What is wrong here...

"The old rule used to be that a manager of a programmer was always a better programmer, and there were no what we called “technical inversions,” where a programmer works for somebody who doesn’t know how to program. We still follow that philosophy: At certain levels we’ve got business managers, but we don’t have non-programmers really managing programming projects."

-- Bill Gates, 1986 - Programmers at Work

And its hard to imagine many projects executed in our industry that don't suffer from this inversion. Wish we were following similar rules here...its a joke discussing things with the manager some times.

Joke of the year - Nobel Peace Prize

...actually this is the biggest WTF moment of 2009. I can almost imagine a collective gasp across the globe on hearing this year's winner.

I wonder who nominated him? Did he/(his team) lobby for it?

Besides the fact that the period under review ended just 12 days after he became the president, I wonder what change he has ushered in? It has all been talk and more talk. or is it simply an award for his "Yes, we can"rhetoric (coz thats what it has become now)? Or is it simply because he is not George Bush? Umm, I am also not George Bush;)

Of course the NPP remains the most dubious category - it has gone to the likes of Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin, Henry Kissinger, Princess Diana in the past after all.

But I think this one is by far the most bewildering...belittles the genuine effort of others...sad...

...and to think Mahatma Gandhi was nominated 4 times (or was it 5?) and still wasn't suitable enough for the committee.

Democracy - Equality and Liberty

Central to the idea of democracy are the twin concepts of equality and individual liberty. Equality is often taken to mean that all citizens of a country are equal in some basic respect. When all individuals are taken to be equal then it is obvious that one person can not decide for the other. Therefore all need to be given the same rights and meted out the same treatment. Of course, a look at history suggests that the right to equal treatment has not been
given to all. It was initially based on sex, wealth, age. Today in a democracy the right to equal treatment is shared by all citizens of a country over a certain age. Equality becomes critical during decision making. Equality aims to guarantee participation and thus avoid a situation where one party decides to disobey the decision because they were not allowed to participate in the decision making process.
Liberty has just as many connotations as equality and they again affect expectations of democracy. Experts suggest three set of ideas for liberty - republican,liberal and idealist. The republican view measures liberty in terms of a free political community. The liberal view is more concerned with individual freedom to do as he/she pleases. In between these views is the idealist view where the individual has the freedom but also the sense to make the right choices or demands.
But obviously a nation is more than an individual. Therefore it is the manner in which individual freedom interacts with the group that ties liberty to democracy. As individuals don't live in isolation, it is important that an individual's freedom of action does not infringe the freedom of others. Some experts see this as the only role for the state. Anything more and they see it as a threat to liberty.
It is this mix of individual rights and being an equal participant in decision making collectively that causes the tension between equality and liberty. A classic example is the desire to bring about economic equality. This can lead to a collective/majority decision to tax the rich more than others, thus infringing the right of the rich to spend their money as they choose. In such a situation, self rule is cited as a way out...and how self rule is to be achieved marks the major division between various forms of democracy.

At one extreme is what is known as Participatory Democracy. At the other extreme is the idea that people are willing to be ruled by a set of people chosen by them periodically [Representative/liberal] which often is the layman's definition of democracy. In between lies various shades, an example for which is people voting on an issue of national importance[Referendum]. Also, in order to restrain unchecked majority rule, an upper chamber is often recommended which will consist of meritorious experts in different areas.

So clearly it is difficult for a society to define what their expectations from this philosophy is. This fine balancing act gets more difficult when you start adding riders to the two opposing yet required forces. These riders include reservations, different laws for different sections of the society, etc.
Is it surprising then that our in-competent members of the legislature have done away with these goals of democracy and reduced it to a power game.

Violated...

So Delhi bleeds again, whats new? We have already seen the same scenes in Ahmedabad and Jaipur and B'lore and Hyderabad and Bombay before...the list is getting longer...
In fact, there are more terror strikes in India than any other nation(except Iraq and that's not much of a nation right now)...and we have ambitions of being a World Player???? How??

Will resign when Sonia ji asks to leave: Patil
Mr. Patil our home minister...the lesser said of his work the better (http://blogmia.blogspot.com/2007/06/india-burning.html)...but resigning if Sonia ji asks? Wasn't the cabinet selected by the PM, hmmm?

A quick check of course tells us that this government is headed by some one who has not won an election...now i don't want to get into whether its people's loss that he is not a member of the Lok Sabha, for he is surely one of the cleanest leaders we have...but not having obtained mandate is unacceptable all the same. Sonia ji of course is just a member of the parliament - but as the convener of UPA she enjoys cabinet status....and therefore the right to select the cabinet?

And yes, Mr. Shivraj Patil lost his Latur seat in the elections...

WTF

Although I am sure plenty of ink and bytes have been wasted on the farcical trust vote that happened the other day, I couldn't stop myself from writing about it.

Our politicians sure have a habit of surpassing all expectations of the people and are the role models for today's generation. Just when we think that things can't go any worse, that surely we have hit the rock bottom of morality and ethics they snicker at us and prove us wrong.
And we all know the names that cross voted...so why isn’t there a IT raid at their homes and why arent their accounts being scrutinized for any shady transfers...wouldn't these be the best candidate to start the investigation on?

Now that the vote has been won, the government is being pressed to fulfil the promises made to get the support...so the government that talks about the nuclear deal as necessary for the advancement of technology also claims that Ram destroyed the setu on his return from Lanka...when I first read that, I was ready to puke...I mean who are they trying to kid here?....and I really want to know who has such fantastic imagination!!!

Seriously we are in desperate need of an over haul of our system...this is beyond crass;beyond repulsive.

India Burning....

I am no fan of this government, but reading the same kind of news (Bomb blast here, riots there) is beginning to get on my nerves. The PM, good guy he might be, is a puppet in the hands of "Madam" and his cabinet is filled with by and large half-wit, good for nothing ministers...lets take a look at them...

Please note that this is entirely my opinion. Dont complain abt lack of facts. Entirely my opinion and probably biased opinion.

Rating

5 - default rating/average performance
>5 - obviously good
<5 - obviously bad
Pranab Mukherjee - Minister of External Affairs : Vision less External policy under this government...not sure how much he is responsible for it but that's what it is. The only thing to show for is the Nuclear deal...and that is yet to materialize in a manner that won't be considered detrimental to our nuclear power aspirations.

5/10

Arjun Singh - Minister of Human Resource Development : Continues the great work started by his look a like VP Singh. He has made the task of destroying whatever little is left of our homogeneity in to an art form.

0/10

Sharad Pawar - Minister of Agriculture and Minister of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution : The only thing on his mind is BCCI and ICC presidentship...not the suicides of farmers.

2/10

Lalu Prasad Yadav - Minister of Railways : Whether it is coz of him or Nitish Kumar before him or simply the effort of the officials, Indian Railway is making money. I just hope it translates into better travel experience, cleaner stations. I can give him the benefit of the doubt.

6/10

Shivraj V. Patil - Minister of Home Affairs : He has made a mockery of the post of Home Minister. I think he epitomizes incompetence. Never has the internal security of our country looked so shabby...Naxals are stronger than ever, NE is still unstable...Kashmir is more unstable than a few yrs back...well I can go on and on...

0/10

Abdul Rehman Antulay - Minister of Minority Affairs : Hmm cant comment on him...so he gets the default rating.

5/10

Sushilkumar Shinde - Minister of Power : No major policy change with regards to the power sector. I think more effort and vision is required considering the power crisis that hangs on our head all the time.

4/10

Ram Vilas Paswan - Minister of Chemicals & Fertilizers and Minister of Steel : Well he isn't happy with the portfolio he has and his agenda is different anyways...

4/10

S. Jaipal Reddy - Minister of Urban Development : Again someone who is not focused on the job at hand.

4/10

Sis Ram Ola - Minister of Mines: no idea.

5/10

P. Chidambaram - Minister of Finance: Tied by the 'Left', his heart is still in the right place...lol..

8/10

Mahavir Prasad - Minister of Small Scale Industries and Minister of Agro & Rural Industries: Umm....

5/10

P.R. Kyndiah - Minister of Tribal Affairs and Minister of Development of North Eastern Region : Is no news good news? NE ain't developing...

5/10

T.R. Baalu - Minister of Shipping, Road Transport & Highways : NDA government had put a lot of focus on roads near the end of their tenure...that has definitely declined.

4.5/10

Shankersinh Vaghela - Minister of Textiles : He wants the Gujrat CM seat...

5/10

Vayalar Ravi - Minister of Overseas Indian Affairs : He has done a decent job so far... but then the ministry isn't much of a ministry.

5/10

Kamal Nath - Minister of Commerce & Industry : Well our exports are booming...we continue our rigid stand at WTO...

7/10

Hansraj Bhardwaj - Minister of Law & Justice : No change...status quo zindabad. Our judiciary really needs an overhaul...

3/10

Sontosh Mohan Dev - Minister of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises : No comments

5/10

Prof. Saif-ud-din Soz - Minister of Water Resources : He wants to go back to Kashmir I think...this is also an area that needs a lot of work...

4/10

Raghuvansh Prasad Singh - Minister of Rural Development : ?

5/10

Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi - Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Minister of Information & Broadcasting : I&B is in a mess. I think he prefers football...lol...

3.5/10

Mani Shankar Aiyar - Minister of Panchayati Raj.and Minister of Youth Affairs & Sports : Loud mouth!! We don't need Asiad huh? Minister of Sports saying that...imagine...wasnt great with the petroleum portfolio either...

3/10

Meira Kumar - Minister of Social Justice & Empowerment : "I am a minister, I am a minister! Yay...do I have to work?? Huh?"

3.5/10

Murli Deora - Minister of Petroleum & Natural Gas : Above average I think...

5.5/10

Ambika Soni - Minister of Tourism & Culture : "I have a press conference to attend...tourists can wait at the airport"

3/10

A. Raja - Minister of Communications & Information Technology : Mr Maran was better...sadly sacrificed for personal reasons...I don't know abt Mr. Raja.

7/10 for mr. Maran.

Dr. Anbumani Ramadoss - Minister of Health & Family Welfare : "How dare he...I own AIIMS" Polio is still around and increasing again...:(

4/10

Kapil Sibal - Minister of Science & Technology and Minister of Ocean Development : Loud mouth...but doing an OK job I think.

6/10

Prem Chand Gupta - Minister of Company Affairs : Huh?

5/10

Then there are some others with an independent charge....

Oscar Fernandes - Minister of State of the Ministry of Labour and Employment : Nothing to report...

5/10

Renuka Chowdhury - Minister of State of the Ministry of Women & Child Development : Loud mouth...she has such a great opportunity to make a difference...nothin has happened...

4/10

Subodh Kant Sahai - Minister of State of the Ministry of Food Processing Industries : No comments.

5/10

Vilas Muttemwar - Minister of State of the Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources : I really would like to know how he is doing...

5/10

Kumari Selja - Minister of State of the Ministry of Urban Employment & Poverty Alleviation : Sounds like a no show...but I am not sure...so...

5/10

Praful Patel - Minister of State of the Ministry of Civil Aviation : He comes across as trying hard...but I think he has little to show for his efforts.

4.5/10

G.K.Vasan - Minister of State of the Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation : What kind of ministry is this?

5/10

This is still a work in progress...if anyone else wanna rate them...please be my guest...

Democracy - The Institutions

The last time I wrote on this (long long time ago, I can still remember...:) Democracy - A Note) I closed by saying that active citizenship is what is required for a democracy to become real.
To be effective and active, a citizen should have the knowledge of the fundamental institutions that are presented as the pillars of democracy. Of course it is impractical to expect people to have academic knowledge of these institutions; instead a practical knowledge of the role of each institution should suffice. Although a strict set of institutions is hard to define, the following general characteristics should ideally be established –

• Elected Representatives - Control of government by members of a parliament or assembly etc. elected by citizens.
• Free, fair and frequent elections - with minimal coercion and fraud.
• Freedom of Expression - All citizens should have the right to express themselves on matters political as well others without fear of reprimand from the existing government.
• Access to alternate sources of information - All citizens must have the opportunity to form opinions using data available from multiple sources (as opposed to the "official" sources), so this clearly refers to the freedom of press.
• Autonomous associations - All citizens should have the right to form associations based on interests.
• Inclusive citizenship - All citizens of the country should be bound by the same set of rules and guidelines
• Independence of the judiciary - The judiciary should be accessible to all and more importantly must be separate from the government.
• Impartial civil service - The civil service should be autonomous and not partial towards the government of the day.

Now let us re-examine the institutions with respect to our motherland.

• Elected Representatives - Clearly we have this institution well and running. But the main problem for India is the fact that we have come to a stage where nearly 2 million people are represented by a single person in the Parliament, an average that makes it impossible for a citizen to really make his/her voice heard (all the more reason for him/her to become an active citizen). UK on the other hand has 646 members in the House of Commons making a people/member average of around 100,000 (that is 2o times less than ours). Well one solution could be to raise the total number of seats (will require an amendment as the max perceived strength is 552 according to the constitution). Well it is hard to make things work with 200 odd that do show up in the first place :)
• Free, fair and frequent elections - We definitely do have frequent elections, the other 2 conditions are on dodgy grounds...but I would like to believe that it's not yet a disease. I don't have any data to make an opinion otherwise anyways...
• Freedom of Expression - It is there and it is not there. All depends on what you are trying to say. Books are banned regularly, gag orders are issued too. As for the freedom of press, India was ranked 120 out of 167 by reporters sans frontiers (www.rsf.org) though it does add - "Countries such as the Philippines (111th), India (120th) and Indonesia (117th) figure in the bottom half of the index despite having free and lively independent media, since killings and physical attacks on journalists, along with outdated laws, still prevent a full flowering of the press. Violence against the media in India rarely comes from the authorities but from political activists and in Kashmir from armed groups."
• Access to alternate sources of information - Well again it's there and not there. RTI was brought in to correct this but it has not yet reached the common people (wonder why the government is the least active in spreading the word about it).
• Autonomous associations - The party system thrives here, a little too much perhaps (sigh).
• Inclusive citizenship - This is a problem issue (imho) as it has been the root cause for some of the most deep crevices in our society. Take the special treatment for minorities (separate laws) or the issue of reservation. Both good on paper but deadly in the hands of our "great leaders" and "intellectuals" alike.
• Independence of the judiciary - Overactive at times but definitely and unabashedly independent. So independent that there seems to be no way to cure all the decay that is prevalent (lawyer strikes, long holidays, pending cases, just to name a few).
• Impartial civil service - this has hardly ever existed, some how the bureaucracy has never found its feet.

So how do we ensure that a citizen is active or forced to be active? Umm, next section maybe...

Democracy - A Note

Here we go...part one of maybe a multiple part series...or maybe I will lose interest after this one...lets see...
I took a book on Democracy by Bernard Crick and it was an amazing journey on the development of the concept and its implementation as it stands today. I want to write this so that I can look back at it if/when I start forgetting what I read and what I felt while reading it.

Democracy as some philosophers feel is an "essentially contested concept", something that can never be defined universally but still is considered as the definition of a good government...or a pre-requisite at the very least. It is a term often (mis)used by the political class when trying to suggest superiority of one government over the other - "we are the largest democracy! We are more democratic then them" - and so on.

To understand it better one needs to be aware of the manner in which it evolved over time...That's what this note is going to be about.

The word first emerged around 4th century BC in Athens, Demokratia - the rule (kratos) of the people (demos). The earliest usage can be found in Plato's writings where he attacks it by calling it a rule of poor and ignorant over the educated and the knowledgeable. His fundamental opposition was between knowledge and opinion. (I for one find this distinction extremely interesting) To him democracy was the rule or rather the anarchy of mere opinion.
His pupil, Aristotle, modified the strong views - it was ok for some to rule with the consent of many...the "some" needed to have excellence (aristocrats in other words) while "many" didn't mean the entire population (most certainly not women and slaves). To be able to choose one needed to have some education and some property. But the requirement of knowledge remained at the forefront of things - "just because men are equal in somethings, they can not be considered equal in all."

With time the concept/doctrine of democracy took root and it was realized that involving its citizens made the state more stable. This idea was further developed by Machiavelli in his book Discourses, around the 17th century. Developing Aristotle's theory further he said that good laws to protect all are not good enough unless subjects become active citizens. They should try and seek responsibility. He understood that the state is a lot safer in the hands of people fighting for a cause(the state) rather than in the hands of armed militia...

And then with the French revolution the idea of democracy also got revolutionized....with aristocracy toppled over by common people...the rules of engagement changed. Suddenly everyone regardless of education and property had a right to make his contribution into the decision making process for it was felt that the greater common good is understood better by the common citizen than the aristocrats living in an artificial make believe world. This threw up a new issue...division between individual liberties and the rights of the state.

The fourth usage comes from the American constitution and most of the constitutions ever since (even though it was formed before America really became a democracy) - All can participate (and they should), all must mutually respect the equal rights of fellow citizens within a regulated legal order that defines, protects and limits those rights. A fusion of rights of the people and the idea of legally guaranteed individual rights. The two are distinct ideas and often contradictory (that’s what happens when you get lawyers involved...)

Of course in today's world, with all the information overload and media hype its difficult to combine freedom and popular power. Neither there is one right and valid method (cant think of any other word) to it. There remain a number of factors that shape its form and implementation - factors like religion, culture, etc. So one form of democracy is not automatically better than the other…it can only be the best that can be implemented under the given circumstances…and that's the key question…is it able to serve its purpose in its current form in a given region at a given period of time?

In the next part (if it comes), I ll write about what essentially makes a democracy tick..:)

Anyways, a round of applause to anyone who actually read all of that…haha…but the evolution of this doctrine is something I find fascinating. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested and a lot of what I wrote actually comes from its pages...

God and his Temples

So friends and friends' friends and I will be going to Tirupathi this weekend...well having lived in southern India for almost 2 years(gosh), I guess it is about time I gave one of the most visited places a visit.

Tirupathi, the abode of Lord Venkateswara, is located in the extreme south of Andhra Pradesh in Chitoor district, 750 odd km from here (Hyderabad).

So much for Geography…

This will be my first visit to a temple in about 2 yrs, probably the tenth or so in the past decade. I don’t visit temples, when I do it’s to see the “place” and the people and never to worship. Temples once meant to create the right environment for the devotees have become jostling grounds. I have never quite understood why worshipping in a particular temple is likely to increase your chances of success at petitioning God. Surely God is not listening to one’s prayers based on his location.

If God is omnipresent and omnipotent then why do I need to go to a particular temple?

And then you reach there, wearing a bandana of your religion on your head, but so have another billion people. All fighting to get ahead in the line, to get into a strategic location – little compassion is shown to fellow humans – cursing, pushing, pulling, etc is common…as if God will not note this…and just your effort to get there…

I remember once when I went to the Vaishno Devi shrine, a guy walking a few steps ahead of me got a nice little rap on his backside coz he decided to wait a few seconds too long before the holy pindis…or take the case of stampedes that happen every year during Haj. So you went to pay homage to the lord and ended up dead in the process.
How uncool is that???

Communal one day; secular the next!

What I wrote earlier were the questions that came to my head while reading about the furore surrounding L.K. Advani’s statement regarding the secular credentials of Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

The statement itself can be seen as an attempt at an image makeover, an attempt to move away from the right wing hardliner to an all encompasing moderate.
To me it represents the typical nature of the politics of the sub-continent: lack of any core beliefs and simply following the prejudices of the day. Looking back at Jinnah's history - "Messiah of Hindu-Muslim Unity" (1916), "Champion of the Two Nation Theory" (1940), dubbing Pakistan as a "laboratory of Islam" and following it up with a call to rise above religion and being citizens first (speech of August 11 1947 which Advani cited), one can easily see a politician at work. A similar pattern can be cited for Advani and perhaps for most politicians - ruthlessly using religion to forward their own cause and then trying to distance themselves from it once the purpose has been served.

What is saddening and at times annoying is the fact that people are unable to see past the rhetoric, the media meant to keep people informed is busy milking the story, I wonder how many people even know what Advani said and in what context; other politicians are either mocking Advani or trying to join the "me too" wagon and hailing the change in attitude; all blind to their own past aberrations.

Our Software Industry

I am a software engineer, working in one of the leading tech companies of India, with a turnover of over a billion dollars annually........

With these facts stated, let me quickly mention the incident that made me wanna pen a.k.a type this down; a conversation with a friend's father, an engineer himself, now enjoying his retirement days...He said, " Son, our software industry is one of the great success stories today, just like Amul was in my days!"

I nodded my head in agreement at the time; US$ 15 Billion exports, among the largest employers, who wouldn't agree? But later I couldn't help but think if it wasn't just another case of falling short of potential, something that is so routine in this country.

Lets go back to the figures, TCS the largest Indian software company was founded in 1968, today its a US$ 2 Billion+ company with a total head count of about 40,000. Microsoft was founded in 1975, today its a US$ 36 Billion+ company with a total head count of about 57,000.

Why such unbalanced growth? Here in lies the truth: our companies suffer from myopic vision, no desire to innovate or invest in R & D, all factors that make a company a world beater. There is nothing revolutionary in what we have achieved. From plain and simple body shopping in the 80s we have used the improved technology (internet and bigger bandwidth for example) to move work back to India (further reducing costs), a methodology known as the Global Delivery Model.

Amazing feats can be accomplished by a motivated work force of forty thousand. Instead most of us end up performing quotidian activities of the most mundane kind, soon to be left with little creative urge or a desire to innovate.

Yes indeed our software industry has come a long way; but if these issues are not addressed, if innovation doesn't become a buzzword, if creativity and imagination are not encouraged, we will soon reach a stage where growth will stagnate and there will be little left to cheer about.