Expressions – Bhagwad Jal Park

The “Equal Opportunities Commission” needs to have its head examined. The latest loonacy is to get private companies to maintain a “religious inventory” of their staff so that they can ‘monitor’ discrimination based on religion.

It’s so silly I don’t know where to start. What are they going to do with the data? Suppose an organization has too few muslims, are they going to try and implement a quota? Or if there are too many muslims (proportionately speaking), will they accuse the organization of discriminating against hindus? I can already imagine crazy parties like the Shiv Sena swooping down and decimating a small business for employing too many muslims…

And of course, if the ultimate goal is to make religion irrelevant then monitoring it is the last thing you want to do. If the caste system still exists in India today, it is in large part due to the government putting its nose in where it shouldn’t. By highlighting caste, monitoring it and laying down separate rules, the government has ensured that the caste system will never die. And if they start monitoring religion in professional organizations, we can be sure that religion will start to play a bigger role in the workplace.

Image Credit: imNickle

Let the cube remain mixed!

When will the government learn to leave things alone? We don’t need more monitoring, we need less. Just keep an eye out for crimes, and unfair practices and let things sort themselves out. I’m going to quote yet again from the Tao Teh Ching here about how to govern:

The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence the people are barely aware.
Next comes one whom they love and praise.
Next comes one whom they fear.
Next comes one whom they despise and defy.

When you are lacking in faith, Others will be unfaithful to you.
The Sage is self-effacing and scanty of words.
When his task is accomplished and things have been completed,
All the people say, “We ourselves have achieved it!”

Tao Teh Ching – Ch. 17.

Kickass translation from John C. H Wu!

Perhaps the government should learn that things take their own sweet time to change. Contrary to popular opinion these days, Democracy works in India (with a little help from the judiciary). We’re doing just fine. Leave things be and don’t try and force change down people’s throat. It’s not going to work. Lucky the corporates are putting up a good fight against maintaining this sort of dossier. And rightly so. They don’t want to be accused of religious profiling. So here’s hoping this will never be finalized.

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• UID and Cellphone Numbers – a benign start? – September 25, 2009
• Indian Unique National ID will not include Personal Details – September 10, 2009
• It’s started – UID used for tagging and tracking – October 4, 2009
• Worldwide attention on National ID cards in India – June 29, 2009
• National ID cards in India – The financial cost – July 1, 2009

Followers of my blog know that most of my impressions of the US are hardly flattering. But one really must give credit where it’s due. One of the great things about this country is the respect and treatment they extend to their armed forces, and this is something that India can really emulate.

Killings of Indian army personnel on the border are an everyday affair for us Indians. Perhaps because of the sheer number of tragedies, it’s impossible to praise and keep track of every death. But our army faces a shortcoming of quality officers and rightly so. Why would any intelligent and promising young person join up? Apart from patriotism, do they have any other motivation to enroll? True they get certain benefits – cheap food, accommodation, and education for their children. But do they get public respect?

Image Credit: $owmya

Respect for Indian Military Personnel

In my year or so of stay in the US, I’ve been astounded by the respect and admiration the American people display towards people in the army. Though it sometimes borders on Jingoism, we can learn much from the Americans in this regard. By following these two simple steps, we can ensure that quality people become motivated to enlist.

1. Mention the Forces frequently in Public gatherings

When people gather together – either in a plane, or in a concert, or a theater, an announcement can be made on the lines of, “Before we start, let’s take a moment to thank our military personnel who are sacrificing their lives for us.” Or “Can we have a big hand for the brave men and women who keep our country secure.” Military personnel can also be asked to stand up and then given a round of applause.

Benefit: This lets them know they are valued and appreciated. It reassures them that their job is important.

2. Advertise Well

Currently enrollment in the National Defense Academy (NDA) is done only via a formal boring tender-style advertisement in the newspaper. In order to attract the best talent, we need to make life in the armed forces more appealing. It’s all about marketing. A video with inspiring music (but not over the top cheesy) which conveys the sort of meaningful life that most young people seek. A meaningful active life with integrity. I’m sure a good media company can make a great deal out of it.

They can show it on TV, in theaters and have well crafted, glossy and tasteful posters strategically placed in high profile areas where we normally see high value brands. Like 5-star hotels, and prime Billboard space. The total cost of all this is negligible (compared to the defense budget) and will repay itself many times over in better quality people entering the army, navy, and air force.

Basically we need to improve the visibility of our armed forces in every sphere of life. Veterans and Disabled personnel all need to be taken note of, and given the respect and adulation that their counterparts receive in the US.

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• Why India isn’t ready for a Uniform Civil Code – November 23, 2009
• Democracy in India – Ignoring the naysayers – May 20, 2009
• US Corporations to India: “Don’t dare use Free Software!” – March 9, 2010
• Are Indians finally becoming Responsible? – March 3, 2010
• Indian Elections – 5 issues that matter – March 28, 2009

It never fails to shock me how a tip is demanded in the US. People simply refuse to listen to reason when we (yes, there are others!) tell them that leaving a tip isn’t necessary. Well, I’m hoping for too much here, but if you’re a waiter, here are 5 reasons why I will try my best not to give any money to you and why the reasons for tipping are crappy.

1. You act as if you’re my best friend

Just leave me alone ok? I don’t want to bloody chit chat with you. I want food. FOOD! Get it? It’s a restaurant. I go there to eat. I go because I want either Italian food, Chinese Food or something else which I can’t get in a McDonald’s. So I come to a restaurant to fulfill my cravings for it. I will pay for what I value – food. Not you.

Christ, you offend me – kneeling down next to my table, pretending to like me and chatting as if you’re my best friend when it’s obvious that all you’re after is the tip! I’m not a bloody money bag you know. I will pay the bill which includes the cost of the food, the environment and the salaries of the people involved – nothing more.

The only way to get money out of me that I don’t have to legally pay is by prying it out of my cold dead hands…

Bottom line: I don’t want to know your name, or interact with you for any longer than I have to in order to place my order. As far as I’m concerned, you’re the equivalent of a conveyor belt that brings me my food and a computer into which I input my order. Of course, I won’t be rude. But don’t expect me to interact with you any more than I would with some stranger.

Image Credit: cafemama

Did you earn this tip?

2. You don’t get paid enough

And this is my problem how exactly? It’s astonishing that customers are expected to make up for your employer’s cheapness in not paying you a decent wage. Please include the full cost in everyone’s bill thank you very much. I’ll pay it because I have to and the charge is there for me to see.

What’s really funny here is that no one seems to criticize the employers! All criticism is reserved for non tipping customers instead of the owners of the restaurant for not paying a decent wage. Wtf! Could it possibly be because you guys know you can make much more by tips and under report your income to the IRS?

3. You’ll spit in my food if I don’t tip you?

And I’ll shoot your kid if you don’t give me a million dollars. Seriously, am I even hearing this right? You’re actually using the threat of blackmail to make me pay you? Well as long as you’re openly claiming to be a criminal it’s all right I guess.

Fortunately that’s why I prefer buffets. Listen apart from it being illegal, this shows your poor integrity. But if you spit in someone’s food because they didn’t give you money you didn’t earn, then you’re a loser and deserve to be a waiter for the rest of your life.

4. Bringing me my food isn’t worthy of being paid extra

Did you cook it? Did you invent it? No. You picked it up and brought it to me. While it might not be easy, there are plenty of jobs which are much worse – shop floor workers for example. And I’ve been a shop floor manager, so I know. Face it – compared to other jobs, being a waiter is unskilled. You get paid what the market will think your services are worth. You don’t deserve more for your work over and above what your employer should pay you.

5. Money doesn’t grow on trees

I expect you to be grateful and pray for me at night if I tip you 10%. Be happy I gave you anything at all. I worked for the money in my wallet and by giving you some I didn’t have to, I’m doing you a favor. Learn to remember that when people give you something they don’t need to, it’s a favor. You don’t complain that they didn’t give you more!

By the way, the same thing above applies to all professions that demand tips including those on cruise liners.

So now that you understand why I won’t give you money you don’t deserve, stop with the “oh how could you?” attitude. I can. And I will.

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• American audiences can’t face Evolution! – September 21, 2009
• Consuming Entertainment – October 18, 2006
• Revenge on Nature – October 11, 2006
• Cruise Gratuities and tipping – February 10, 2009
• Being Lazy is Good – April 1, 2008

This post isn’t going to make me very popular with the progressive Indian crowd. I don’t blame them. A Uniform Civil Code (UCC) for India will mean that there will be only one civil law for all religions and for all people. As of now for example, Muslims have a separate marriage law and Christians have a separate inheritance law. The Indian Constitution states that the government should try and ensure that over time, there is just one law for everyone. Mind we’re not talking about Criminal law which is the same for everyone. Just Civil law.

I used to be a big believer in a Uniform Civil code for India too, until I began to see things differently and began to understand why India has survived as a Democracy for so long against all odds. I’ve come to realize that people don’t like their identities to be subsumed by a larger identity – especially when they feel threatened.

Image Credit: Adam Foster | Codefor

India's diversity is its strength

All over the world we see people struggling to maintain their identity – to differentiate themselves from a larger identity that they feel threatens their own. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, the Uighurs (or Uyghurs) in China, the Tibetan population, and too many others to list here. These movements are worldwide. Even countries with uniform and homogeneous cultures have separatist movements. The French for example, fiercely protect their language and identity and the Danish people will pay immigrants to leave if they can’t integrate culturally.

Given all these movements, it’s nothing short of a miracle that India which has 1,576 languages (according to the 1991 census), and a dizzying multitude of races has managed to survive so long without being split apart several times over. The main reason for this is the fact that India doesn’t try and integrate everything by force. It just lets things be. Force begets force.

India doesn’t believe in coercion. It accepts everything and everyone. It doesn’t try and control. Many people claim that India’s weakness is that it doesn’t take anything too seriously. They are wrong. It isn’t weakness. It’s strength.

I can’t help but quote from the Tao Teh Ching here – it’s so apt that it might have been written for India:

When government is lazy and blunt
The people are kind and honest;
When government is efficient and severe
The people are discontented and deceitful.

and

Those who lead people by following the Tao
don’t use weapons to enforce their will.
Using force always leads to unseen troubles.

and finally

Why are the people rebellious?
Because the rulers interfere too much.
Therefore they are rebellious.

As things stand right now in India, most people don’t feel threatened by a government that is chill with everything. No one takes anything too seriously. There are fights and battles, but the disturbance they cause is relatively small. As of now, I feel that the imposition of a Uniform Civil Code by force will make people feel threatened.

It goes against the grain of India to make things uniform. India is a mass of contradictions. Each state is like a separate country – a bit like the European Union rather than the US, with each having its own culture, and language. Even the Chief Justice of India has commented on how the Uniform Civil Code is a sensitive issue.

India has found stability because of its contradictions. Instead of trying to resolve contradictions, we let them thrive side by side. Destroying those contradictions and bringing everything in line with logic, may be a pretty ideal, but it will be the end of India as we know it.

What’s your take?

 Loading ...

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• Respecting our Army – 2 lessons from the US – November 26, 2009
• Democracy in India – Ignoring the naysayers – May 20, 2009
• US Corporations to India: “Don’t dare use Free Software!” – March 9, 2010
• Are Indians finally becoming Responsible? – March 3, 2010
• Indian Elections – 5 issues that matter – March 28, 2009

This is going to be a tough one for you guys to swallow. At the heart of it, is a chap called Lawrence Summers who’s currently the Director for the National Economic Counsel in the US. When he was president of the World bank, he wrote a memo which recommended dumping more toxic waste in developing countries because – get this – lives in poorer countries are worth less than those in developed countries.

Image Credit: Molas

Dumping Toxic Waste in Developing Countries - because rich people's lives are worth more?

The problem of where to dump toxic waste generated abroad has plagued planners in the west for a long time. The recent controversy regarding the Platinum II cruiseliner on Indian shores is evidence of this. Summer’s memo makes a very clear point by saying,

“The World Bank should be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs [Least Developed Countries]“

He gives three reasons. First, rich people in the west earn more money. Therefore if someone has to die, it makes economic sense for it to be the poor people. In his words:

“I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that.”

Second, poor countries like Africa are under polluted! To quote:

“I’ve always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted, their air quality is probably vastly inefficiently low compared to Los Angeles or Mexico City”.

His logic is that the pollution generated by the west must be spread over the globe instead of being restricted to the countries where it was created. In other words, he sees the good air quality in Africa as a haven for dumping the Industrialized world’s waste into.

And finally, he says that since people in poor countries anyway have a shorter life expectancy, dangerous chemicals will have less of an impact on them. He goes on to claim that they’ll be willing to trade clean air in exchange for money since they must value a clear environment less than rich people

Remember that these aren’t the words of some loony fringe economist, but the Chief economist of the World Bank in 1991 and who still holds a position of prominence in the Obama administration!

In my opinion, such statements can only come from economists who view everything including life in terms of money. Wait, that’s not true. Corporates whose only motive is profit also think the same way. When you start looking at the entire world using just one metric – money, you commit terrible atrocities because your sole aim is then to increase that metric to the expense of everything else. The whole world becomes a means to increase your money as much as possible. The lives of all living things, and the environment are fodder to be used.

When Summer’s memo was released, it created a terrible backlash leading him to claim that it wasn’t serious. But from reading his language in the original memo, I don’t believe that for one moment. I think he was dead serious. And for a brief moment, we the regular public caught a glimpse of the kind of people who rule our world today.

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• The Environment? It’s not just us! – September 23, 2009
• Patents standing in the way of Combating Climate Change – September 16, 2009
• The Real cost of Natural Resources – September 11, 2009
• Privacy wins and the WADA code is suspended! – October 8, 2009
• Homosexuality finally Legal in India – The law comes of age – July 2, 2009

If there’s one thing that really pisses me off about the traditional capitalistic system, it’s the fact that people feel they have a right to patent ideas and technology in perpetuity. This is one reason why climate change prevention is being held up. Rich countries who want places like India to urgently reduce emissions, refuse to subsidize green technology that will help developing countries do just that. Instead, they want to be paid expensive license fees. Kind of like having your cake and eating it.

So it makes me happy when I see a company in India showing how things should be done. Ahmed Khan’s company in Bangalore is using discarded plastic to make roads which last longer – removing the need for the plastic to enter landfills. And it seems to be a success in Bangalore which already has around 1200 km built using this technology.

Image Credit: Himalayan Trails

Green Roads Reducing waste

Here’s my favorite part though: “The Khans’ business spread to other cities and states, and although they patented the plasticized pavement in India, other companies are copying the technology. The Khans said they had decided not to object”

Don’t you just love that? Inventions like this help the entire country and can speed up the process of making our living space a bit cleaner. Now with competition, prices can be cut and made more affordable. If this was a traditional western company, they would not only have not allowed anyone else to use it, they would also have charged triple the price of a regular road to maximize their profit and milk their monopoly.

Incidentally this highlights the difference between a professional corporate company and a smaller personal firm. The former doesn’t belong to any one person and has no morals other than profit. A smaller firm on the other hand is linked to a person and can behave ethically as well as make a profit. Can you for example imagine a corporate like AT&T giving away a technology to other people because it’ll be good for the country? Never! Till a few years back, I used to dislike smaller businesses, but now I understand why they’re better than large faceless organizations.

Profit isn’t the sole motive of innovation and human kind has adapted and succeeded in the world only because people copy others and when one person discovers something, the entire group shares the benefits. Here’s hoping that more of common sense prevails!

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• How Patents stifle and go against Human nature – September 21, 2009
• Patents standing in the way of Combating Climate Change – September 16, 2009
• The Real cost of Natural Resources – September 11, 2009
• Poor people must die first – so says an Economist – November 18, 2009
• Enjoying my new Kindle in Chennai, India! – January 21, 2010

Update: I have been persuaded by my Significant Other (without physical violence I swear!) to add a disclaimer to this post. Namely that this is a theoretical discussion – in practice, I acknowledge that the provision of a separate coach for Indian women in trains is probably the best solution to prevent harassment as of now.

If there’s one thing our government’s good at, it’s legislating morality. Whether we’re talking about time restrictions for bar dancers, homosexuality or gambling, our “leaders” in Delhi feel that it’s their job to ensure that we follow their morals. Sometimes they get it right, and sometimes they don’t. The point is, what is the use of legislating morality if the people themselves don’t feel that way?

Take women’s equality for example. The government feels (and rightly) that women must have the same essential rights as men. So it goes about legislating it. How does it do this? By implementing reservation in parliament, providing separate seats in buses and separate coaches in trains. And still women face discrimination from men. And far from making them “equal”, measures like this only strengthen the bias against women since the men feel that they’re getting a raw deal.

Image Credit: takomabibelot

Women's Equality

How would I like women to be equal? Well for one, I wouldn’t like to talk about women at all. I don’t care about women. I only see people. Me no care if thee is woman, transsexual, black, white, old, or have pins in thy head. Wtf is women’s rights anyway? I just want all adults to have the same rights and opportunities. Is that so hard to understand? Damn, why should people have to fight separately for “gay rights” and “women’s rights” and “lower caste rights?” – can’t all you guys just gang up and say “treat everyone the same?”

Of course if my way of thinking goes through, we’ll have to put an end to reservation for all lower castes. How d’you expect lower caste people to improve if you keep reinforcing the feeling that they’re different? 60 years down the line, and all the reservation in the world hasn’t helped. The original intention was to get rid of reservation a few decades later – and now because of reservation, the caste system in still alive and thriving since people now see that being of a lower caste actually has an impact on their life instead of being a useless badge.

It’ll also mean an end to all sorts of special privileges for women. By legislating morality in this way, the government has generated nothing but anger and has widened the gap between the sexes. Many people are now angry with lower caste people because they have reservations and many men are now pissed with women because they get to have special seats in a bus.

I understand that women have a tough time traveling in crowded buses and trains – well, I can try and imagine it, not understand it since I haven’t felt it – but surely pinching a person’s butt is a crime even if the victim is a guy. I’ve been hit on a few times by gays in Delhi since I’ve been told I look “chikhna” – apparently that’s hot in gay land. I feel that by providing a separate coach for women, you’re kind of saying that pinching a girl’s bottom is ok if she’s in front of you.

It’s this sort of piecemeal legislation which doesn’t address the fundamental issues that will prolong the time necessary for women to achieve true equality. Deal harshly with discrimination of any sort of person – only then will it get into the thick skulls of people that life is life irrespective of the form it’s in.

What’s your take?

 Loading ...

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• Equality of Men and Women – Proving it in Court – September 30, 2009
• Rape and Men’s Psychology – September 15, 2009
• Men Women Equality case – Postponed to 3rd Nov. 2009 – October 19, 2009
• Section 377 – Mess in the SC. Hearing for 29th Oct. 2009 – October 1, 2009
• Homosexuality finally Legal in India – The law comes of age – July 2, 2009

Following up on last time’s post where we consolidated all the cases pending against the modification of section 377, the next date for hearing is set for 9th December 2009.

So here is the status as of now:

Note the addition of two more cases at the bottom to add to my tracking woes .

Some may remember that the Krantikari Manuwadi Morcha once supported Dara Singh who killed the Australian Missionary Graham Staines and his two sons. Now they’re aligning themselves to challenge the reading down of Section 377 with a Christian organization who’s trying to get justice for Graham! So basically killing 3 people is okay, but heaven forbid two people have sex in private!

The Raza Academy at the bottom of the pile apparently feels that India is subject to Muslim Sharia law by saying “The government should have held discussions with religious organizations before repealing the controversial Section- 377.”

So the number of people opposing the ruling has now reached a nice round figure – 10. I hope they cry themselves hoarse. Because any fool can see where this case is going – the loonies haven’t a prayer.

P.S: Apparently the court’s site gets updated many days after a hearing which is why I’m unable to immediately post the next hearing date. Maybe they have a weekly schedule or something- or perhaps they can’t handle the load. Bear with me on this…

To get future updates on the progress of the challenge to Section 377, you can subscribe to the RSS updates or choose to get notified via email.

What’s your view on the matter?

 Loading ...

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• Hearing on Article 377 set for Tomorrow – September 29, 2009
• SC hearing on Article 377 postponed from 14th September to 29th – September 14, 2009
• Section 377 – Mess in the SC. Hearing for 29th Oct. 2009 – October 1, 2009
• Why the Indian SC will uphold the Decriminalization of Gay Sex – Take the Poll – July 9, 2009
• Govt. says High Court’s Judgement on gay sex is Constitutional – July 28, 2009

One of the fundamental distinctions in our mind is that between life and non life. We think nothing of crushing a rock, but think twice before doing the same to, say a sparrow. But what is life?

It turns out that according to the definition of life that we all learnt in biology, a lot of us humans aren’t really alive! Can you believe that? Well, one of the necessary conditions for life (according to our textbooks) is reproduction. Meaning that if an entity cannot reproduce, it’s not alive. Well, what of humans who are sterile – or who choose to not have kids? It’s no good saying that humans as a species can reproduce. Because in a strict sense, each person is a separate species in themselves since the genes are slightly different.

Image Credit: tanakawho

Do plants feel pain?

Are plants alive?

In my opinion, plants are not really alive. Well, what does it mean to be alive? I think that plants are essentially robots. They have no choice, and are completely predictable in their actions.

I also know they don’t feel pain – how do I know you ask? Well two reasons. First of all, we know that they have no central nervous system and don’t have the hardware necessary for feeling. It’s like trying to run Linux on the hardware of a toaster. Pain needs certain physical components.

Secondly, pain would never have evolved in plants since it confers no survival advantage. A plant can’t decide to move away when in pain. Pain is useless unless the organism can do something to alleviate it.

Having said that, it doesn’t mean I condone the destruction of plants and trees. Though I know intellectually that plants don’t feel, I still feel somewhat emotionally bonded to such “living” organisms.

What about computer viruses?

Who said that life has to be biological in nature? If we take a computer virus, we find that it can:

1. Reproduce
2. Adapt to the environment (it can even mutate)
3. Defend itself

If normal biological viruses and bacteria are life, then why not computer viruses? What is the essential quality that makes something alive?

The real way to define life

I feel that the only consistent way to define life is via consciousness. Though it’s extremely hard to define and even more difficult to detect for an outsider (perhaps impossible), consciousness exists beyond a doubt. Decartes “Cogito ergo sum” (I think therefore I am) cuts to the heart of the question. By my definition, the following entities are not alive:

1. Plants
2. Biological Viruses
3. Computer Viruses

Even a little bit of consciousness is enough to make something alive. Everything else is just robotic in nature. Of course, one can expand on this and define life by saying that living things have choice. But it’s my belief that we’re all robots in the sense that choice is an illusion. The only real difference between us and a fridge is that we know we exist and a fridge does not.

What’s your opinion of what life is?

 Loading ...

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• Authority and Power – October 4, 2006
• Why Consciousness is Special – October 2, 2006
• Ethics of Abortion – October 12, 2006
• Revenge on Nature – October 11, 2006
• The Importance of Man (Any Life) – October 1, 2006

When the project to give every India a Unique Identity (UID) Number was announced, the reason given to the public was that it would check illegal immigrants. Of course, even at that time some of us wondered how this could be achieved since there was no way to check whether a person was an illegal immigrant before giving the UID.

It turns out that we were right. Our home minister Chidambaram has admitted that the UID won’t be able to identify existing illegal immigrants. Even after handing out the cards, the UID will at most be a proof of residence and not citizenship. So what’s the real reason for the card? Why did the government have to cover up the purpose with the “stopping illegal immigrants” mantra?

Image Credit: patparslow

Do you need a number to tell you who you are?

The real reason is that the UID will act as a link between various government databases. As it stands right now, the government has little bits of info about us which are relevant to their department. For example, the tax department knows what it needs to know – namely your financial details and such. It doesn’t know about your health or education. Nor should it. In the same way, your health data (if maintained by the government and insurance companies) should not be linked to your tax status and finances.

Now suppose all the data from the various government departments is aggregated. Imagine you go to a hospital for treatment, it will be theoretically possible for the hospital to “determine” whether you’re financially sound by looking at your investments and refuse to treat you on that basis. Or suppose you go to enroll your kid in a school and using your UID, the school is able to recover your financial situation?

Or worse still, suppose a governmental officer asks you for a bribe after checking out how much you’ll be able to pay? The possibilities for abuse are simply endless.

The dangers of having data easily accessible in one place can only be mitigated by thorough privacy laws and technical measures. But we have no such comprehensive privacy laws (though Nilekani has said the country needs them). Moreover, this will be the largest identification database in the history of mankind. Smaller systems have been compromised till now. Do you trust the Indian babus to not abuse the power this database gives them? I certainly don’t.

What’s your opinion?

 Loading ...

Like

Unlike

Similar Posts:

• It’s started – UID used for tagging and tracking – October 4, 2009
• Worldwide attention on National ID cards in India – June 29, 2009
• Privacy Laws in India – June 15, 2009
• Nilekani admits that UID will be used for tracking people – December 9, 2009
• Universal ID cards. A threat to privacy – December 11, 2006