Home> Current Affairs

Current Affairs Archive

India first

November 11, 2009 Category :Current Affairs 21

I am a gujarat bred, maharastra settled, marathi, hindu, brahman. There. Thats how many people expect me to define myself. Actually thats not accurate, since I have no clue how others expect me to define myself. I never asked them. But looking at many other’s behaviour, I do have suspicions they may choose to define themselves along similar lines. So be it. At least that was my take. But no more. Because such classifications eventually end up isolating, not defining me. I am an Indian.

Looking at history of nation states, India is but a recent entrant. For long it was a continuously fickle set of shifting boundaries, changing dynasties and deeply distinct cultures (or subcultures if you will). The british exploited it. Big time. They rode the fissures. They ruled us. And they plundered us. They left. And it seems they took the learnings of that era with them as well. Because I don’t see those learnings around me.

1947 was an experiment. It was an experiment where someone decided to actually form a country called India. They started an experiment to forge a national identity that never existed in the thousands of years of a continuously thriving culture and economy. Thus was born a nation state without any corresponding consistent cultural identity, and a history that documented far more internecine wars than external conflict. A state where the neighbouring household could sometimes be perceived as a far bigger threat than a massive army across the border. A state which basically was given no reason to really survive save one – democracy. 62 years later, this state is starting to move just a little faster. And it is starting to get noticed. But it is like a vehicle from a post apocalypse movie – a torn down vehicle which is powerful but is struggling to move since the friction of its own parts substantially exceeds the friction it really needs to conquer – the one with the road. And its manned by a group of continuously bickering and bitching, rag tag motley crowd, who are paying more attention to who is able to sit more comfortably in the vehicle rather than where and how fast the vehicle is moving. This is the generation I see today. Around me. The midnight’s grandchildren. More than a billion of them. Who basically have been spectacularly unsuccessful at overcoming the same prejudices their parents, grandparents and all other forefathers suffered from. All while cynically attempting to protect the sacred heritage their forefathers left them. Cynically since they disregarded that heritage wherever and whenever necessary – and yet never giving up on the issue when it came to livingroom debates.

Back to the nation. We attempted to define a common identity was a strong message from the pulpit. But the subidentities forged from centuries (nay millenia) of continuous history were simply too strong to be messed around with. The stories I’ve heard of the post 47 era were much worse. People wouldn’t sit in the vehicle of someone who belonged to another religion. And they wouldn’t eat the food prepared by someone of a different caste. Some of these have changed for the better. Some haven’t. And some things have gotten worse. The last name of a person is still eagerly requested as a pathway to understand his linguistic, religious and casteist identity. Religious representations in companies are disproportionately high or low compared to the population. The political system is just so full of casteist computations. And both government and private sector are rife with allegations of some particular linguistic group dominating another or hiring more of self. Some localities end up serving as the area where a people of particular language or religion are to be found in far more proportion than local populations. And affirmative action seems to be restricted to a set of historically identified and perpetuated set of people and their offspring – as if diversity management was supposed to be restricted only to those constitutionally identified as economically challenged. And the state doesn’t fall behind. Lack of diversity in the police forces has at times become the bone of contention.

We have fissures. Deep fissures. Fissures that splinter us. These fissures are the arcs that are just so easy to exploit. But allow me to be explicit. We are idiots. Idiots for treating these very fissures as walls. Walls that somehow protect us from those beyond. But one thing I must give ourselves credit for. We are not dumb idiots. We are actually smart idiots. We are smart enough to understand that there is a whole ecosystem of vultures out to exploit these fissures. We know these vultures are upto no good. We are smart enough to understand that the only way to defeat these challenges is by overcoming the prejudices, breaking down the inner walls and treating each other as friends. The only thing that makes us idiots is that we believe these behaviour need to be adopted by “everyone else”. I imagine my language, my religion, my caste, my subcaste, my region is under threat by vile, evil, beyond the wall participants. So the assessments I make are convictions and the same by others are prejudices. So the actions I take in forming tighter groups or specifically promoting or supporting people of my ilk is a defensive action while everyone else across the wall who does the same is offensive.

We’ve paid some costs for these fissures. We’ve had to deal with severe caste strains in post independence India. We see massive agitations grounding states to a halt for segments of the population to be listed for special constitutionally accorded benefits for the economically deprived. We’ve had to deal with the army marching into strongly fortified sacred religious sites. We’ve seen a communal backlash post a prime minister getting assassinated, the assassination itself being the end result of a long journey that started off with politicians attempting to exploit these very fissures I referred to. We’ve had another prime minister getting assassinated – again as a eventual culmination of a process of attempting to further fan linguistic divisions in foreign lands. We’ve seen a train getting burnt followed by a government abdicating as a state burnt. We’ve seen strong agitations against the inflow of migrants from a neighbouring country. We now see protests against intra India migration, violent incidents to redraw linguistic demographics, and even state legislature members attacking each other for the choice of language used. Notwithstanding the fact that there certainly were some aggrieved parties in each such episode or in the history leading to each such episode – the fact is people on all sides of the table actually believe they were the aggrieved party. A fissure. And common to all these is the cynical exploitation of these fissures. Exploitation which undermines the very principles of equal rights within and across the nation. Exploitation that takes away the very protection from discrimination thats the essence of a vibrant society. Exploitation by those who are supposed to represent us. Those who we call leaders. Those who come to seek our votes. Those who preach holier than thou from the podium. Those very people we shudder to even consider to lead our household. The very ones who we instead elect to our legislatures. They tell us the other castes need to be shown their place. They tell us our religion not the country defines our brotherhood. They tell us our language is under threat. They tell us our state would be so much better but for all the others making it such a bad place. They tell us that to extract our vote. We listen. We see the craftiness. But we are blinded by it. The trap appeals to the emotion even as it dulls the rationality. We actually come under the influence even as we believe others are getting waylaid. We vote. The machiavellian victory is complete. Our loss, invisible behind a smoke and mirrors act. At least for a while.

There’s only one way to beat this. There’s only one way to resurrect ourselves. Use the yardstick – India first. For this the most important ingredient is to believe that our identity as Indians dominates and overrides our identities defined by caste, creed, language, religion, region etc. Sure we have a debt to pay to our gods. But I suspect thats an activity thats best left to doing when in heaven. While on earth pay the debt to humanity first in order to get to heaven. Sure we need to protect our language. But do that through supporting its literature, theatre and most importantly using that language at home within the family. Sure our region needs to be supported. So work hard to make the region that much more economically prosperous and pay your taxes diligently. There are ways to support and strengthen all such affiliations without being derisive or divisive. When you form social, professional, or organisational affiliations – encourage diversity and try to find the best Indians you can affiliate with. When you go out to vote – make sure you think of whats right for India. And we will run into those who place their linguistic, religious, regional or casteist affiliations above that of the one with India. Grant and respect the freedom of expression accorded to them, hear them out if unavoidable. But do make sure you exercise your freedom of expression as well, as you greet them – a slight smile even as you politely say – Fuck You.

,

Pune’s 20 power twitterers

October 31, 2009 Category :Current Affairs 13

So twitter launched lists and many believe these will be a new mechanism for computing reputation instead of the current defacto followers. It is not a restricted knowledge that using follower counts as a measure of effectiveness of twitter is a extraordinarily error prone and brave exercise due to the obvious. Given the appearance of twitter lists, I was keen on figuring out if there is a way to reasonably measure effectiveness of a twitter id. This post details the exercise I went through. While there could be discussion around the exact semantics of such a computation and whether the results are consistent with everyone’s expectations, let me assert that I find the result sufficiently superior to anything else I’ve seen or I’ve been able to imagine so far. And that may stem from or despite the fact that two of my twitter handles (@dnene and @d7y) feature in this list.

As an input I took the top 50 handles from pune from twittergrader.com. Why top 50 ? Only part of the process was automated – the remaining required manual input. I did not want to spend too much time on doing data entry. This also gives you the twitter grader grade. I subsequently looked at the reputation of the handle in Klout, looked at the lists which included the handle and finally also looked at the twitter rank as expressed by yet another site twitter-friends.com. I computed rankings using each of these. I finally created a sum of all the ranks, and create a composite rank based on the sums. The interesting aspect of this computation was not just the end results but also some of the intermediate results.

So without further ado – here’s what I found

Ranked as per twitter grader

  1. shinils
  2. arthut
  3. indianguru
  4. sandeepjain
  5. tmalhar
  6. brajeshwar
  7. rohit_shah
  8. ghoseb
  9. rkartha
  10. prateekgupta
  11. ajinkyaforyou
  12. gauravsaha
  13. inkv
  14. aparanjape
  15. scepticgeek
  16. meetumeetu
  17. nishantmodak
  18. czaveri
  19. phpcamp
  20. ngkabra

The rank based on followers or twitter grader ranks was not well correlated with the other ranks. In my mind there is a sufficient rationale to question the effectiveness of both followers count or twitter grader as an ability to reach or influence or engage with others, even though twitter grader grade is slightly better than a folliower count. Thats why the other ranks turned out sufficiently differently ?

Ranked by Klout

  1. brajeshwar
  2. scepticgeek
  3. gauravsaha
  4. ichaitanya
  5. sahilk
  6. indianguru
  7. irohan
  8. rkartha
  9. phpcamp
  10. dnene
  11. ghoseb
  12. ngkabra
  13. prateekgupta
  14. d7y
  15. trakin
  16. aparanjape
  17. adityab
  18. punetech
  19. inkv
  20. nishantmodak

To my lay reading this had a stronger emphasis on people who engaged with others, were conversational and had a high update count as well.

Ranking by Twitter Lists

  1. sandygautam
  2. indianguru
  3. scepticgeek
  4. dnene
  5. brajeshwar
  6. phpcamp
  7. ghoseb
  8. adityab
  9. inisa
  10. rkartha
  11. aparanjape
  12. gauravsaha
  13. prateekgupta
  14. meetumeetu
  15. punetech
  16. ngkabra
  17. trakin
  18. freemanindia
  19. aaruc
  20. rush_me

To me this reflected not the spread of the following as much as the strength of the following. Notice how @sandygautam who very tightly focuses on psychology and is well respected twitterer in that area moves to the top (in a rather dominating way I might add)

Rank using Twitter Rank computed by Twitter-Friends

  1. scepticgeek
  2. ghoseb
  3. prateekgupta
  4. gauravsaha
  5. aaruc
  6. dnene
  7. rkartha
  8. adityab
  9. aparanjape
  10. sandygautam
  11. trakin
  12. d7y
  13. meetumeetu
  14. irohan
  15. aditto
  16. clickonf5
  17. rush_me
  18. sahilk
  19. punetech
  20. brajeshwar

This is an interesting metric and while I couldn’t help clearly identify what drove this, would be certainly willing to lend a ear if you want to come up with a suggested rationale.

So the final 20 pune power twitterers based on a composite of the 3 metrics, which in my perception is not terribly different than a list that I would come up with using my gut feel (though perhaps with different rankings) is …. drumroll … drumroll ..

Pune power twitterers

  1. scepticgeek
  2. gauravsaha
  3. ghoseb
  4. dnene
  5. rkartha
  6. brajeshwar
  7. prateekgupta
  8. indianguru
  9. adityab
  10. aparanjape
  11. sandygautam
  12. phpcamp
  13. trakin
  14. sahilk
  15. d7y
  16. irohan
  17. ngkabra
  18. punetech
  19. meetumeetu
  20. ichaitanya

Note : All the computations results are visible in the attached PDF. Also in a few case klout ratings or twitter friends rankings were not available. In such cases I have applied a klout rating of 0 and twitter friend ranking of 999999. Obviously it reduces the probability of such handles appearing in the overall rankings substantially – but there was no other reasonable option I could think of.

Disclaimer : At the end I am certain there can be a number of views on how such an exercise could be conducted. There might even be some complaints. Being aware of that, I list results of what I believe to be a “fair” exercise. Whether it is a “just” exercise is left to the reader. Also be aware that I have two of my twitter handles in the list above. You may choose to believe my assurance that I did not tweak the logic based on a first pass of results – the logic I decided to apply was not changed once the results were visible.

, , ,

India Votes 2009 : Options for the deeply cynical

April 8, 2009 Category :Current Affairs| Event Log 3

So we have elections coming up soon, and I start wondering. Great, there is the drive for online petitions, voter enrollment and a general push to a jaagore. Its nice to know we are all waking up in even more numbers. But there is a problem. Its a rude wakeup. A blissful icy dream protected by ignorance and disinterest is suddenly a raging inferno of cynicism searching for a target with the hopeless realisation that there is no one to blame and probably no one who is blameless.

So having woken up, and finding a vote to spare, how does one use it ? And what are the options ?

  1. You have a favourite political party.  It could be accused of pandering to one or more of populism, communalism, communism, regionalism, casteism. So what if its leaders come grace your TV screens every news night and indulge with their peers in ‘barkism and bitism’. You rest your hopes in the party and you vote for its candidate. The great thing about it is often one vote can buy you so many isms. The difficulty is that many of the leaders put their rivals down rather than India up. You can’t get Indianism. Its tough to get truism. Even though I don’t expect it, its virtually impossible to get altruism. Ho Hum.
  2. You have a favourite candidate who you believe is honest, incorruptible, dedicated and probably even skilful enough to survive the rough and the tumble should he make the grade. The problem is that he may even do great at the hustings, but just may not have what it takes to reach the winning post first. Any vote cast here seems like a vote squandered
  3. Use the 49-O protest vote. The trouble with that is it makes no practical difference between that and not going to the polling booth at all. Sure it is an explicit protest vs. an implicit protest, but is the distinction really important ? I can’t quite buy it.
  4. Don’t vote at all. Seems attractive, but I don’t consider being fatalistic as a virtue even when the chips are down.

Amongst these choices “2” seems to be the least unattractive. But a more dominant feeling seems to be the need to hear a ‘lori’ n go back to sleep hoping that jaagore might just have been a dream.

Note : This post is not to encourage you to not vote. I will vote. It is just to indicate that voting requires votability, a sorely missing commodity at the moment.

,

What amounts to a defamation

March 2, 2009 Category :Asides| Current Affairs| Internet & Social Media 0

What amounts to a defamation

In the context of topical issues regarding online media and potential defamation implications, this page seems to summarise the matter quite well. Retrieved via What is not libel or slander and When its not defamation.

, , ,

Free to blog but accountable you are. The Supreme Court of India weighs in on blogging and online expression.

February 25, 2009 Category :Current Affairs| Internet & Social Media 23

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of India in an important ruling refused to shield a 19 year old blogger from a responsibility to face the charges in a different state than the one of his residence. A few important implications stem from this which should be noted.

One important aspect which is perhaps easy to lose sight of in this debate is that the Supreme Court did not weigh in on the guilt or lack of it in this case, but on the fact that the person could not shy away from the responsibility to face the charges in a court. What should also be noted is that the underlying case is a criminal case and not for civil liability or libel, and seems to stem from an alleged death threat that was issued in the forum as per this article from The Telegraph.

The implications are relevant to bloggers, site maintainers, forum administrators, group moderators and perhaps even small commercial internet services dealing in opinions and expressions flow. In interest of brevity I use the word blogger below to be freely substitutable by any of these.

Note: I am not a lawyer and this is not a legal opinion, it is an expression of my personal understanding.

The Burden of Accountability

The Burden of Accountability. Imaged owned by and used under permission from Firoze Shakir. http://www.flickr.com/photos/firozeshakir/3309041065/

Is a blogger accountable for the online content including those made by others on the site ?

The Hindu offered a brief summary of the underlying issue in the case as follows.

Ajith D, a Kerala-based computer student had approached the apex court for quashing of the criminal case registered against him at Thane Police Station for allegedly hurting public sentiment by starting an online community in Orkut with an intention to launch an anti-Shiva Sena campaign.

I think this verdict does go to some extent towards suggesting that he does though I am not sure if it is a blanket conclusion one can draw at this stage. The court in its comments said :

You should not have indulged in such activity. You are a student of IT. You are doing something on internet and you should know about it.

This is a clear and unambiguous message which suggests that the constitutional rights do not cover a netizen from a responsibility to face any charges that may crop up as a result of any of his / her online expressions or facilitation of other’s online expressions. In this case many of the offensive comments were made by anonymous contributors and not by defendant himself. Thus such a person cannot shy away from having to face charges and defend himself even when the vehicle of expression he provides is used by others to express themselves.

Thats like holding the public transportation and public telephony organisations responsible since their offerings were used to conduct an activity that is now under criminal investigation. That obviously does not make sense. But allow me to introduce a hypothetical premise here. What if the public transportation and public telephony organisations used their discretion from time to time to decide who can use their services and who can’t, and what if they knew the the broad intentions of the user in using their services (either upfront or post facto). Would they now have a responsibility in this case ? That does make the situation a bit cloudy.

The equivalent situation in this case is when an online forum / site / group / blog is moderated. I am also going to assume for a moment (since I don’t know the facts) that the said orkut group allowed the group maintainer to moderate the content and the group maintainer might have used his privileges to say knock off spam on the group. This would imply that all expressions are not automatic and hence there is perhaps a case for the court to have made the moderator responsible to face charges for all the content in the group. However I would find it a little surprising if the group maintainer did not have any privileges to moderate the content or exercise his right to do so.

Should the blogger be required to face charges in any jurisdiction ?

While terribly inconvenient and perhaps with a lot of nuisance potential, the court opined very very clearly.

If a case is filed in a foreign country go and face it. You should know what you are doing on internet.

This is going to be really an issue for a lot of bloggers. In traditional (non internet) offerings, the service provider often has some kind of presence in the places where his services are consumed. Not so in the case of internet. You can reach the world without leaving your house. Also traditional service provision, requires some infrastructure or facilities investment or leasing, not so in case of blogging. The blogger often may have limited access to resources, may often have no revenues whatsoever. Yet he could be made responsible to defend himself in the furthest corners of the world. So herein lies the issue – Given the potential minimal resources and perhaps no revenue at his disposal, the blogger may have to face charges from any corner of the globe. The resultant investment in time and money alone may now seem like a punishment even if the blogger was to be eventually successful in defending himself in a court.

While the internet has delivered asymmetric capabilities to the blogger (maximum reach at minimum cost), the legal infrastructure has placed him at the receiving end of that asymmetry (maximum potential costs of defending himself while working off minimal / zero revenues). There is something clearly uncomfortable about this but I am not sure whats the right solution.

An interesting angle that will need to be looked at here is also the implication for internet based individual or small company commercial services (which often operate on a rather shoestring budget and headcount). Would this opinion lead to a negative business climate for such offerings ? Coule it be detrimental to their offerings, since often the primary commodity they deal in is information, precisely the currency whose use could expose them to (threats of) legal action.

I do think this is an issue which will perhaps need a different resolution in times to come. And especially since the Supreme Court has already weighed in on the issue, it might be the time for legislature to take a look at its implications especially by considering its implications on the business climate of small internet services as well.

Is this an attack on freedom of expression ?

In this case the charges are criminal in nature and seem to be stemming off a death threat. These expressions if made orally would’ve made the person who made such an expression equally inconvenienced, and I cannot imagine why online expression should be granted any more freedom or privileges than oral expressions. If at all, online expressions because of their reach and ability to persist, need to have more accountability. So confusing this with freedom of expression and speech is just being plain facetious. So in my opinion the answer is NO.

However the case does raise interesting possibilities about non threatening or non criminal charges. How would the Supreme Court opine in such a situation. Well we wouldn’t know until such a case reached them, but let us for a moment assume that the opinion continued to be similar. Even in such a hypothetical situation, I believe it would still not impinge on freedom of expression. All that the court has said is that one cannot escape from being accountable for expressions and thus present themselves to defend themselves. Thats perfectly reasonable. However it could indirectly hurt freedom of expression due to the burden it places in terms of defense. Defending oneself in a remote state can be an act of punishment itself which could dilute the very strengths the constitutional rights sought to promote. That part does worry me.

So what can be done about it ?
For starters I think the legislature while continuing to make people accountable for their expressions should pursue mechanisms by which the cost of implementing such accountability could be reduced. How that could be done is beyond my capabilities and understanding of the legal system. Moreover the judiciary could in the cases it handles, continue to be very proactive in ensuring that the freedom of expression is strongly defended in the cases that come to it for redressal. It should also figure out a way to deal strongly and with penalties on any frivolous use of force to clamp down on expression.

Update : I am surprised with myself for having forgot this recent tweet of mine (post the NDTV / Chaitanya kunte episode). Quite simply it says :

   Right to express is inalienable from accountability of expression. Civil liberties are strengthened by responsible civility

, , ,

A perspective on The Indian Information Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2006

January 6, 2009 Category :Current Affairs| Event Log| Internet & Social Media| Pune| Software 4

Disclaimer :I am not a lawyer, neither do I claim to understand law well. The perspective below is based on my reading of the two bills which was not conducted in complete rigour and detail. The following is my understanding it. For a legally valid opinion kindly consult a lawyer.

Just last month, the Indian Parliament passed the Information Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2006. The bill is currently pending Presidential assent (to the best of my knowledge) and is expected to become a law soon. Unfortunately this document is a little hard to follow since it refers to changes made to the earlier applicable version of the law as defined by The Information Technology Act, 2000. One has to read them side by side to understand the full import. This post primarily focuses on the implications of the changes to the law but may refer from time to time to the implications of the earlier version as well.

Digital Signatures and Certificates : This is a very large section of the bill. I think I shall need to read it more carefully. So I am completely skipping that section and may choose to write separately about it later.

Computer networks and their security :

This bill now brings into purview wireless networks (the word wireless got added to the definition of a network). While an intermediary earlier was someone who stored or transmitted a message, it is a far broader definition as stated below.

‘(w) “intermediary”, with respect to any particular electronic records, means any person who on behalf of another person receives, stores or transmits that record or provides any service with respect to that record and includes telecom service providers, network service providers, internet service providers, web-hosting service providers, search engines, online payment sites, online-auction sites, onlinemarket places and cyber cafes, but does not include body corporate referred to in section 43A



Note that a message has been replaced by a record which broadens the scope quite a bit, and in my perhaps lay interpretation is likely to bring under its purview all the software as a service or a network service providers.

Offenses

The earlier law had two offenses listed in this section, which now have increased. Lets take a look at them.

The first offense description related to tampering of source code continues to remain the same unchanged -

65. Tampering with computer source documents. Whoever knowingly or intentionally conceals, destroys or alters or intentionally or knowingly causes another to conceal, destroy or alter any computer source code used for a computer, computer programme, computer system or computer network, when the computer source code is required to be kept or maintained by law for the time being in force, …



The next offense Hacking with a computer system is now far less precise, and loosely means any dishonest or fraudulent activity in the context of a number of computer related activities as described in Section 43. That section incidentally has now been supplemented by Section 43A which under its purview now requires “body corporates possessing, dealing or handling any sensitive personal data” to maintain reasonable security practices and procedures (with a two year prison sentence in case of default). I will not dwell on Section 43 since it lists out a broad range of activities which can have negative consequences on computer systems and networks.

A new offense description can now be found as follows :

66A. Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a
communication device,—
(a) any content that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or
(b) any content which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently makes use of such computer resource or a communication device,



This is an onerous clause requiring us to be very careful in many of our online communications. I think to the extent it brings in accountability in online communications it is welcome. It is my belief that both the prosecution or courts are unlikely to pull people up for frivolous comments unless there are strong negative consequences and / or it is a persistent activity with a deliberately negative intent. However I still feel concerned about the rather loose wording which still could get misused.

The next offense is related to pornography. The first clause of the offense continues to the best of my reading ablities to be unmodified

… publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, …



However it has now been further expanded by the following

… publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which contains sexually explicit act or conduct …



I could not find any reference in my reading to either consumption or storage of pornographic content to be an offense.

Interception and Decryption : While the wordings are different I could not find any substantive changes in the clauses related to the state rights to Interception and Decryption, except that the word Monitoring has also got added. But its safe to say that the Central Government can pretty much continue to snoop on any electronic transmission as they believe necessary. Couldn’t really figure out what if any difference this bill makes.

Modifications to the Indian Penal Code : The penal code is now applicable to “any person in any place without and beyond India committing offense targeting a computer resource located in India”. So people who are not residents or citizens of India targeting Indian computer systems are now classified as offenders. Incidentally it should be noted that the penal code already applies to “Any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India”. However that seems to be now made much clearer by the explanation which states that “the word offense includes every act committed outside India which, if committed in India, would be punishable under this Code”. While I am not certain about it my lay reading seems to indicate that Indian Citizens committing violations outside India will be eligible to be flagged as offenders. If my interpretation is correct, Indian Citizens involved in publishing or transmitting pornography or in activities which could get classified as an offender as per this law, , will get classified as offenders under the act in India, even if such activities are legal in the parts of the world where they or their computer systems reside. However I must insist I am not too sure about this.

A law misconstrued and misunderstood ? I wasn’t quite sure how to react to blog posts like “India Sleepwalks To Total Surveillance“. However I really can’t respect the way the bill has been represented. Some of the bold statements in the post say, “Thou shall not author a joke. Not even forward one”, “Thou shall not surf Bollywood news” and ” Thou shall not watch porn”. I really could not find any evidence to support such views whatsoever. The sad part is that such posts get picked up in articles like Blogger Writes from Inside the Newest Police State on the Planet, discussions such as slashdot - India Sleepwalks Into a Surveillance Society and tweets such as these. I have spent about 6 years in US, and the remainder in India. I have always been very happy with the freedoms I have received in India, even though I do know that very unfortunately a small proportion of the population does get victimised or harassed due to the stringent laws from time to time. I won’t be surprised if a substantial proportion of Indian Citizens actually support the clauses against pornography. And finally the draft bill has been under discussion since 2006 so I couldn’t understand how the world’s largest democracy sleepwalked into something (though I am certain this and another bill got completely fast tracked after the Mumbai Terrorist Attacks). The fact of the matter is that this has always been a state of stringent laws, with laws which don’t always agree fully with the western world. I think we should rate our laws based on our aspirations and desires. While I shudder at the privileges the government has in terms of eavesdropping, I am quite ambivalent on the strictures against pornography and greatly welcome the enhancements related to electronic signatures and increased accountability in terms of online communication and network security maintenance. Its really a mixed bag in my opinion. If at all India is to be considered a police state as in some opinions, in my opinion it is certainly not because of this bill.

, ,

Making a complete ass of the Indian media

July 1, 2008 Category :Current Affairs| Event Log 0

High time they had this coming. The state of news seems to have been crumbling for some time and journalistic standards were not being adhered to. A group of people called the Pen Pricks got together and pulled off a hoax (link to a hoax press release) (Update: The link at the left is no longer valid. Not sure where the document can be found now.) and thus exposed the media for their complete lack of journalistic standards. Of course the foreign media had a great time having a bit of a laugh at Indian media’s expense.

It tells us a lot about the credibility of the stuff we pay to get delivered to us daily. What is telling is not one but many many newspapers ran the story. Its sad and unfortunate, but a nice kick in the rear end was probably well deserved. One only prays that it will sound a bit of a wake up call else journalism and news will fall prey to the every munching monster called deadlines and bottomlines.

Breaking news is so broken

June 14, 2008 Category :Asides| Current Affairs 0

BREAKING NEWS: War for news

A hilarious look at what today’s Indian Media calls “Breaking News”, including items such as

  • Chajje pe Billo Rani : Cat on a terrace
  • Amitabh Bacchan ko Thand lagi : Amitabh Bacchan got a cold
  • Rahul ne Dal Puri aur Sabji Khai : Rahul (son of India’s late prime minister Rajeev Gandhi) had Dal Puri and Sabji for meals
  • Commissioner ka kutta mila : Commissioner’s dog found

The Market drives the Product Stupid ! (or what I learnt from IPL)

June 3, 2008 Category :Current Affairs 0

Background : IPL (Indian Premier League) is a cricket league tournament which only recently held its first series and which by most accounts was phenomenally successful.

As an engineer, I have often focused on products, and IPL has been a great educator. It has sent a clear signal – products aren’t so important as markets are !. This post talks a little about what I learnt from IPL. (By the way – this ain’t my thought – its lifted from : The pmarca guide to startups, part 4 : the only thing that matters.)

1. Focus on the market needs !

IPL figured out the market – IPL focused on it. The rest is history.

2. Leadership may be diverse, it may be distinct – it matters

Leadership matters at the end of the day. As IPL and Shane Warne demonstrated – it can really really make the difference at the end of the day. There is no one right pattern for leadership, but at the same time it does make a difference at the end of the day. Check this article : “Different strokes”; for details.

3. There’s always a Kerry Packer and a Lalit Modi to upstage status quo :

You may feel safe in your beliefs – this is how its always been done. But if you do not ask yourself the question – am I doing the best I can for my markets and try  to answer and react to the question to the best of your abilities – please do not worry – there’s always a Kerry Packer and another Lalit Modi to upset all your assumptions (and all your apple carts).

4. Its the world of fast food

People want to consume -  and they want to consume in a hurry. Forget italian food – McDonalds rules. Please figure out who you are serving. And please please .. if you want to serve a slow italian meal – do not take on McDonalds and do not envy its riches.

5. Do you want to be the “real man” or the “rich man” ?

These are no longer necessarily the same. Do you want to be the real man” or would you be the “rich man or the one who sets up landmarks ?

Here’s where I do a sudden U turn and say – if you have a product which really helps the market – take an inspiration from IPL and just run with it – the status quo simply doesn’t matter and if you are meeting the market needs – don’t worry about the current club rules - the market rules and clubs don’t matter.

, ,