13:45:57.399-07:00You See Berkeley<span style="font-family:arial;"><br /><a href="http://youtube.com/ucberkeley">This</a> had to happen, right?<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-49920027109709461682007-06-25T11:14:00.000-07:002008-12-09T23:47:44.176-08:00Modern Health Science<span style="font-family:arial;">Gotta love it...<br /><br /></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeeBR7vBEFdyvsKO0sFjZ2qIsZACoRl8bN8-hlvMXDrNTg2lCrk0aCTQUJU5QDyOCPjjEvLW2d6AhxnVl0xFveiHSU30aipuxts82bki_IGqinJ0D4toanr8ZbS8S2WZ1777_c/s1600-h/bbc.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeeBR7vBEFdyvsKO0sFjZ2qIsZACoRl8bN8-hlvMXDrNTg2lCrk0aCTQUJU5QDyOCPjjEvLW2d6AhxnVl0xFveiHSU30aipuxts82bki_IGqinJ0D4toanr8ZbS8S2WZ1777_c/s320/bbc.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5080067860124018834" border="0" /></a><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"><br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-30673900779174733152007-05-16T09:40:00.000-07:002007-05-17T12:12:28.842-07:00Gödel Prize, Naturally<span style="font-family:arial;"><br /><a href="http://www.mi.ras.ru/%7Erazborov/">Sasha Razborov </a>and <a href="http://www.cs.cmu.edu/%7Erudich/">Steve Rudich</a> <a href="http://www.eatcs.org/activities/awards.html">have been chosen</a> as this year's <a href="http://sigact.acm.org/prizes/godel/">Gödel Prize winners</a> for their brilliant work on <a href="http://scholar/scholar?q=Natural+Proofs&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search">Natural Proofs</a>. Congratulations<span style="font-family:arial;">!<br /><br />So what are natural proofs?<br /><br />A computer scientist who did some work in complexity theory once quoted someone: "if you wish to separate NP from P, it is not NP that you need to understand, it is P that you need to understand".<br /><br />The natural proofs argument says: if you're going to do that, <span style="font-style: italic;">watch out</span> -- you might need deeper thoughts than you're capable of.<br /><br />Let's say we don't like a circuit complexity class C - we think it's too weak in its computational power (think AC^0, nonuniform versions of Logspace or P). We go into our laboratory, cook up deep thoughts about C, and come up with "nutshell" observations like: if a Boolean function can be computed by C, then it can't be too special -- in fact, it must have property P. [Running example: if a function can be computed by an AC^0 circuit family, it can't be "too sensitive" (the function's value on a random point of the Boolean hypercube must agree with all but polylog many neighbors of the point, whp)]. Then we think a little bit more, and say, "Hey, but wait, here's this function g that doesn't have property P" [Running example, contd: The parity function is like a sweet-tooth on a dentist's chair -- too damn sensitive.] And voila, we've shown a lower bound against class C.<br /><br />All's well, but now let's go and analyze our thought process, specifically, let's try and ask: what's the computational complexity of our deep thought that led to the lower bound? In other words, what's the computational (say, circuit) complexity of the property P? Suppose that P(f), a function on N = 2^n bits, can be computed by some circuit of type/complexity D.<br /><br />On the other hand, by virtue of the fact that we were able to succinctly describe property P in one or two English sentences, it ought to be the case that a random Boolean function almost surely won't have property P. Since we're supposed to be formal mathematicians, let's not handwave, instead let's turn this into an <span style="font-style: italic;">assumption</span>: let's assume that P(f) is False for a random Boolean function f wp. 1 - o(1).<br /><br />The punchline of this kind of dont-attempt-early-in-the-morning-before-a-pot-of-Earl-Grey thinking is that if class C is capable of producing pseudorandom functions that can fool class D, then this scenario is impossible -- after all, given a function from the pseudorandom ensemble of functions produced by class C, what is the class D circuit to do? Since it can tell that the function has property P, it can identify that it was manufactured in the C-factory, something it wasn't supposed to be able to (by defn. of pseudorandom function generator)...<br /><br />Moral of story, illustrated: if there's a pseudorandom function generator computable by polynomial-sized circuits that can fool circuits of size poly(2^n) (or even 2^n^eps), then the property P that you need to come up with to prove a lower bound against polynomial-sized circuits needs to be more complex than can be recognized by a circuit of size 2^n^eps... whew, there I said it in one sentence. In English: to separate C1 from C, it might be futile to pick on C and try and find some human-interest property of all functions computable in C and hope that something in C1 doesn't have that property... you might actually have to be smart and find weirdo functions (like the diagonal language, complete languages, hard-on-average problems) in C1 that are not in C for less blatant reasons.<br /><br />[Technical clarification of the previous sentence: Imagine a circuit T with two inputs, an n-bit string x, and an n^k-bit string s. Via T, one obtains a collection of functions T_s(x) by sticking in all possible "seeds" s. Suppose there is some fixed c (much smaller than k, naturally) such that any circuit of size 2^{n^c} that takes 2^n inputs cannot tell the difference between a random function from the collection {T_s(.)} and a totally random function. Then what we have on our hands is </span></span><span style="font-family:arial;"><span style="font-family:arial;">a polynomial-sized-circuit-computable-pseudorandom-function-generator, the kind of thing <a href="http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/%7Enaor/">Moni Naor</a> might be willing to talk about before breakfast, but one that you shouldn't try making at home.]<br /><br />Next post: the most complex lower bound property I've seen..</span></span><span class="" style="display: block;" id="formatbar_CreateLink" title="Link" onmouseover="ButtonHoverOn(this);" onmouseout="ButtonHoverOff(this);" onmouseup="" onmousedown="CheckFormatting(event);FormatbarButton('richeditorframe', this, 8);ButtonMouseDown(this);"><br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1170118558237353902007-01-29T16:49:00.000-08:002007-01-29T17:03:10.146-08:00A Berkeley Journalism Professor questions Nutrition Science<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />I wrote (long ago) about the importance of <a href="http://globofthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/03/break-assumption.html">breaking an assumption</a> in doing science. In today's NYT, Berkeley journalism professor Michael Pollan <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/magazine/28nutritionism.t.html?ei=5087%0A&em=&amp;en=ce28063f61d4a925&ex=1170219600&pagewanted=all">questions the analytical approach to food</a> (aka nutritionism). I found the first sentence in the following excerpt to be especially quote-worthy, and the genesis of this (a tad too long) article. One of the more thought-provoking essays in The Times in recent memory.<br /></span><p style="font-family: arial;"></p><blockquote><p style="font-family: arial;">In the case of nutritionism, the widely shared but unexamined assumption is that the key to understanding food is indeed the nutrient. From this basic premise flow several others. Since nutrients, as compared with foods, are invisible and therefore slightly mysterious, it falls to the scientists (and to the journalists through whom the scientists speak) to explain the hidden reality of foods to us. To enter a world in which you dine on unseen nutrients, you need lots of expert help. </p><span style="font-family:arial;">But expert help to do what, exactly? This brings us to another unexamined assumption: that the whole point of eating is to maintain and promote bodily health. Hippocrates’s famous injunction to “let food be thy medicine” is ritually invoked to support this notion.</span></blockquote><span style="font-family:arial;">Now that I've started blogging again after a year's hiatus, there's no telling where this might lead...</span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1145645902796730852006-04-21T11:49:00.000-07:002006-04-21T18:06:14.060-07:00Earth Day Quiz<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />Answers tomorrow, on Earth Day, together with pointers to some Google goodies...<br /><br />(0) What is E85?<br /><br />(1) How many 16-oz bottles of bottled water does the average American consume each year?<br /><br />(2) Why does <a href="http://www.khoslaventures.com/">Vinod Khosla</a> (co-founding CEO of Sun Microsystems and venture capitalist extraordinaire) want California to add a new tax?<br /><br />(3) Is it a coincidence that this (clickable) front-page ad from GM on <a href="http://nytimes.com">nytimes.com</a> bears colors from the Brazilian flag?<br /><a href="http://www.gm.com/company/onlygm/"><br /></a></span><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.gm.com/company/onlygm/"><span style="font-family:arial;"><img src="http://m1.2mdn.net/viewad/1137699/concept2_336x285.png" /></span></a><br /></div><span style="font-family:arial;"><br />(4) Who is Vijay V. Vaitheeswaran?<br /><br />(5) What is the single largest energy consuming appliance in a typical household?<br /><br /><br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1145393564080201002006-04-18T13:43:00.000-07:002006-04-18T13:53:35.380-07:00Science du jour...<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />NYT has <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/18/business/18services.html">this</a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/18/business/18services.html"> article on the "science of services"</a>, whatever that means.<br /><br />An ex-colleague of mine wonders: why is this article in the <span style="font-weight: bold;">Business</span> section of NYT?<br /><br />I won't whine (in this post, anyway) about why this is not a science, but will merely lament NYT's lack of critical reporting: there's no discussion of operations research, industrial engineering, "management science", and other mathematical/engineering/business school disciplines (sciences and non-sciences) that subsume this field of deep scientific inquiry many times over.<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1145246637368770722006-04-16T20:54:00.000-07:002006-04-18T13:53:52.286-07:00Most Emailed-About Theory Geek<span style="font-family:arial;"></span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://geomblog.blogspot.com">Geom<br />Blog</a><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Makes it</span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">To a </span><a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/14/books/14fibo.html?ex=1145332800&en=020c7cd2891e3ba4&ei=5087%0A">most<br />Emailed article</a><span style="font-family:arial;">.</span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Congratulations, Suresh V!<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1144954201569754562006-04-13T11:41:00.000-07:002006-04-13T11:50:01.583-07:00Ashamed to be Indian<span style="font-family: arial;">I am usually proud about the culture, heritage, yada yada of India - being the largest democracy, more or less peaceful coexistence of numerous languages, religions, an advanced intellectual core, tons of entrepreneurship, etc. etc.<br /><br /><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4905880.stm">This</a> I fail to understand: a popular movie actor, whose last movie was probably a decade or two ago, dies at age 77 of natural causes, and his fans and others indulge in looting and violence and general unrest. At least five people have been killed following this burst of violence. And they threw stones at a Microsoft office in Bangalore. The technology capital remains shut for two days. This is absolutely idiotic. I fail to see even a sliver of logic behind this.<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1144131947783255802006-04-03T23:15:00.000-07:002006-04-03T23:44:41.760-07:00NYT's new design sucks<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />Decidedly more "content" (links to blogs, etc.), but I find the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/02/business/02ednote.html?8dpc">new design</a> ugly and not user-friendly. Starting with the smaller font, longer pages, ad-heavy top screen, etc., I think I am going elsewhere for my hourly news fix. Both <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/global/">The Times</a> and the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/">BBC</a> have better layout and navigation, I think. BBC even has a sidebar that gives links to the same story in other major newspapers of the world, a definitely cool feature: this site "gets" the web -- your overall value is not just a function of the content you provide but also a function of the links you provide.</span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1144081484693571122006-04-03T09:15:00.000-07:002006-04-03T09:25:04.200-07:00Gapminder<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />Recently at Google, I got to watch parts of a very interesting "Tech Talk" by folks from <a href="http://www.gapminder.org">Gapminder.org</a> -- "... a non-profit venture for development and provision of free software that visualise human development. [This is] done in collaboration with universities, UN organisations, public agencies and non-governmental organisations."<br /><br />The talk had really cool animations of time-series data about various correlations between health and income of populations across the globe. The talk had a strangely interesting kind of self-reference: it was as much about the presentation technology as it was about the data being presented, not unlike, but richer in content than, a power point presentation about powerpoint, or a <a href="http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheCigarStoreIndian.htm">coffee table book about coffee tables</a>...<br /><br />You can view the Gapminder talk in its entirety at <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7996617766640098677&pl=true">Google Video</a> (about 70 minutes).<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1143143000873333452006-03-23T11:36:00.000-08:002006-03-23T11:44:29.996-08:00First we had to factor prime numbers...<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />and now, we need to factor numbers to generate cryptographic keys... (from <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7083/full/440398a.html">"2020 Computing: Champing at the Bits"</a> in <a href="http://www.nature.com">Nature</a> magazine's <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/futurecomputing/index.html">2020 Future of Computing Web Focus.</a> This kind of pedantic peeve aside, the web focus has some pretty interesting articles.</span><br /><br /><blockquote><span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-family:courier new;">In fact, quantum computers are currently little more than two-trick wonders. In 1994, Peter Shor, now based at MIT, devised an algorithm that would allow quantum computers to factor numbers exponentially faster than conventional computers. <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Factorization is important in cryptography, where it is needed to make and break keys.</span> And in 1996, Lov Grover, who is now at Lucent Technologies in Murray Hill, New Jersey, unveiled a quantum algorithm that can greatly speed up database searches.</span></span></blockquote>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1143133160319617852006-03-23T08:30:00.000-08:002006-03-23T08:59:20.396-08:00Break an assumption<span style="font-family: arial;"><br />Every time I hear or read something about the story of how the Wright brothers built the first airplane, I find it inspiring in a new way. Yesterday, I watched a <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wright/">NOVA program</a> on (the recreation of) the Wright brothers' Model B airplane. Here's an excerpt from the <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3015_wright.html">transcript</a>:<br /></span><p style="font-family: courier new;"> <b></b></p><blockquote><p style="font-family: courier new;"><b>TOM CROUCH:</b> The great problem, really, that, uh, flying machine experimenters in the late 19<sup>th</sup> and early 20<sup>th</sup> century faced was the issue of control, and it was the Wright brothers' recognition of the fact that the control issue was going to be critical that initially set them apart from virtually everyone else.</p> <p style="font-family: courier new;"> <b>NARRATOR:</b> While most engineers assumed that a successful aircraft would need to be inherently stable, as bicycle builders, the Wrights made their living building vehicles which were inherently unstable. They knew that a bicycle was stable only if the rider kept it under control.</p> <p style="font-family: courier new;"> <b>TOM CROUCH:</b> Most other experimenters in the field assumed that the control issue was going to be so difficult that the best approach they could take was to build an airplane that had maximum sort of automatic stability, an airplane that would fly in a straight line until the pilot made some sort of control input to change its direction, and then it would continue going in a straight, straight line again.</p> <p style="font-family: courier new;"> <b>NARRATOR:</b> Early designers imagined<b> </b>aircraft as a kind of flying boat. If wind or waves rock a boat, it should be able to right itself. Instead of a boat, the Wrights thought of their flying machine more like a bicycle and rider: if the bike rolled to the left or right it was the job of the rider to keep it upright. The Wrights didn't worry about building automatic stability into their airplanes anymore than they designed their bicycles to go without riders.</p> <p style="font-family: courier new;"> <b>TOM CROUCH:</b> As cyclists, the Wright brothers said to themselves, "Well, if you tried to describe the act of riding a bicycle to someone who'd never seen one, um, what? You're going to roll down the street in this thing with two narrow rubber tires, and you're going to be balancing while you're operating the handle bars."</p> <p style="font-family: courier new;"> It would sound like the sort of feat that only the world's greatest acrobat could accomplish, and yet, they knew that once you learn how to ride a bike, you internalize that, and it becomes perfectly natural and instinctive; you don't even think about it. And they were sure that the same thing would be true of a flying machine.</p></blockquote><span style="font-family: arial;">In other words, they broke an unstated, implicit, assumption that was prevalent in their field. Geniuses often do. In computer science, this is probably a good algorithm design principle - check your assumptions, write them down. The space of possible solutions might include things that you might fail to consider because of your prejudices. Remember the puzzles "place four marbles that are equidistant from each other" and "two Americans were standing in front of the British Embassy in Buenos Aires - one was the son of the other, but the second one was not the father of the first one - how is that possible?"? In each of these, you might have to break an implicit assumption to get to the solution.<br /><br />Strassen broke an assumption when he used subtractions in a matrix multiplication algorithm, as did Gill/Rabin/Solovay-Strassen/Carter-Wegman with randomized algorithms, and Codd with relational databases.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/071671017X/102-2084319-0145768?v=glance&n=283155">Aha! Insight</a> by Martin Gardner has more interesting puzzles, some of which call for breaking assumptions.<br /><br />So, whatever you're doing, go check your assumptions once more.<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16984363.post-1141115551960259902006-02-28T00:13:00.000-08:002006-02-28T00:33:56.556-08:00Several servings of India...<span style="font-family:arial;"><br />With President Bush's upcoming visit to India, there's a flood of India-related articles in the American popular media. I was lucky to catch most of a Charlie Rose interview with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the man widely credited with reforming India's economy. PM Singh was simply scintillating, in my opinion -- the clear, measured, analytical responses of the economics scholar failed to hide his underlying compassion for India's poor.<br /><br />According to the <a href="http://www.charlierose.com/">Charlie Rose website</a>, you may be able to <a href="http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=tvshow%3ACharlie_Rose&so=1">find/download</a> it at <a href="http://video.google.com">Google Video</a> (free for one day after the airing and $0.99 after that). The rest of week includes more interviews with several prominent members of the Indian administration, business, and journalist communities.<br /></span>D. Sivakumarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05750992965116762335noreply@blogger.com0