Daniel Pipes, MJ Akbar and the T-word

Still Asleep After Mumbai :: Daniel Pipes

Daniel Pipes is a known expert on the Middle East and the Islamic world. In this piece he has chillingly assessed the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage.

This piece caught my attention. (Please read the full piece though, it is as informative as it is alarming).

Nomenclature lays bare this denial. When a sole jihadist strikes, politicians, law enforcement, and media join forces to deny even the fact of terrorism; and when all must concede the terrorist nature of an attack, as in Mumbai, a pedantic establishment twists itself into knots to avoid blaming terrorists.

I documented this avoidance by listing the twenty (!) euphemisms the press unearthed to describe Islamists who attacked a school in Beslan in 2004: activists, assailants, attackers, bombers, captors, commandos, criminals, extremists, fighters, group, guerrillas, gunmen, hostage-takers, insurgents, kidnappers, militants, perpetrators, radicals, rebels, and separatists – anything but terrorists.

The following is exactly what MJ Akbar, the premier journalist, says on his blog (www.mjakbar.org) in a piece called "Biting the BBC bullet". These are the words he wrote to the BBC when they did not use the T-word.

"I am appalled, astonished, livid at your inability to describe the events in Mumbai as the work of terrorists. You have called them 'gunmen', as if they were hired security guards on a night out. When Britain finds a group of men plotting in a home laboratory your government has no hesitation in creating an international storm, and the BBC has no hesitation in calling them terrorists. When nearly two hundred Indian lives are lost, you cannot find a word in your dictionary more persuasive than 'gunmen'. You are not only pathetic, but you have become utterly biased in your reporting…Shame on you and your kind."

Kudos to Akbar for his forthright expression of indignation.

My feeling about the T-word is the same. (My thoughts on this from 2005 can be found here and I have not changed my stance). International pressure builds on the direct and indirect perpetrators of such acts when strong words are used. Pussy-footing is what our government had done earlier by using words like "militants" and "miscreants" to refer to terrorists in Kashmir.

The Indian government has worked itself into a corner. If it refers to certain acts as terrorism, it assumes that it is accusing the minority community. This is basically insinuating that all the minorities in India are anti-national and hence sponsors of terrorism. Minority leaders should actually take exception at the government's not referring to the killers by the T-word.

In the present world, the importance of media presence cannot be over-emphasized. It will do the government a lot of good if it can use its media handlers more effectively to convey the gravity of the situation.

As the acts have become increasingly heinous, the Indian media has finally started using the T-word. Oh wait, not yet. This link from this leftist TV channel still uses the word militant. Militant does give a more harmless connotation and that is why we need to use the strongest possible words to describe the killers. When Pipes takes the international media to task for using "militant", here are our guys - still stuck with militant.

HonestReporting had this to say when castigating AP's treatment of Hamas - militant or terrorist, while commending NY Times for using the right word. And this was in 2006.

The Associated Press actually used the words "terror network." What is surprising is that they use the phrase to label Al-Qaida, while referring to Hamas as a more neutral "militant group".

Can I hope that our media folks will look at such subtle but important distinctions while reporting? MJ Akbar, it looks like nobody from NDTV has looked at your blog or that of Pipes or HonestReporting. Or is it something else with these people?

Concluding this post, I wonder if our esteemed PM Dr. Manmohan Singh gets enough sleep at the thought of poverty in the Indian Muslim community. A recent post by MJ Akbar reports that a whopping zero percent of the money allotted to minority development was spent in Maharashtra. Rather than be too sensitive about perceived slights that a community might take offense to or not, it would be far more useful to uplift and educate minorities and bring them to the national mainstream. But then, who would re-elect these politicians?

Terror in the ministry

UPA proud of my Karkare remark: Antulay

Now that we have terror everywhere, it makes sense to consult the dictionary to understand what the actual meaning of the word is. The Merriam-Webster's online dictionary has this to say:

Terror
1 : a state of intense fear
2 a: one that inspires fear : scourge
   b: a frightening aspect terrors of invasion>
   c: a cause of anxiety : worry
   d: an appalling person or thing

Looking at this definition, the perpetrators of the horrific Mumbai carnage were not terrorists to the UPA government as it was neither fear inspiring - given that Rahul Gandhi, the heir-apparent, partied all night when commandos were still engaged at the Taj. It was neither appalling nor a cause of anxiety. Apparently, our honourable PM did not lose sleep over this as much as he lost over the condition of a mother of a bomber. Even if the nation was terrorized, the UPA government was probably not.

However, the current event is terror inspiring to the UPA. Abdul Rahman Antulay is a terror not only to his party comrades, but also to his co-religionists and all Indians.

By his parrot-like repetition of an ill-conceived conspiracy theory the likes of which are often repeated (recall the canard of a CIA-Zionist plot of 9/11 that is claimed as gospel truth in a large part of the Muslim world), Abdul Rahman might have endeared himself to Islamist fanatics and the sensationalizing aspect of Pakistani media - but has become a political hot potato now.

His wayward comment about Karkare's death not being at the hands of terrorists is not only irresponsible but also downright malicious. In an exercise that Goebbels would have been proud of, a Pakistani channel and Abdul Rahman mutually reinforced one another. Now each will have the other's word as evidence. How convenient!

If we look back at the events that transpired, we had a few people, incidentally Hindus, investigated in the Malegaon blasts. The fact that the Indian media took this up with undisguised glee and projected this as the Hindu counterpart of the global threat of Islamic terrorism is indeed deplorable.

When the Mumbai events unfolded, the world saw the unprecedented horror occurring before it. Even so, Somini Sengupta in the New York Times in her report of the Mumbai events had to have a footnote on "Hindu Terrorism" - which, even if this Sadhvi character is proved to have committed, would amount to less than a drop in the whole Arabian sea.

I read somewhere that India now is a dubious statistic of being the second worst terror-affected country after Iraq (which is under civil war!) in the last five years. How much of this loss is due to "Hindu" terror?

When I read Somini Sengupta's piece that mentioned this "Hindu" terror in the same piece in her Mumbai report - as the events were transpiring - I squirmed in my seat. What blatantly misleading information was being fed here! Luckily, due to more sensible media houses in the west - who were on the ground and not dependent on their Indian agencies, the extent of the damage as well as clear information on the origin of the perpetrators was conveyed to the world.

The public has a short term memory. Three weeks later, people are just normal - of course - we don't want people to continue to be terrorized. Politicians are back to their quibbling ways. However, several common people have been really shaken by the events and they are taking to the streets in protest.

There are welcome changes occurring too - though I don't know how many of these will be effective in the long run. The first one is the refusal of the Waqf body to conduct an Islamic burial for the slain terrorists. Till now, all slain terrorists, be it in Akshardham or in J&K were apparently handed over to some Islamic body which would then bury them in Indian soil. Now this will not happen. I am so glad that the Muslim community has come out in strong protest.

The second one - in smaller measure - is the red gun salute given by Naxalites in memory of the Mumbai victims. This was unprecedented. If the trained Naxalites were to fight the LeT-types... I continue to dream.

The third one is the support - diplomatic and logistic - that India is getting (finally!) from the US, UK and Israel. Not that this was not done earlier - but there is a feeling of increased solidarity against terror.

Fourth, new guidelines about crisis coverage have been instituted by the news broadcast association. This should hopefully trickle down to lessened sensationalism in other spheres as well.

Fifth, a national body to counter terror, curiously labeled NIA (they liked the CIA acronym?) has been set up. This should hopefully increase intelligence dissemination among government agencies.

Coming back to Antulay and the UPA, I would at least hope that the UPA has enough sense to boot him out of the party and make him a political pariah. But this could be a double-game by the UPA. By retaining Antulay, it can retain the vote bank of insecure minorities while pandering to the majority at large by effecting ineffective changes such as mere legislations and ministerial resignations. Why am I such a cynic?

Whatever happens, I hope the haunting images of smoke billowing out of the Taj and of that gun-toting criminal walking through the CST looking for his next kill never fail to awaken righteous indignation amongst all Indians.

ಜಲವನ್ನು ಜಲದಂತೆ ವ್ಯಯಿಸದಿರು ನೀ ಮನುಜ

ಸ್ನಾನದ ಮನೆಯ ಕಿಟಕಿಯಿಂದ ಮಿಣಿಮಿಣಿ ಮಿಂಚುವ ಹಸುರೆಲೆಗಳ ನಡುವೆ ರವಿರಶ್ಮಿಗಳ ಆಟ ಮನಸ್ಸನ್ನು ಸೂರೆಗೊಂಡಿತ್ತು. ಮೈಮೇಲೆ ಬೀಳುವ ಸುಖೋಷ್ಣದ ನೀರು ಆಹ್ಲಾದಕರವಾಗಿತ್ತು. ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ನೀರನ್ನು ಬೊಗಸೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹಿಡಿದು ದಿಟ್ಟಿಸಿದೆ. ಕಾವೇರಿನದಿಯ ಆ ಸ್ವಚ್ಛ ಸುಂದರಾರ್ದ್ರತೆಯನ್ನು ಮುಖಕ್ಕೆ ಎರಚಿ ಮುದಗೊಂಡಿದ್ದೆ. ಕಾವೇರಿ ನದಿಯದು ಈ ನೀರೆಂದು ಒಟ್ಟಿಗೆ
"ಗಂಗೇ ಚ ಯಮುನೇ ಚೈವ ಗೋದಾವರಿ ಸರಸ್ವತಿ |
ನರ್ಮದೇ ಸಿಂಧು ಕಾವೇರಿ ಜಲೇಸ್ಮಿನ್ ಸನ್ನಿಧಿಂ ಕುರು||" ಎಂಬ ಸರ್ವವಿದಿತ ಶ್ಲೋಕ ಮನಃಪಟಲದಲ್ಲಿ ಮೂಡಿ ಮಾಯವಾಯ್ತು. ಒಮ್ಮೆಲೆ ಆ ನೀರಿನ ಮೇಲೆ ಭಕ್ತಿಯೇ ಉಕ್ಕಿತು.

ನೀರು ನಮಗೆ ನಿತ್ಯ ಸಿಗುವ ವಸ್ತುವಾದರೂ ನಮ್ಮಲ್ಲಿಲ್ಲದಿದ್ದರೆ ನಾವು ಅಸ್ವಸ್ಥರು. ಪಾನ-ಪಾಕ-ಪಾನಕ-ಪಾವನ ಮಾಡುವುದಕ್ಕೆ ಪ್ರಾಣಪ್ರಾಯವಾದ ಆಪೋದೇವಿಯರ ಕೃಪೆಯಿರಬೇಕು. ನಮ್ಮಲ್ಲಿ ತಕ್ಕ ಮಟ್ಟಿನ ತೇವದ ಅಂಶವಿಲ್ಲದಿದ್ದರೆ ನಾವು ಮೃತರೇ! ನಾವು ಅದರಿಂದ ಮಜ್ಜನ ಮಾಡದಿದ್ದರೆ ಮಡಿಯಿರದೇ ಮಡಿಯಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಅದಿಲ್ಲದೆ ಅಡುಗೆಯಿಲ್ಲ. ಸುಡುಬಿಸಿಲಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಬಾಯಾರಿ ಬೆಂಡಾದವನ ಬಾಯಿಗೆ ಎಂಥ ರಸಪಾಕ ಕೊಟ್ಟರೂ ಬೇಡ, ಒಂದೆರಡು ಗುಟುಕು ನೀರೇ ಸಾಕು.

ನಮ್ಮ ಹಿಂದಿನವರು ಪ್ರಕೃತಿಯ ಎಲ್ಲ ಅಂಶಗಳನ್ನೂ ಗೌರವಿಸಿದ್ದರು. ಆ ಕೃತಜ್ಞತೆಯೇ ಸ್ತವ-ಮಂತ್ರ-ಸ್ತುತಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ತುಂಬಿದೆ. ಅದರ ಮಹತ್ತ್ವದ ಅರಿವು ಪ್ರಾಣಿಮಾತ್ರಕ್ಕೂ ಇರುವಾಗ ಹೋಮೋ ಸೇಪಿಯೆನ್ಸ್ ಎಂದು ನಮ್ಮನ್ನು ನಾವೇ ಕರೆದುಕೊಂಡ ಮಾನವರಿಗೆ ಇದರ ಅರಿವು ಎಷ್ಟಿರಬೇಡ. ಇಲ್ಲೇ ನನಗೆ ಸಂಶಯ. ಆ ಕ್ಷಣಕ್ಕೆ ಕುಡಿಯಲು-ಕುಳಿಯಲು ನೀರಿದ್ದರೆ ಸಾಕು. ಮುಂದಣ ಕಾಲದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಇರಬೇಕಾದ ಜಾಗ್ರತೆ ನಮಗಿದ್ದ ಹಾಗಿಲ್ಲ.

ಹೀಗಿದ್ದಲ್ಲದೆ ಕೊಳವೆಬಾವಿಗಳ ಕೊರೆತದ ನಿರಂತರ ಮೊರೆತ ರಾಜ್ಯಾದ್ಯಂತ ಕೇಳುತ್ತಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಭೂಜಲ ಒಂದು ಆಪದ್ಧನವಿದ್ದ ಹಾಗೆ. ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯದ ಮೋಜಿಗೆ ನಾವೆಂದಾದರೂ ನಮ್ಮ ಆಪದ್ಧನವನ್ನು ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸುವ ಅವಿವೇಕವನ್ನೆಸಗುತ್ತೇವೆಯೇ? ನೀರಿನ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಅದೇನೋ ಔದಾಸೀನ್ಯ, ತಿರಸ್ಕಾರ. "ನೀರಿನ ಹಾಗೆ ಹಣ ಖರ್ಚುಮಾಡಿಬಿಟ್ಟರು" ಎನ್ನುವುದು ನಮ್ಮ ಜಾಯಮಾನ. ನೀರೆನ್ನುವುದು ಅಷ್ಟು ಅಗ್ಗದ ವಸ್ತು! ಇದರ ಮೌಲ್ಯ ಬರಪ್ರದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ಐದಾರುಮೈಲಿ ನಿತ್ಯವೂ ಕುಡಿನೀರು ತರಲು ಸೊಂಟಸವೆಸಿಕೊಂಡ ಸೊರಗಿದವರನ್ನು ಕೇಳಬೇಕು.

ನೀರನ್ನು ಕುರಿತಾದ ವ್ಯಾಜ್ಯಗಳು ಕಾವೇರೀಜನ್ಮಸ್ಥಾನವಾದ ಕರ್ಣಾಟಕಕ್ಕೆ ಹೊಸದೇನಲ್ಲ. ಹಿಂದೆ ಹೆಣ್ಣು-ಹೊನ್ನು-ಮಣ್ಣುಗಳಿಗೆ ನಡೆದ ಯುದ್ಧಗಳು ನಾಳೆ ನೀರಿಗೋಸ್ಕರವೇ ನಡೆದರೂ ಆಶ್ಚರ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ. ನೀರಿನ ಮೂಲಗಳು - ಗ್ರೀನ್-ಹೌಸ್ ಮುಂತಾದ ಮಾನವನಿರ್ಮಿತ-ಪರಿಸರ-ಘಾತಕಗಳಿಂದ ಬತ್ತುತ್ತಿವೆ. ತಲತಲಾಂತರಗಳಿಂದ ಭಾರತದ ಆಧ್ಯಾತ್ಮಿಕವಾಹಿನಿಯಂತೆ ಪ್ರವಹಿಸುತ್ತಿರುವ ತ್ರಿಪಥಗೆಯಾದ ಗಂಗೆಯ ಉಗಮಸ್ಥಾನವಾದ ಗಂಗೋತ್ರಿ ಬತ್ತುತ್ತಿದೆ. ಕಿಲೋಮೀಟರ್ ಗಳಷ್ಟು ವರ್ಷೇ ವರ್ಷೇ ಕುಗ್ಗುತ್ತಿದೆ. ಈ ಗತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಸಾಗಿದರೆ ನೂರು ವರ್ಷದ ನಂತರ ಗಂಗೆಯೂ ಸರಸ್ವತಿಯ ಹಾಗಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಕೋಟ್ಯಂತರ ಉತ್ತರಭಾರತೀಯರು ನೆಲೆಸಿದ್ದ ಗಂಗೆಯ ಮೈದಾನದಲ್ಲಿ ನೀರಿಗಾಗಿ ಪರದಾಡಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಜೊತೆಗೆ ಚೀನವೂ ಬ್ರಹ್ಮಪುತ್ರ ನದಕ್ಕೆ (ಇದೊಂದು ನದ - ಅಥವಾ ಗಂಡುನದಿ) ಆಣೆಕಟ್ಟನ್ನು ತನ್ನ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಕಟ್ಟಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಿದೆ. ಭಾರತಕ್ಕೆ ಇದರಿಂದೇನಾಗಬಹುದು?

ನೀರಿಗಾಗಿ ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ನಲ್ಲಿಯ ಬಳಿ ನಡೆಯುತ್ತಿದ್ದ ಹೊಡೆದಾಟಗಳು ಈಗ ಯಾವಾಗಲೂ ನಡೆಯಬಹುದು. ಪರ್ವತದ ಝರಿಗಳ ನೀರನ್ನು ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ಕಂಪನಿಗಳು ಪರ್ವತದಷ್ಟೇ ಎತ್ತರದ ಬೆಲೆಗಳಿಗೆ ಮಾರುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರೆ (ಎವಿಯನ್, ಹಿಮಾಲಯನ್ ಮುಂತಾದ ನೀರುಗಳು). ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ಕುಡಿಯುವ ನೀರು ಆಫ್ರಿಕದಲ್ಲೇ ಅಲ್ಲ, ನಮ್ಮ ಭಾರತದಲ್ಲೇ, ಕರ್ಣಾಟಕದ ಎಷ್ಟೋ ಪ್ರದೇಶಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಈಗಲೇ ದೊರೆಯುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ನೀರಿನ ಬರ ಬಂದಾಗ ನಮ್ಮ ಅವಸ್ಥೆಯನ್ನು ಊಹಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದು.

ಇದುವರೆವಿಗೂ ಹೇಳಿದ್ದು ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ತಿಳಿದ ವಿಷಯವೇ. ಆದರೂ ನಮ್ಮ ನಿತ್ಯದ ನಡೆವಳಿಕೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಆ ಕಳಕಳಿಯನ್ನು ನಾವು ತೋರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.

ನಾನೇನೂ ತಿಳಿದವನಲ್ಲ. ಆದರೂ ಒಂದಷ್ಟು ಅಭ್ಯಾಸಗಳನ್ನು ರೂಢಿಸಿಕೊಂಡರೆ ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದು ಎಂದು ಬಗೆದು ಈ ಕೆಲವು ತೋಚಿದ ದೈನಂದಿನ ಜೀವನದಲ್ಲಿ ಬಳಸಬಹುದಾದ ಅಂಶಗಳನ್ನು ಬರೆಯುತ್ತಿದ್ದೇನೆ.

೧. ಸ್ನಾನ ಮಾಡುವಾಗ ಶುದ್ಧಿಗೆ ಬೇಕಾದಷ್ಟು ಮಾತ್ರ ನೀರು ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸುವುದು. ಹಲ್ಲುಜ್ಜುವಾಗ, ಕ್ಷೌರ ಮಾಡುವಾಗ ನಲ್ಲಿಯ ನೀರನ್ನು ತಿರುಗಿಸದೇ ಇರುವುದು.
೨. ಪಾತ್ರೆಯನ್ನು ನಲ್ಲಿಯ ಕೆಳಗಿಟ್ಟ ಮೇಲೆ ನಲ್ಲಿಯನ್ನು ತಿರುಗಿಸುವುದು
೩. ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಗಿಡಗಳಿದ್ದರೆ ಅವಕ್ಕೆ ಹನಿ ನೀರಾವರಿ ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸುವುದು
೪. ಮನೆಗೆ ಮಳೆನೀರುಕುಯಿಲಿನ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆ ಅಳವಡಿಸುವುದು
೫. ಮನೆಯ ಮೇಲಣ ಜಲಾಲಯ (ಟ್ಯಾಂಕ್) ಕ್ಕೆ ನೀರನ್ನು ಕೆಳಗಿನ "ಸಂಪ್" ನಿಂದ ಕಳಿಸಲು ಸ್ವಯಂಚಾಲಿತ ನೀರಿನ ಮಟ್ಟದ ನಿಯಾಮಕವನ್ನು ಅಳವಡಿಸಿವುದು. ಇದು ನೀರು ವೃಥಾ ಪೋಲಾಗುವುದನ್ನು ತಪ್ಪಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.
೬. ರಾಸಾಯನಿಕ ಸೋಂಕಿಲ್ಲದ ನೀರಿನ ಮರುಬಳಕೆ. ತರಕಾರಿ ತೊಳೆದ ನೀರು, ಅಕ್ಕಿ ತೊಳೆದ ನೀರು, ಇತ್ಯಾದಿಗಳನ್ನು ಗಿಡಗಳಿಗೆ, ಅಥವಾ ಶುದ್ಧಿಯ ನಂತರ ಭೂಮಿಗೆ ಸೇರಿಸಬಹುದಾಗಿದೆ.
೭. ಶೌಚಾಲಯಕ್ಕೆ ಕಡಿಮೆ ನೀರು ಬಳಸುವ ಫ್ಲಶ್ ಅಳವಡಿಸುವುದು.

ನಾನು ಹೇಳಿದ್ದು ವೀರಪರಿಸರವಾದಿಗಳ ಮಟ್ಟಿನದಲ್ಲ. ಅವರನ್ನು ಕೇಳಿದರೆ ಮತ್ತೂ ಹೇಳಿಯಾರು.

ನೀರು ಪೋಲಾಗುವುದನ್ನು ಕಂಡಾಗ ನಮ್ಮ ಕಣ್ಣುಗಳಿಂದ ನೀರು ಬರುವಷ್ಟು ದುಃಖವಾಗಬೇಕು. ಆಗ ನಮ್ಮ ಜನಾಂಗ ನೀರಿನ ಬರವನ್ನು ತಪ್ಪಿಸಬಹುದು. ಇದಾಗುವವರೆಗೂ ನಮಗೆ ದೇವರೇ ಗತಿ.

iPhones for General purpose computing and a quick Android comparison

IBM Researchers Using iPhone App Store as Test Bed | Gadget Lab from Wired.com

Typing this waiting for my plane on my old notebook, I begin to wonder if the notebook's days are numbered. My notebook is not that old when seen from a conventional viewpoint (what's conventional nowadays?!!). It is 3 years old. People still watch movies that are 3 years old. Children are still considered young when they're three. Nature doesn't change a whole lot in 3 years. But in the technology industry, three years is an eternity.

Three years ago, the iPhone wasn't there yet. Mobile computing referred mostly to notebooks with a handheld here and there.

The PC was within the reach of most people - but to use it one would have to be slightly computer literate. But a phone was a different matter. Anybody could dial a number and receive a call. People took to SMSs like fish to water. It is amazing how the cellphone revolutionized communication and raised the general awareness of a user.

A marriage between a communication device and a computing device was imminent - but Apple, as it is known to do, did it so stylishly that the world was left moaning oohs and aahs. So much so, that there is a whole bunch of imitators following. Whether the iPhone will be eclipsed a la IBM by Intel/Microsoft is left for the world see.

In the US, where the devices are subsidized by the service providers, the iPhone is quite affordable. And my unscientific polling showed a-not-so-insignificant part of the population sporting old and new iPhones. But it is still basically a computing platform.

The current Apple products seem to exude this avant-garde quality which people really love. And sure enough - you have tons of developers falling over each other to develop their apps for the iPhone. Other companies would kill for that kind of a fan-following.

It also seems to be an ideal computing device. No wonder IBM is testing it out as a general app bed.

I don't know when SETI@home (BOINC) will start an iPhone version - to run when the iPhone is charging up and so on.. And you know what? Some one has thought about this a year ago here... http://boincstats.com/forum/forum_thread.php?id=2255

Currently there seems to be at least a version on iPhone and iPod touch. We have enough evidence now to show that people are considering the iPhone more as a generic platform.

Now for the other part. How can Google not salivate when it saw all the traffic it was getting from iPhones. As is well known, a phone using Google's much touted Android was released a couple of weeks ago. Android aims to bring a reasonably powerful computing platform to lower end phones too. To me, it is doing a Microsoft to Apple's IBM. (comparing the PC platform to iPhone-like platforms). And of course, its Chrome browser in its Beta gives the rest of the browsers some hard competition.

Unfortunately, the Android phone (I had it with me for a bit) - at least the first version seems to have floundered. Actually, it is pretty OK but if you look at the expectations people had from it, it was just too much.

Apple has had the luxury and/or burden of making the entire iPhone right from the HW to the SW and packaging. I don't know how much of a say Google had in influencing the packaging - apparently not enough.

Even an old iPhone looks shiny whereas a brand new "gPhone" appears dull and used. With the map application, the Google phone becomes discernibly hot in a matter of little more than a minute. The iPhone wasn't so. The intuitiveness of the iPhone seems to be missing in the HTC phone also. And battery life seems a little worse too.

If you looked at the Android phone by itself, you would say that it is a very good phone. But who buys anything without comparison?

That said, Google's first shot at the iPhone should be taken seriously. They have some really smart people working for them and support from a couple of other manufacturers. They might do well on the third or fourth try - which is not far away, btw.

Coming back to the original thread - Apple and Google have made general computing devices out of phones. I don't know when such devices will reach a level of battery consumption and ample performance where it can be considered general-purpose enough. That day seems fast approaching now with companies pushing envelopes aggressively.

We have an interesting battle to witness now. May the better one win! The consumers will win anyway...


PS: This is one of my few posts on technology. I don't know why I wrote this or if I'll write on such topics again. Anyway.. it is random enough....

Selfish behavior is detrimental to society

Selfish driving causes everyone to pay the Price of Anarchy

While the result of this study is not surprising, the fact that this study was done and the methods it used are really interesting.

An illuminating observation that the study brings is the "Nash equilibrium" (a point at which no benefit will be realized if one's strategy is changed unilaterally) is reached when more and more people move away from the global optimum. What this means is that if a single person decides to start playing by the rules on the roads, he will still be late if the people around him don't follow the rules. The whole setup needs to change to benefit everyone. Sample this quote from the paper's abstract:

Uncoordinated individuals in human society pursuing their personally optimal strategies do not always achieve the social optimum, the most beneficial state to the society as a whole.

In India, and Bangalore especially, driving is little short of anarchy. In my earlier grouses on the matter, I have consistently held the opinion that people need to pay heed to the law to benefit not only themselves but the entire society and indirectly themselves as well.

In the book "Games Indians play" by V Raghunathan, the author touches upon this point. But he states that this condition is unique to India. However, this study by scientists from KAIST (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology) while focusing on traffic shows that this is essentially a "human" problem.

The system cannot be optimized for maximum possible individual benefit without substantial costs. Optimization for maximum system benefit is what is needed; which will translate to significant individual benefit as well. There are plenty of team games that illustrate the same point quite well.

I was reminded of a set of brilliant essays (Collection titled "The Quest After Perfection") I am reading now by none other than the philosopher-sage Professor M Hiriyanna. In his essay on the "Ethics of the Upanishads", he defines evil to be two fold (I am paraphrasing here).
1. The urge for instant self-gratification as opposed to deferred pleasure.
2. The prioritization of one's own pleasure over that of society and the environment.

To be not-evil, therefore, one should have deferred gratification of pleasure and keep societal needs before the individual's, which is essentially the same point the authors of the paper make.

Dharma is a central Indian concept that involves putting society before one's self. The idea here is that it will make life easy not just for yourself but the entire society, while benefiting each individual finally.

In this age, individual liberties are held to be more important than societal good. The assumption behind this seems to be that a bunch of individually happy people will make society happy as a whole. Unfortunately, studies such as the one referenced show that individual maxima do not translate to a system maximum.

The questions that arise in my mind are:
1. To what extent can individuals forego "personally optimal strategies" to benefit society as a whole?
2. Which one is preferred? A non-optimal society where people have a little more "freedom" to pursue personally optimal strategies? Or an optimal society which, by design, will be less "free" to pursue personally optimal strategies? Is there a meeting place for the two?

The paper itself can be found here.