Where’s that?

Faroe Islands: Not spelt Farrow, but can be spelt Faeroe instead. The official language is Faroese. They’ve been inhabited since the 4th century, and settled/ruled/owned by Norwegians, English, Danes, Icelandic. If we were to enforce a narrowly won referendum from 1946, Faroe Islands would be an independent state, but that was annulled by the King of Denmark, and so the islands belong to (surprise, surprise!) the Danish Kingdom. Sorry, where is this archipelago, you ask? Midway between Iceland, Norway and the UK in the Atlantic Ocean.

Christmas Island: Closer to Indonesia than to Australia which governs the land, Christmas Island hovers just about 350 km south of the Java Islands. It was named so because of its discovery on Christmas Day in 1643 by an English sea captain with an allegiance to the East India Company. The British lost the island to the Japanese during World War II but eventually reclaimed it. And later, the British Colony of Singapore sold Christmas Island to Australia for $20 Million in 1946 for its Phosphate mines. English, Malay, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Hokkien are the primary spoken languages, and the island boasts of a population of under 2000 people. Christmas Island is known for a natural world’s phenomenon as well, but more on that later.

Cocos (Keeling) Islands: I’m cheating a little bit by picking this next, since it shares most of its history with Christmas Island. Further south of Indonesia (and still nowhere close to Australia), Cocos Islands were also purchased by Australia from the British Singapore in 1955. The island was discovered by William Keeling in 1605, but not inhabited until a certain John Clunies-Ross stopped by 200 years later, planted the flag of the Union Jack, and left with the notion of bringing his wife and family to settle in these islands. Before he could do that though, another wealthy Englishman Alexandre Hare, had the same idea. Except, instead of bringing his family, Hare brought in Malay women to create a ‘voluntary’ harem and settled in the islands. When John Clunies-Ross arrived with his family and some soldiers, a feud grew between the two Brits, with John ultimately winning the islands from a distraught Alexandre whose ‘wives’ had run away or left him for the newly-landed soldiers. John then took over administration of the islands, and even minted his own currency, the Cocos Rupee.

The Brits officially controlled the islands from 1906, even though all the land belonged to John. These islands have a fascinating history in both the world wars, owing to a telegraph station the Brits built here, on an island that they helpfully called ‘Direction Island’. Today, the islanders (all 600 of them) predominantly practice Sunni Islam, and speak Malay. The islands are named so after their abundance of coconut trees.

Related, and absolutely fascinating: The annual red crab migration of Christmas Island occurs around October/November each year, and sees an estimated 40 million red crabs coolly walking, climbing and shimmying across the island to get to the ocean in order to breed. The male crabs start earlier, leaving their homes in the jungle to reach areas around the ocean where they create burrows and wait for their potential female mates. The females arrive fashionably late, and spend an additional couple of weeks incubating the eggs and making a further trip to the ocean to finally release the larvae into the water. Whales migrate to the coast of Christmas Island to feast on the newly released larvae. The baby crabs that survive all this then make the treacherous journey back to the jungles in the middle of the island. Here’s a video of all this chaos.

Things I learnt from this video:

  1. There are crab infrastructures created in Christmas Island each year: this includes crab bridges, detours, and underpasses.
  2. Crabs are cannibals. They feed on the ones that don’t make it to the ocean.
  3. Crabs can climb over absolutely anything.
  4. A female red crab can release up-to 100,000 eggs at once.
  5. Christmas Islanders are alarmingly calm about red crabs.

Here’s a bonus article featuring a video by David Attenborough on the same migration.

Perplexed Potato still can’t figure out where that is.

The problem with labels in arguments

A high school physics teacher once enforced a rule in his classes which still stands out to me as the single best method in learning — ‘You’re only allowed to use a new word once it’s been defined and everyone agrees on its meaning’.

What did this look like in practice? When learning about objects moving at a constant speed, for example, we weren’t allowed to use terms like forceacceleration, or gravity. If we wanted to introduce a new word, we had two choices: take the time to define it for the class, or stick to concepts we’d already established.

That same principle of establishing shared understanding before using a term feels increasingly rare in social discourse.

During conversations about policies, politics, and beliefs, I’ve often heard someone in the group make a quip along the lines of, “That is an X argument” where the X could be ‘communist’, ‘conservative’, ‘sexist’, or the like. It seems intelligent in its premise: someone is able to summarize a nuanced and lengthy argument into a single, succinct label.

Sometimes however, the single, succinct label ‘X’ is used to discredit someone’s nuanced argument. Instead of moving the discussion forward, it’s weaponized to attack the speaker and discredit their argument quickly. Too quickly. Now, the burden of proof shifts: the speaker must defend herself against the label, rather than have her original argument considered on its own merits. And because labels come preloaded with assumptions and baggage, choosing not to reject the label can imply tacit acceptance of everything that comes with it.

Potato stunned by carrot’s labeling

Scott Alexander calls this the Non-Central Fallacy—when a label technically applies to something but leads us to reject it based on extreme or unrelated associations. His article shows someone dismissing a scientific concept as “sexist,” not because it devalues women, but because it talks about sex differences at all. The word might technically apply, but it’s doing more to stop the conversation than to clarify it.

″Evolutionary psychology is sexist!” If you define “sexist” as “believing in some kind of difference between the sexes”, this is true of at least some evo psych. For example, Bateman’s Principle states that in species where females invest more energy in producing offspring, mating behavior will involve males pursuing females; this posits a natural psychological difference between the sexes. “Right, so you admit it’s sexist!” “And why exactly is sexism bad?” “Because sexism claims that men are better than women and that women should have fewer rights!” “Does Bateman’s principle claim that men are better than women, or that women should have fewer rights?” “Well…not really.” “Then what’s wrong with it?” “It’s sexist!”

So what can I do about it? The next time a label gets thrown into a conversation in an attack, this is a note to myself to pause, turn around, and ask the label-lover to define it.

“What do you mean by X?” or “Why do you think this is X?”

Maybe that way, the onus of defense goes back to the wielder of labels, and we can open the door to more meaningful dialogue with respect, nuance, and shared understanding.

I don’t have to wear glasses anymore!

Notes from the day I had Lasik + other eye related trivia

January 5, 2023

For the last 20 years of my life, the first thing I’ve done in the morning has been to fumble for my glasses. After every good night’s rest, and every not-so-good uncomfortable nap in cars. In the car, it’s usually tucked away into the seat pocket in front of me while I sleep on my mum’s lap. At home, despite all my promises of consistency, they move everyday — sometimes on my desk, sometimes atop the rightful bedside table, sometimes curiously placed within last night’s book under the bed, but mostly, they lie in bed next to me when I sleep alone. So each morning I fumble with the sheets, feeling for the frame with my hands. I’ve even sought help in this regard – yelling for my parents on school day mornings to aid in my searches.

Usually, they never come off after, apart from the aforementioned naps in cars, swims, and showers. Swims are usually an adventure of their own while showers are relatively easy, especially in known terrain. Even still, I carry my glasses into the shower each time, taking them off at the last possible second. I put them back on immediately after, making my way out of the bathroom with foggy and wet vision.

When I swim, I usually study the pool before jumping in. I’ve also gotten good at judging distances and velocities of oncoming traffic of swimmers. I’ve only bumped into a handful of swimmers in all of my experience. Finding friends however, is a more challenging chore. Over the years I’ve memorized the colors of their swim caps — the bright neon of my brother, the blue and teal of my best friend — beacons in the pool. Mostly I assume that since they’ll be able to see me, things are okay, and this strategy has worked.

The ocean is a different terrain, literally. Here, what bothers me is not even the crowd of strangers and the conspicuous absence of swim caps. It’s the sand underneath! Or what is supposed to be sand underneath. Each step is panicky, unknowing of whether I’m about to step on sand or stone, or — and you can call this an irrational fear — a starfish or a toad. I’ve worn my glasses in the ocean more times than sensible.

It’s surprising to me therefore, in all my years adorning these fragile equipments atop my face that I’ve only broken 3 pairs of glasses. Most recently, last year, by taking a football to my face. When I was 14, I had the acute stupidity of purchasing the then fashionable, and to-date utterly impractical ‘frameless’ spectacles.

Predictably so, I broke them playing with my cousins. Unpredictably, we were playing a ‘game’ we called War wherein two opposing teams (usually formed on pre-existing rivalries) would wield anything within a child’s bedroom as a weapon and throw all things from pillows to tennis balls, sketches to badminton racquets at each other until a team (or usually one injured player) calls quits. That we only broke a pair of frameless spectacles (and a lot of ego) in these games is by itself a miracle worth dwelling on. That all it took was my youngest cousin’s soft plushie to my face is, if anything, cute. We later got the ‘frames’ fixed and repurposed as my amma’s spectacles. I got dealt a marginally more practical metal frame.

I’ve squished metal frames innumerable times, and they’ve portrayed immense resilience each time. Mostly they’d just get malformed, like play-dough. In a careful adult’s hands, they’d be back to perfect in seconds. I always handed mine to my mum’s surgical, sure hands. I’m not sure how my dad would have fared.

The third and final time is a hazy memory. I can’t tell if I’m making it up. I was in 3rd grade. I had a pair of metal glasses. My vision was good enough that I could make do without glasses, although I wore them most of the time. I recall placing them on the railings of my school corridor on the 3rd floor. I remember wondering if they’d survive the fall (some kid in my class had boasted that his had). I remember then running downstairs to pick up my unscathed pair of glasses from the hot, dusty ground. Whether I had intentionally dropped them or the wind had carried them over — I don’t know. Hell, I don’t even know if I’ve made this memory up. I’m just realizing that in any case, they didn’t break, so this incident doesn’t count. Never-mind then.

I’ve been called ‘butti’ (Tamil colloquial word for glasses that is mildly insulting) all the time. I’ve grown rather dear of that nickname.

Wintry, unspectacular potato looks back perplexedly at its past framed face.

Outside of a few trials and tribulations with lenses, butties have been a staple diet on my face for 2 decades. I have my LASIK (laser assisted in situ keratomileusis, or one of those words that you’ll know is an acronym but can’t quite place) procedure scheduled for today and I know it isn’t a big deal. I know it is a simple procedure. I know millions of folks have undergone this. I’m not scared (well, I’m not terrified). I’m certainly sentimental though.

– Butti

First few thoughts post-surgery:

  1. My ophthalmologist lied when he called this a painless surgery.
  2. If one eye hurts more than the other, does it mean they botched half the surgery?
  3. Where are my glasses?
  4. My head hurts. On one side. Refer to (2).
  5. I need to remove my lenses/my eyes are dry. (Post surgery, eyes tend to dry out since a part of the procedure cauterizes nerves that connect the cornea to tear glands. This leaves the eyes with a contact-lenses-worn-too-long feeling.)
  6. Whoa, did the window always have so many cracks?
  7. How do people sleep with so much entertainment? One routine I’d created unknowingly was a ‘bedtime mode’ for my vision. Like turning off blue light or setting your phone on B/W mode, removing my glasses made the world dimmer, a bit duller. The world was now too entertaining to just go to sleep. This took a few days to get over.
  8. I can SEEEEEEE! (This I repeated so many times I’m surprised no one has told me off, yet.)

More on eye-related things!

  1. What is Astigmatism, anyway? Here’s a 110 second video with a 60 second explanation.
  2. ‘Starry-Eyed’ can mean you’re an optimist with impracticable thinking. It could also mean that your retina has been detached from the back of the eye by the vitreous fluid and that you need immediate medical attention. As we say it, potato, po-tah-to.
  3. Strawberry Squids, besides having a bizarre name, outdo the rest of us puny species with an asymmetric evolution in vision. The two eyes of the squid are differently sized — one is almost twice as large as the other, and are positioned differently to allow for separate functions. The larger eye is positioned to look up, to sight shadows using the dim sunlight that pervades the depths of the ocean. Sunlight can only permeate up to 200m under the ocean’s surface and Strawberry squids can be found up to 1 km under the surface. The smaller eye on the other side of the head looks down for bioluminescence in the water.
  4. ‘Madras Eye’ or conjunctivitis is an infection to the outermost portion of the eye that can be caused by virus or bacteria. The common name of ‘Madras Eye’ doesn’t seem to have an obvious explanation, apart from a singular pithy article in The Hindu claiming that the virus was first discovered in Madras in 1918. I suppose ‘Madras Eye’ has a better ring to it than ‘Chennai Eye’.
  5. Hindsight is always 20/20 or 6/6? From the 20/20 of visual acuity, the phrase generally means that things are obvious in retrospection that weren’t clear at the onset. I recently found out 20/20 is the same as 6/6 – one’s in imperial units and the latter is in meters. 6/6 means you, at 6 meters away can see what an average person can see at 6 meters. Having a vision of 20/16 would mean you have superior eye-sight, you can see at 20 what the average person can only see from 16 feet away.

And About That: Happy New Year or Happy new year?

Resolutions are for people who have flaws and fallibilities, never mind the rest of us

It’s that time of the year again!

Like our calendar, our resolutions also have European roots. January, derived from the name of a Roman God Janus, represents the month when Romans would promise the God to be on their best behaviour, which back then was displayed by paying their debts and returning ‘borrowed’ objects. Janus is one of Rome’s rare own Gods, with no counterpart in Greece. Depicted as the god of transition, Janus is imagined to have two faces – one looking back at history, and the other facing forward, into the realms of future. (Given such mythological powers, which direction would you look?)

On that note, here are some of our inspirations for setting resolutions for the year!

On setting atomic goals, from Veritasium.

And on setting supersized themes instead, from CGP Grey(Clearly I couldn’t make up my mind on which one works better and chose the lazy way out by leaving the readers to decide).

Whatever your resolutions are, one recommendation from us is to have regular check-ins to see how you’re tracking and adjust the goals accordingly. This app has worked well for half of us who’ve tried it.

How do you plan to send wishes for the new year? What do the wishes mean grammatically, and behaviorally (I think):

  1. Happy New Year!
    • Only valid for Jan 1, or a few weeks in January for the perpetually tardy.
  2. Happy new year!
    • The more generous wish – here’s to wishing 364 times more fun than the folks above.
  3. Happy New Year’s!
    • New Year’s what?
  4. Happy New Years!
    • Talk about being generous! They’re wishing a wonderful rest of your life (whether that means they never intend to ever meet you again, we don’t know).
  5. Happy 2023!
    • We see what you did there. Smart.
  6. I don’t partake in such trivialities of humankind. I’ll abstain.

On the presumed utility of shoes

Why do we glove our feet?

For insulation, primarily. Some kind of covering for feet were used in cold northern climates as early as 500,000 years ago, and the earliest forms of shoes for support are estimated to have come into use 40,000 to 26,000 years ago.

How do we know this? By examining the bones of early Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthals. Wearers of shoes tend to develop weaker toes owing to a reduced need for strength and flexibility, with the shoes doing most of the work of gripping ground. Studies have shown that Native Americans who were regularly barefoot had stronger toes than Inuits in Alaska who wore insulating footwear, proving that the weakness/strength of toes is not evolutionary!

In another case of barefoot behaviour, one of the earliest hunting strategies of humans relied heavily on long-distance running. Hunters (ancient versions of us) chased the prey until the latter eventually tired and slowed down. At this point the early humans could kill from short distances – typically by clubbing/stoning. This also gave them the unique ability to attack other predatory creatures, which were incapable of sustaining their speedy, lithe attacks over long periods time. Called ‘Persistence Hunting’, this could make for several hours of heated pursuit – the kind that would warrant a $100 pair of running shoes today.

… all of which leads us (un)comfortably to why I started thinking about this in the first place — heels hurt — the Sam Edelman and Jimmy Choo kind, not the Achilles kind. With return to office around the corner, I returned to the long-forgotten pain of shoe bites (albeit just a hybrid thrice a week for now), and to the nagging question of why we wear shoes.

While I started with achy heels, my blissfully unaware co-author researched sneakers and their evolution, of which we’ll definitely not hear about in the next issue (scheduled for 6 shoe bites later). I’m sure it’s going to be rant on rubber soles or something.

What’s that and why?

Stilettos: Thought to be named after long pointy needle-like swords of Italian origin. The word itself comes from Latin ‘stilus’, a thin pointed Roman writing instrument for engraving wax or clay tablets. The same root word also gave rise to ‘stylus’.

Etymologically strong Perplexed Potato ordered the wrong item

Bata: Founded in 1894 in today’s Czech Republic, named after the founding cobbler Tomáš Baťa. (Did you also think it was an Indian company? No? Neither did we…)

Hawai Slippers: The ultra comfortable, all-withstanding tropical slippers made of rubber we wore growing up are not universally known as the ‘Hawaii slipper’. In fact it’s spelt ‘Hawai’ and was the name given to the sandals by Bata, which introduced and popularized the style in India. Most of the world calls them by their onomatopoeic name ‘flip-flops’. They’re called ‘zoris’ in Japan, ‘jandals’ in New Zealand, ‘plakkies’ in South Africa, and confusingly known as ‘thongs’ in Australia. Hawaiians call them ‘slippers’.

And about that…Coriander/Cilantro

This flavorful green has a longer history than its unassuming nature showcases. We’ve found evidence of coriander use six to eight thousand years ago in Israel, and the question of where it originated and was first put to use is still unanswered. The range of that answer covers all the way from Portugal to Israel, approximately 4000 kms in distance.

Interestingly, while the taste of these leaves is typically described as lemony/tart-like, one in four people instead describe them as ‘soap-like’. Odd as it seems, this is linked to a gene that detects aldehydes (that chemical term we learnt in high-school) in coriander which are also incidentally used in soaps and odorants.

Coriander seems to have always had a problem with hiding its body odour. The very name coriander derives from koríannon (Ancient Greek) which is related to kóris, the term for a bed-bug in Greek. The Spanish name cilantro also derives from coriandrum, and is the more common American term for this plant owing to its large use in Mexican cuisine.

Turns out that before we linked the smell of coriander to the cleansing smell of dish-soap, it was already linked to the smell of bed-bugs, and hence earned its name. The 1 in 4 people aren’t the ones who seem like weirdos anymore, huh?

Potato holding a sprig of coriander and wondering why