mythbusters# Joke - 肚皮舞运动
c*x
1 楼
印度卢刚mainak sarkar，亚克西
发信人: eatshiit (hello1231), 信区: Military
标 题: 两篇关于印度卢刚mainak sarkar的文章，部分印度人英文还是不错
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Feb 16 09:51:36 2019, 美东)
http://theglobalcalcuttan.com/?p=5052
https://secondsaturn.com/2016/06/21/ucla-shooter-mainak-sarkar/
发信人: eatshiit (hello1231), 信区: Military
标 题: Re: 两篇关于印度卢刚mainak sarkar的文章，部分印度人英文还是不
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Feb 16 09:53:16 2019, 美东)
Prof Garfinkel says that Mainak wanted the output of his research as his own
property but this was not possible because the UCLA had funded the research
and the research rightfully should have belonged to the UCLA and not to
Mainak. While Garfinkel was talking of money, Mainak was talking of
authorship. Institutions repress individuals and often subsumes the most
brilliant work under its label. What is even more annoying is that a
brilliant worker is loaded with seven or eight non- performers as a “team”
so that they can piggyback ride into fame. This happens all the time with
research institutions where brilliant performers are rendered invisible and
silent and are routinely absorbed and camouflaged under a team. What can be
even more annoying is that mediocre bosses claim fame by plagiarism when
their incumbency in the hierarchy allows them to access intellectual
property of any member of the team. Team work is often subservience to
ruthless intellectual exploitation of the brilliant by the mediocre. To my
mind, both Prof Klug and Prog Garfinkel were using Mainak Sarkar to do the
coding while appropriating his research and sharing the credit with the team
at large, the team mostly consisting of their cohorts. Would it ever have
mattered to put the name of Mainak Sarkar as the lead researcher, or as the
team leader or as the principle scientist? But, the idea was not to give
credit, the idea was to appropriate the intellectual property, to steal by
stealth of the institutional set up and organizational structure and then
embalm it through the plethora of rules and conventions of the IPRA which
talks only of money and not of credit. American Universities are ruthless in
this business. And don’t I know?
发信人: eatshiit (hello1231), 信区: Military
标 题: Re: 两篇关于印度卢刚mainak sarkar的文章，部分印度人英文还是不
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Feb 16 09:53:54 2019, 美东)
Despite receiving advanced degrees even from reputed institutions in the USA
, he failed to improve his social status. To add insult to injury, his wife,
who was merely a language graduate when he met her, had elevated her status
to that of future doctor, with earning potential greater than him.
According to her grandmother, she teased Mainak, and he didn’t take it well.
The oft-described loner, Sarkar, was already ill at ease, socially, and
neither took well to criticism or teasing. For an IIT graduate, to be
belittled by a plain-looking language graduate in a parochial locality in
the US must have been humiliating. This too occurred while he was working a
mediocre job at a rubber company in an insecure environment and driving an
old beat-up car while others who’d studied with him were making good money,
setting down roots. His thesis advisor was only a year older than him, and (
in another life) might well have been peer rather than academic adjudicator.
A 2007 article in Scentific American on failure to meet expectations and how
it motivates violence, quoted Nobel Laureate economist, John Harsanyi, on
human motivation. He said that “apart from economic payoffs, social status
seems to be the most important incentive and motivating force of social
behavior.”
If an improvement in social status was at the heart of Sarkar’s mountainous
climb in his life’s journey, all the hard work and sacrifice might have
seemed, towards the end, as all for nothing.
发信人: eatshiit (hello1231), 信区: Military
标 题: 两篇关于印度卢刚mainak sarkar的文章，部分印度人英文还是不错
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Feb 16 09:51:36 2019, 美东)
http://theglobalcalcuttan.com/?p=5052
https://secondsaturn.com/2016/06/21/ucla-shooter-mainak-sarkar/
发信人: eatshiit (hello1231), 信区: Military
标 题: Re: 两篇关于印度卢刚mainak sarkar的文章，部分印度人英文还是不
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Feb 16 09:53:16 2019, 美东)
Prof Garfinkel says that Mainak wanted the output of his research as his own
property but this was not possible because the UCLA had funded the research
and the research rightfully should have belonged to the UCLA and not to
Mainak. While Garfinkel was talking of money, Mainak was talking of
authorship. Institutions repress individuals and often subsumes the most
brilliant work under its label. What is even more annoying is that a
brilliant worker is loaded with seven or eight non- performers as a “team”
so that they can piggyback ride into fame. This happens all the time with
research institutions where brilliant performers are rendered invisible and
silent and are routinely absorbed and camouflaged under a team. What can be
even more annoying is that mediocre bosses claim fame by plagiarism when
their incumbency in the hierarchy allows them to access intellectual
property of any member of the team. Team work is often subservience to
ruthless intellectual exploitation of the brilliant by the mediocre. To my
mind, both Prof Klug and Prog Garfinkel were using Mainak Sarkar to do the
coding while appropriating his research and sharing the credit with the team
at large, the team mostly consisting of their cohorts. Would it ever have
mattered to put the name of Mainak Sarkar as the lead researcher, or as the
team leader or as the principle scientist? But, the idea was not to give
credit, the idea was to appropriate the intellectual property, to steal by
stealth of the institutional set up and organizational structure and then
embalm it through the plethora of rules and conventions of the IPRA which
talks only of money and not of credit. American Universities are ruthless in
this business. And don’t I know?
发信人: eatshiit (hello1231), 信区: Military
标 题: Re: 两篇关于印度卢刚mainak sarkar的文章，部分印度人英文还是不
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Feb 16 09:53:54 2019, 美东)
Despite receiving advanced degrees even from reputed institutions in the USA
, he failed to improve his social status. To add insult to injury, his wife,
who was merely a language graduate when he met her, had elevated her status
to that of future doctor, with earning potential greater than him.
According to her grandmother, she teased Mainak, and he didn’t take it well.
The oft-described loner, Sarkar, was already ill at ease, socially, and
neither took well to criticism or teasing. For an IIT graduate, to be
belittled by a plain-looking language graduate in a parochial locality in
the US must have been humiliating. This too occurred while he was working a
mediocre job at a rubber company in an insecure environment and driving an
old beat-up car while others who’d studied with him were making good money,
setting down roots. His thesis advisor was only a year older than him, and (
in another life) might well have been peer rather than academic adjudicator.
A 2007 article in Scentific American on failure to meet expectations and how
it motivates violence, quoted Nobel Laureate economist, John Harsanyi, on
human motivation. He said that “apart from economic payoffs, social status
seems to be the most important incentive and motivating force of social
behavior.”
If an improvement in social status was at the heart of Sarkar’s mountainous
climb in his life’s journey, all the hard work and sacrifice might have
seemed, towards the end, as all for nothing.
