Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Замд бодсон бодлоос

Сvvлийн хэд хоног хувийн ажлаар хотоос гадуур баахан явах хэрэг гараад блогтой vнэндээ ноцолдож амжсангvй. Pune-Mumbai-Hyderebad-Pune гэсэн маршрутаар 2000 гаран км дэмийрч явахдаа юу эсийг бодох вэ. Тэр бодлуудаасаа та бvхэнтэй хуваалцахыг хvссэн юм.

Non-AC class хагас унтлагын автобусанд суудал нь хvрэлцээгvй учир шалаар нэг зулсан энэтхэгvvдийг хараад єєрийн эрхгvй єрєвдєж билээ. Эхэндээ ч тэдний хєлс шивэрнийх нь vнэрт дасах гэж арай л хамраа даралгvй явж байсан бол сvvлдээ бараг єєрєє нєгєєдvvлтэйгээ адилхан vнэртэй болчихсон арай л толгойгоо нийлvvлж унтаагvй дэг. Зарим нь жоохон хvvхдээ гэдсэн дээрээ тавиад єєрєє хагас суугаа байдалтай унтаж байхад зарим нь суудал авсан мань мэтийн хєлийг дэрлээд унтах гэж vзнэ. Эхэндээ ч тэр нь тээртэй санагдаж байсан боловч яваандаа ажрахаа байгаад толгой дээгvvр нь алхан бууж суугаад сvvлдээ бvр ууж явсан уснаасаа хvртэл хааяа нэг илvvчлэх болов. Тэр vед л энэ шороон тvмэн амьтан ингэж яваагийн буруу нь хэнд байдаг бол гэж бодож байлаа. Харин Энэтхэгvvд єєрсдийгєє хєгжиж буй орон гэдэг ангилалд яваагийнхаа гол бурууг энэ хєлс хир vнэртvvлсэн хэдэн живаа эгэл борчууд руугаа чихэж байдаг. Улс нь хангалттай орлого оловч хvн амынх нь тоонд хуваагаад vзэхээр яагаад ч хєгжингvй орон гэсэн шатанд орох боломжгvй болчихдог учир энэ хэдэн сая ажилгvй, боловсролгvй, залхуу массаа цєєлєх гэж янз бvрийн арга сэдэж толгойгоо гашилгаж байдаг гэсэн. Манай нэг найз ядуусын хороололд архины дэлгvvрvvдэд нь зєвхєн засгийн газраас зєвшєєрєгдсєн vргvй болгох бодис бvхий архи зардаг гэж ярьж байсан. Тэгэхээр энд хvн нь илvvдээд тэр нь хєгжлийг нь саатуулагч гол хvчин зvйл болдог бололтой.
Энд хэдэн сар болчихоод Улаанбаатрынхаа тоост гудамжаар утаат агаарыг нь цээж дvvрэн амьсгалан сэтгэл тэнvvн алхаж явахад хотын гудамжин дахь хvмvvс нь хаачсан юм бол гэж бодогддог сон. Хаашаа л харна уу хvнэн далай урсаж байдаг энэ газар би дасчихсан бололтой.

Харин бємбєрцєгийн нєгєє талд буюу миний эх оронд байдал эсрэгээрээ хvн нь цєєдєєд байдаг юм шиг. Бид ердєє 2.5хан сая (би яг нарийн хэлж мэдэхгvй ч багцаагаар нэг иймэрхvv л байх). Тэгээд аль єнгєтэй єєдтэй, эх орныхоо ирээдvйг авч явах ёстой залуучуудынх нь ихэнх нь гадаадад. Нэг их муу зvйл биш боловч эргэж ирэхгvй бол яах вэ гэдэг нэг зовлон байгаа. Нутагтаа vлдсэн хэд нь нэгнийгээ архичин, худалч, хулгайчаар нь дуудан гуйлгачин болоод ч хамаагvй хилийн дээс алхаадахвал л диваажинд очих юм шиг санан байдгаа золиосонд тавин виз хєєцєлдєнє.
Тэртэй тэргvй хэдvvлэхнээ юм байж яах гэж тэгж нэгийгээ газар дор ортол муучлан улыг нь шагайж явдаг нь гайхмаар. Намайг Германд байхад тэндхийн Монголчууд нутгаас онгоц ирэх тоолонд нисэх рvv очиж шинэ хvмvvсийг хардаг гэж сонсогдож байсан. Шинээр ирсэн нэгийгээ тусалж дэмждэг юм болов уу гэж анхандаа хvvхэд зангаараа гэнэхэн боддог байж билээ. Харин сvvлд сонсохнээ нэлээд инээдтэй, ямаршуу охин, ямаршуу залуу шинээр ирж хэнийд байх нь уу, хэр мєнгєтэй юм шиг байна, юм мэдэхгvй бол танилцаад ашиглаад авъя гэсэн бодолтой очдог юм гэсэн. Баабарын бичиж байсан нvvдэлчин монголчуудын цусанд шингээстэй жалга довны vзлийнх нь орчин vежсэн хувилбар нь тэр байх.
Тэгээд юм л бол нутгархаж бvлгэрхэж талцан аль нэг талдаа ороогvйгээ бєєрєнхийгєєр нь дуудан нєгєє талынхнийгаа бол бvр vзэн ядна. Хэн нэгэн нь жаахан хамтарсан юм хийх гэж оролдохоор хамтрагч нь нэг бол хулхидна, vгvй бол гуравдагч этгээд єєртэй нь хамтарсангvй гэж хорссондоо тэднийг хуйвалдан идэгчдээр зарлана. Харин Энэтхэгт бол хэчнээн хvн нь илvvдэж засгийн газар нь аргагvйн эрхэнд янз бvрийн арга хэрэглэж борчуудыгаа нийгмийн байгууллынх нь хувьд устгахыг хичээдэг ч гэсэн манайхан шиг иймэрхvv зан тєрх гаргаж ингэж галзуурч байхыг би л хувьдаа жил гаран тогоон дотор нь чанагдахдаа хараагvй дэг. Тиймдээ ч эд ингэж хулгана шиг vрждэг биз.

Миний нэг хvндэлж явдаг хvн Япончуудыг Монголтой харьцуулж нэг иймэрхvv утгатай vг хэлж билээ. “Япончууд єчvvхэн жижиг газар нутагтай. Тэр газар нутгийнхаа хэмжээнд єчvvхнээр сэтгэж амьдардаг юм. Харин бид уудам тал шигээ уужуухан сэтгэж амьдрах хэрэгтэй” гэж. Би Японд очиж vзээгvй Япон хvнтэй ч цєєхєн уулзаж байсан болохоор vvнийг vнэн эсэхийг хэлж мэдэхгvй. Гэхдээ биднээс яагаад тэр уудам тал нутаг шиг маань уужуухан ухаан бодол гарахгvй, амьдарч байгаа жалгынхаа хэмжээнд сэтгэн, худгийн мэлхийн vлгэрээр бvхнийг тєсєєлєн боддог юм болоо.
Энэтхэг газрын хєрсєн доорхи эрдэс баялагаараа тун ядуухан орны тоонд ордог. Тиймээс энэ олон хvн єлсєж vхэхгvйн тулд арай єєр хоол хайх болсон нь оюуныхаа хєдєлмєрийг зарах. Одоогоор Энэтхэгийн экспортын нийт бvтээгдэхvvний 60 гаруй хувийг оюуны хєдєлмєр буюу программ хангамж эзэлдэг. Энэтхэгийн мянга мянган залуучууд гадны ихэвчлэн фирмvvдэд урилгаар очиж ажиллан барууны компаниудын оутсорсинг болох дуудлагын тєвvvд єдєрт хэдэн арваараа энд нэмэгдэж байдаг.
Би лав хувьдаа эцэг євгєд маань бидэнд яах гэж ийм элбэг баян газар нутаг vлдээвээ гэж хааяа харамсдаг. Тэртэй тэргvй бэлэн байгаа хоолыг яасхийгээд бvгдээрээ эвлэгхэн хуваагаад идчихээ бодохгvй чи их авлаа, би бага авлаа хэмээн хоорондоо хэмлэлдэж чи ч биш, би ч биш тэгвэл гуравдагч хэмээн гадныхнийг дуудаж ирvvлж байдаг бидний єчvvхэн бодол. Тэртэй тэргvй хоол бэлэн байгаа учир хэрхэн яаж хоол олохоо бодохгvй, харин яаж хуваахаа бодсоор бvхнээс хоцорч байдаг. Энэтхэг шиг юу ч vгvйгээс бvхнийг бvтээх потенциал бидэнд байхгvй гэж vv?

Hyderebad-аас Pune орох замд автобус тvр зогсож жирийн vед бол шагайж ч харахааргvй заваан гуанзанд хоол идэх боловоо. Бараг хориод цаг хэлэн дээрээ юм тавиагvй байсан амьтан тэр балиар завааныг нь ч тоосонгvй гамбиран дээрээ гvйх жоомыг авч шидчихээд сэжиглэхгvй бол яадаг ч vгvй юм гэнэ лээ хэмээн дотроо бодон амаа олохгvй чихэж гарав. Миний єєдєєс харан ядуухан боловч жаргалтай харагдах залуу хос хvvхдээ тэврээд нэг нухсан тємс маягийн юмаар хооллож байгаа харагдана. Нєхєр нь миний єєдєєс харж дулаахнаар инээмсэглээд хориод цаг автобусаар аялсан тэр гурвын сvvлийн хvнс байсан байлгvй нэг жоохон вандуй, шош ямар нэгэн юмтай холиод над руу сарвайж харагдана. Хэчнээн нэрэлхэж татгалзаад ч шалаад байх тул урмыг нь бодон тvvнээс нь хэд vмхлээ. Автобус vvрээр Pune-д ирэхэд шєнєжин миний євдгийг дэрлэж хоносон залуу гараараа над руу нэг даллачихаад нэг гартаа хvvхдээ тэврэн нєгєє гартаа том цvнх бариад авгайгаа дагуулан дуу аяланхан холдож билээ. Хэзээ бид энэ хосууд шиг ядуу ч гутрахгvй, байгаагаараа бvгдийг дайлан уудам тал нутаг шигээ сэтгэж амьдрах бол оо.

М.Огоо
03.10.06

9 comments:

khnmd said...

Mongold, ter tusmaa zahiin duureg oirtoh tusam hestuu humuus ulam ih haragdana. Olon humuus iim baidald baigaa ni uursduus ni, magadgui uur olon huchin zuilees bolno. Ene baidlaas garahad ogoo shig boddog humuus olon baih l heregtei baih. Gehdee zarim tiim bodoltnuud ni Mongoldoo irj hiij buteeh heregtei baih. Magadgui ireh hugatsaagaa jaahan ch bolow naashluulaad... Minii huwid ch togoo shanaganii asuudlaas hetrehgui negen. Yaj garahaa medehgui l baina. Nadaas ch hestuu humuus ergen toirond maani ih baih ymaa. Het huwia hicheesen,er ni bol tamiin togooniii ulger. Ter uudrug, baigaa buhnee busadtai huwaaltsahaas tatgalzdaggui ni ch bas tsuungui l baih. Er ni bol mongoliig hugjuuleh humuus gadaad zuwhun bish mongoldoo bas tsuungui. Gehdee l ted tsuuduud baina. Ted gedegt ni bi orohiig hicheej l baina :)

Anonymous said...

ogoo,
bi chinii ene bichsniig chinii bichsen burees sain saihanyg haidag shigee anhaaraltai bogood amtarhan unshlaa.. tegeed hamgiin suuld ter yaduu zaluugiin garaa sarvaguulaad huuhdee tevreed avgaigaa daguulaad uldej bgaa haragdaad nudnii nulims tsiilegnej bh yum.. ter humuusiig yaduu ch gesen tiim jargaltai bj chadaj bgaad ni bayarlaad nulims tsiilegnej bgaa ni ter.. za za daraa oor bodson yumnaasaa bichnee.. setgel amar bol ter jargalaa..

khishgee said...

Өрөвмөөр юм. Тэгэхдээ үнэндээ тэр залуу биш өөрийгөө жаргалтай хүмүүс гэж бодож явдаг бид нар л өрөвдөлтэй юм шиг.

ehleed ooriigoo todorhoil! said...

jargaltai amidral gedegt standard hemjuur bhgui, tiimees busdiig yaduu esvel jargaltai gej todorhoilj bna gedeg chin ugtaa zovhon ooriinoo umgar setgehuigeer setgeed bgaagiin ilrel bus uu?
ngeed bval busad hun yaduu ch bsan ataarhaj l bdag, bayan ch bsan ataarhaj l bdag neg sonin amisgal haragdaad bh yum. ooriih n buh yum n bolohoo baichihsan tegeed busdiig harahaar l sain saihan yum n tod haragdaad bdag hun shig l bh yum.
ooriin buuznaas ailiin bantan amttai gedeg l bolj dee.
yer n etssiin etsest jargaltai amidral gedeg yumiig bgaagaar n huleej avch "shunalgui" setgej surahtai ih holbootoi bh.

Enkhchimeg_D said...

Yaaval humuusiig bie bienee oilgodog, hudeldeg, hairaldag bolgoh ve??? Humuus hariltsan bie biendee itgej, neg ni nogoogoo demjdeg, hamtarch ajilladag, sanaa bodloo soliltsoj, oilgoltsdog, het tuilshirdaggui tiim l niigemiig baiguulj baival ter ni Communism ch bna uu, Democratic ch bna u hamaa alga aa. Yamar ch -ism bsan hamaa alga, bidend neg tiimerhuu l niigem heregtei bna.

Anonymous said...

Uul ni mongolchuud uujuu dotortoi yu bna tuugeeree daildag tiim l humuus shdee. Huduuguur yavbal uul ni medegdene dee. Haramsaltai ni gadagshaa garch bui humuus ni negnee hulhidsaar bgaad hashraachihsan.Ternees ni bolood gadagshaa yavj bui busaddaa mongolchuudaasaa holhon bai gej zahidag bolchihson emgeneltei unen yum daa. Gehdee busdiig geltgui ta uuruu yadarsan negendee tus hurgeed uuriiguu bolgood eh oron ireeduigee shnaar tusuuluud yavj bhad bolno shdee. Huvia hicheesen archaaguichuudiin toonoos neg huniig hasna gedeg bas l shan hereg. Neeree ene jalga dovnii uzel, bogino bodol zergiig hamag saihan uhaantai uvug deedsee lam neriin dor 30,40-uud ond tsaash ni haruulsnaas bolson gej boddog.

Anonymous said...

eniig bas.
mongol2003

Google and YouTube

Two kings get together
Oct 12th 2006 | SAN FRANCISCO
From The Economist print edition

Google's acquisition of YouTube shows that “Web 2.0” has come of age
AP
“CHAD and Steve remind me of Larry and Sergey,” said Eric Schmidt, father figure and chief executive of Google, on October 9th. Google, founded by Larry Page and Sergey Brin, was announcing its purchase, for $1.65 billion in shares, of YouTube, founded by Chad Hurley and Steve Chen. Messrs Page and Brin created an internet phenomenon with their search engine and refuted conventional wisdom by proving that search could make money when paired with advertising. During the past year Messrs Hurley and Chen (pictured) have created another phenomenon: a simple, fun website to which anybody can upload video clips in order to share them. Every day YouTube fans upload 65,000 videos and watch 100m. Admittedly, YouTube has yet to prove that advertising can make video clips as lucrative as search results. But Google, too, only found a way to “monetise” its service after it had become popular. “This really reminds me of Google just a few years ago,” said Mr Brin, to drive the point home.

With this deal, “two kings have gotten together,” boasted Mr Hurley in a video clip on YouTube, with his team in stitches over the grandiose language. But he was not exaggerating. The stockmarket debut in 1995 of Netscape, the first popular web browser, marked the internet's first generation. The merger of “old media” Time Warner and “new media” AOL, announced in 2000, came to symbolise that era's excesses; and the collapse in 2001 of Webvan, a notoriously hapless dotcom, epitomised the bust. This week's pairing of Google and YouTube may come to be remembered as the moment “Web 2.0”—ie, the web, version two—came of age.

Until recently, however, the deal seemed unlikely. Messrs Hurley and Chen said publicly that they were not looking for a buyer because they wanted to remain independent; privately, they had unflattering things to say about Google and its rival clip-sharing site, Google Video. For its part, Google made many small acquisitions but professed not to be interested in big ones. If anything, Messrs Page and Brin were becoming concerned that Google already dabbled in too many products beyond web search and risked confusing its users.

Both firms changed their minds. For YouTube, a sale was logical. Like the dozens of other independent video-sharing sites, it makes losses, incurs large costs from storing and delivering all those videos, and has no revenues to speak of. It is also walking a legal tightrope because many clips violate copyright. And its investors wanted a return on their money.

A sale to Google neatly solves most of these problems. Google's vast and growing computer farms can store information more cheaply than any other firm's. Its main business of search-related advertising is so profitable that it can afford to carry YouTube until meaningful revenues appear. Google has the largest online network of advertisers, whom it can now refer to YouTube. It has armies of lawyers that can be deployed to handle copyright suits. YouTube's founders and investors will make a fortune. And Google has, apparently, even agreed to allow YouTube to maintain its separate identity.

For Google, the case for buying YouTube was less clear at first. So far, Google has bought tiny technology firms, often to annoy Microsoft, the software giant that dominated the PC era and the first generation of the web. This time, however, Google is buying a rival. According to Hitwise, a market-research firm, YouTube has four times as many visitors as Google Video; according to comScore, another research outfit, YouTube streams nine times as many clips as Google Video. That Google is now prepared to buy, rather than build, market leadership marks a big strategic change.

The deal is “an aggressive, mature move for Google, one that shows that senior management is not too proud or stubborn to see that they can't build everything themselves,” says Henry Blodget, an analyst at Cherry Hill Research. Indeed, Google's Mr Schmidt freely conceded that YouTube is the “clear winner”, especially in creating social networks around its site.

But Google also appears to be thinking a lot further into the future. Its mission is “to organise the world's information,” and a lot of information happens to be in video form. Google's natural impulse is to unleash its algorithms on this video content in order to search it. But direct searching of pictures or videos (as opposed to the words that people attach to describe them) is much harder than indexing and searching text. “Video search simply doesn't work,” says Charlene Li, an analyst at Forrester, a research firm, so users have to “rely on the opinions, ratings, and playlist compilations of others to discover good video.” That means using social networks—precisely YouTube's approach.

Together, Google and YouTube can also better address the single biggest risk to both of them: lawsuits. “Google lawyers will be a busy, busy bunch,” says Mark Cuban, a blogger and billionaire since he sold Broadcast.com, a web-radio firm, to Yahoo!, Google's main rival as a portal site, in 1999. YouTube reminds him of the early days of Napster, an internet service that let users share pirated music. Like YouTube today, says Mr Cuban, Napster said it would remove pirated material at the request of any copyright owner, thus seeking refuge in the “safe harbour” clause of a 1998 copyright law. But Napster lost in court and ceased to exist in its original form.

A combination of Google and YouTube may help in two ways. First, the two companies are such a force in web video that they ought to be able to strike partnership deals with copyright owners who might otherwise sue them. Hours before they made their deal public, both Google and YouTube announced separate deals with music studios and media companies that will make them, in effect, distribution channels for those content owners. Second, YouTube has been working hard on “fingerprinting” technologies that would allow content owners to trace their property as it migrates around the web and to share any advertising revenues it produces. But YouTube has not got very far. “Who is in a better position to develop that technology—60 burnt-out people at YouTube or the legendary technical minds at Google?” asks Forrester's Ms Li.

The main benefit of the deal, however, may be the difficulties it creates for Google's rivals. Yahoo! and Microsoft, as well as News Corporation and Viacom, two media giants, all wanted YouTube. But Google pre-empted them, just as it denied them access to AOL, another portal, in which it bought a defensive stake last winter. Microsoft now claims that it has decided to build its own video-sharing business. But this misses the point: YouTube's value to Google is not its technology, but its audience and its brand, which no amount of clever programming can duplicate. Meanwhile Yahoo!, which has already lost out on several other big deals, will now have to offer ever more desperate prices for Facebook, a social-networking site it is said to be interested in buying. Google's lead looks bigger than ever.

Anonymous said...

ogoo eniig unshaarai. zugeer yum bna.
Charlemagne

The brain business
Oct 12th 2006
From The Economist print edition

How Europe uses and abuses its brainpower

WHICH country is best at fostering and using knowledge and skills? The answer to that might also tell you which country will be most successful economically since knowledge is held to be the key to growth; the European Union has grandiloquently set itself the target of becoming “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world”.

Until now, though, it has been frustratingly hard to measure who is fostering knowledge best. Instead, there have been partial indicators, such as who spends what on research and development. Or there have been indicators of something slightly different, such as competitiveness rankings compiled by the World Economic Forum, the organisers of annual conferences in Davos.

Hence the value of a brave stab at measuring knowledge and skills, broadly defined. It comes from two European think-tanks, the Lisbon Council in Brussels and the Frankfurt-based Deutschland Denken (Think Germany), and has been devised by Peer Ederer of the Zeppelin University in Friedrichshafen.

Mr Ederer's scorecard has four columns. First comes a country's knowledge base or, as economists call it, “human-capital endowment”. This is the imputed value of all the effort that has gone into educating and training everyone in the country. Formal study is part of it, but so is the value of time spent parenting. Results here vary surprisingly widely between countries, with Sweden doing brilliantly and Italy poorly.

This column also includes adult education and in-house training by companies. In turns out that these have at least as big an impact on a country's ability to create knowledge as the relative performance of its education system does. The resulting score for human-capital endowment is then depreciated, for what is called, with delightfully euphemistic tact, “obsolescence in the knowledge base and some level of forgetting”.

Next comes employment. It is no good training people and giving them splendid skills if they don't have a job, so the second measure is “human-capital utilisation”. That is a bit like a traditional employment rate but weighted for education, training and the rest of it. And as it is not much use training people and giving them jobs if they are working inefficiently, the study therefore includes a third measure, of productivity, to capture how well a country is using knowledge. It divides economic output by the human-capital stock (normal productivity measures, in contrast, divide output by the number of hours worked). Lastly, Mr Ederer included demographic change, since even if a country has well-trained people, with good jobs, working effectively, its knowledge base will still decline if low fertility means its working-age population is shrinking.

Putting that lot together, you come up with an overall score. European countries divide into three groups: A-grade students (with Sweden easily the best, followed by Denmark, Britain, Austria and the Netherlands); muddlers in the middle (Finland, Ireland, France and Belgium); and lastly duffers who ought to be held back a year (Spain, Portugal and—oddly—Germany, with Italy trailing way behind).

In some ways, these grades might not look all that surprising. They are similar to what you would get if you looked at countries' general economic management over recent years: the Nordics (including Britain and Austria as honorary members) are doing well; Mediterranean and large continental economies are in trouble. But surprising or not, no one has worked out the impact of knowledge like this before.

There are also revealing details. Finland has, by most measurements, the best education system in Europe, perhaps in the world. Yet it is outstripped on Mr Ederer's scorecard by Sweden and Denmark. Why? Because Swedes and Danes invest more time than anyone else in bringing up children (generous laws on parental leave, perhaps?). They put skilled people to work: 63% of the national knowledge base is in productive use in Denmark but only 55% in France and a measly 52% in Italy; that's a big gap.

The study casts light on why France is doing so well in some ways but so badly in others (it has high unemployment, yet its multinationals are world-beaters). When skilled people are put to work in France, they are highly productive: the country scores well on the productivity ranking. French demography is also favourable. But the country is falling way behind in creating a knowledge base (it scores badly on the human-capital endowment ranking) and it is signally failing to put people to work.

Germany's late for its exams
More worrying, though, is Germany, perhaps the most striking failure among countries in the study. It continues to churn out highly trained people (it comes fifth on the endowment ranking). But it is not to putting them to work: the average age at which Germans graduate from university (at master's degree level) is 28 years, one of the highest in Europe. And its demographic indicators are flashing red: Germany and Italy between them account for 70% of the total decline in western Europe's workforce in the next 25 years.

No one would say these indicators are perfect (they almost certainly understate Ireland's knowledge base, for instance). But because human capital is the main determinant of economic performance, they at least provide a rough guide to future success. Sweden is better placed than its recent election might lead you to think (the result was a demand to reform the “Swedish model”). Germany and Italy are doing worse than they seem.

The study is also a timely reminder that much European debate on innovation and the “knowledge economy” is woefully inadequate. The next time you hear Europeans talking excitedly about increasing research and development spending, as they will undoubtedly do at next week's EU summit, remember that such efforts are only a tiny part of the wider task of building and deploying knowledge.
mongol2003_94

Anonymous said...

Az jargal bol zurkh setgeliinx gej bi boddog. Uchir in zurkhendee zargaltai baij l uils in zov, uxaan in saruul bx bolov u ? Tiimees zurkhee xairla nzuud mine..