Deadly Non-neutral Acid? (DNA)

If you’re like me, you’ve been fingerprinted when entering or leaving the United States as a foreigner. Then you knew that the US government had you identified by everything you ever touched in the US. Whether it be a snack bar in a supermarket or your touching your date’s face before he/she was found murdered.

Now, the anti-criminalization policies have gone one step further. Forget foreigners. If you are a suspect in a crime and are arrested, the US government has the cheek to swab your inside cheek to take a sample of your DNA to add to their database. Forget if you’re guilty or not. That is apparently immaterial.

I’m surprised that all the privacy groups who worry about Internet data gathering, browser cookies, browsing history, online search history records, etc. by Google and other software companies are keeping mum about this issue. This is your DNA we’re talking about - nothing can be more personal than that. And to let the government collect and store your DNA even if you’re innocent - what more intrusion of privacy can there be? Is that how socio-cultural issues work - the Internet makes news, conventional stuff doesn’t?

In other news, you can now (apparently) check if you suffer from bipolar disorder by ordering a test “spit kit” from Psynomics. They will test your DNA and will mail you the test results. We already have pregnancy tests for women, sugar-level tests for diabetics, and blood pressure checkers readily available even in third-world countries like India. Is technology moving diagnosis more and more from physicians to consumers? Will consumers be able to assess if they need a cardiac bypass surgery or an appendectomy by themselves? Will physician’s diagnoses become obsolete some day in the future? Something to ponder about.

The Largest Pyramid Ever?

A grand idea, considered improbable by most. Gaining publicity last month, was the proposed plan of German entrepreneurs to build the world’s largest structure - a pyramid shaped tomb to contain the remains of millions of people of all faiths from all over the world.

The Friends of the Great Pyramid say:

The Great Pyramid can potentially be any human being’s grave or memorial site. As monumental as it is affordable, it serves those of all nationalities and religions. Individuals who are either unwilling or unable to have their ashes buried there can also opt to have a memorial stone placed instead. Stones can be custom designed with any number of colors, images, or relief decorations. The Great Pyramid will continue to grow with every stone placed, eventually forming the largest structure in the history of man.

And regarding it becoming the largest building in the world:

The Great Pyramid grows brick by brick; its structure of rock-solid concrete receptacles and memorial stones is set to outlast the coming millennia. Each tomb container will contain an urn with the ashes of a deceased, while memorial stones hold capsules containing other remembrances.

All stones are identical in size and are positioned at random in the Great Pyramid. After only few thousand stones have been laid, the Great Pyramid will have reached massive proportions. Even if only a small percentage of all current and future living decide on a Great Pyramid stone, the monument will outsize the Giza Pyramids very soon. In only a few decades it will be the largest structure our civilization has ever built.

They have secured $122,600 (£60,000) in state funding, estimate it would take about 30 years to be completed, with each burial costing about $960 (€700). Pritzker-winning Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas is heading the jury for choosing a final design for the project. Not everyone is optimistic about the proposal though.

The Washington Times says:

The improbable plan is based on the idea that people will pay to have their ashes encased in the concrete blocks used to construct the monument. Millions of people would have to sign up to make it viable, though if the team behind it is successful, they will be rich beyond the wildest dreams of even the most ambitious pharaoh.

You can see the number of people who’ve signed up for this here. Also, as expected, local residents’ ire is reported by The Independent:

However, the pyramid idea has not been universally welcomed by residents in the next door village of Streetz. “We don’t want to live next to the world’s biggest graveyard,” one inhabitant was quoted as saying last week.

Gizmodo also contemplates that in 30 years, who would want to fly their remains to Germany when one could fly them in space?

I actually liked the idea in some ways, though it is true that it does seem improbable. If mankind were to extinguish itself by nuclear holocaust or climatic destruction, there would hardly be any signs left of its existence on planet earth. The larger the structures we build, the larger the probability that alien probes would sense man-made structures on earth after our demise. Ah! But that’s romanticizing, just like Friends of the Great Pyramid!

(Image Credits: Friends of the Great Pyramid)

Weekend Flea Market 5-Oct-07

An assortment of stuff I came across in cyberspace, offered second hand, for anyone who may be interested.

• If you haven’t read it already, Thomas Friedman’s penultimate op-ed 9/11 Is Over, is a must-read.
• China has now started blocking all RSS feeds as well.
• A woman has been sentenced to death by stoning in Iran for committing adultery. Kamangir and a group of Iranian bloggers are trying to stop that from happening.
• Microsoft launches HealthVault, an online repository where consumers can store medical information for free in an encrypted database. For once, Microsoft beats Google to something!
• Ashok talked about “Collective Intelligence” in the comments discussion on my post “Runaway Train“. Techcrunch reveals that a new site, CrowdChess, has launched. You log on and sign up for a game. Each side is made up of teams of dozens, hundreds or even thousands of people. Anyone on a team can suggest the next move, and the move that gets the most votes is the one that is played out. Like Erick, I too wonder if any number of amateurs can ever beat a grandmaster in this scenario! What do you think?
• MMP has his own insightful analysis of why he blogs. He has developed an interesting universal model that shows how we all live in blogging CAVES. Check it out.
• Check out Ashok’s take on the various categories of Indian bloggers to have a healthy laugh at The Blogosphere Zoopedia.
• A US Senate Judiciary Committee has passed the Free Flow of Information Act. There is still a long way to go and final outcome seems uncertain at this stage. See Are Blogging Journalists Shielded? for background information.
• The Economist paints a sordid and bleak picture of the challenges involved in revamping Mumbai. A must-read if you care about Mumbai.
• Financial Times puts Rahul Gandhi’s first populist action after ascending to the Congress secretaryship as the backdrop to describe how political short-termism is hampering retail reforms.
• I had pondered on a few questions regarding cricket’s status in India in my 10 Thoughts on T20 World Cup Win post. Social psychologist Ashis Nandy has some interesting answers in his interview with Outlook magazine. He says there are only three areas of our life—cricket, cinema (Bollywood) and crime that recognize capability wholeheartedly and unconditionally.
• I have written about the contempt of court ruling regarding Justice Sabharwal. Vinod Mehta brings greater clarity to the issue and wisely cautions that if the media and the judiciary engage in a war, the only winners will be the politicians.
• To bring this potpourri full circle back to the US, Rajinder Puri takes on a lot of controversial issues in his take on the decline of the US. Some of his comments resonate with Shefaly’s comments in the discussion on Right To Free Speech: What does it mean?.

Google Reader does evil; dumps Opera

One of the most favorite (and certainly my personal favorite) RSS readers is Google Reader. In cut-throat competition with Bloglines, Google introduced Search functionality in Google Reader yesterday. Read TechCrunch’s take here.

Unfortunately, this has made Google Reader stop working with my favorite browser, Opera. Here’s how it looks in Opera v9.23:

Now, despite Opera being the most W3C compliant browser, it has the lowest market share, and hence has historically had problems with various Google services. This, despite the fact that Opera is the closest browser to Google’s approach towards features and functionality. And this, despite the fact, that the folks behind IE, Firefox, Opera, and Google Reader, announced in April this year, that the browser wars are over.

As of this writing, there is no response yet from Google to this issue being reported in the Google Reader forums.

I sincerely continue to hope that Google - a company that has grown phenomenally by focusing on the W3C-regulated Internet rather than a proprietary OS - respects the most W3C compliant browser in the market. Google’s motto may be “Do No Evil”, but it’s doing the exact opposite!

Update 7th Sep 2007: Google has fixed the problem. Cheers! I Glllooove you, Google!

Technorati Tags: google, opera, w3c, internet, browser, rss

Share this post :

123 Agreement vs. Hyde Act

There have been claims and counter-claims by many regarding whether the 123 Agreement will supersede the Hyde Act, or vice versa, in case there are differences of opinion over the deal. Here are three independent clarifications on this issue.

The Week

K. Subrahmanyam writes in The Week: The opponents and supporters harp on the Hyde Act. Supporters say the agreement does not mention the Act at all, and that its provisions are binding not on India, but only on the US. The US legislation has binding and non-binding provisions, and the US administration implements only the binding portions. The US president, in his signing statement, has made it clear that he would ignore the non-binding provisions of the Act. …

…According to Article VI of the US Constitution, as interpreted by the US Supreme Court, obligations of an international agreement supersede provisions of domestic law.

The Hindu

Siddharth Varadarajan clarifies in The Hindu:

“Some commentators have noted that the Indian 123 agreement does not contain a sentence found in Article 2.1 of China’s 123 agreement with the U.S., namely that “the parties recognize, with respect to the observance of this agreement, the principle of international law that provides that a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.” Thus, it is felt the U.S. administration can always claim the Hyde Act’s restrictions trump the 123 agreement’s more generous commitments.

Though the Indian negotiators had an identical line in all their drafts and tried till the end to incorporate it in the final agreed text, the U.S. remained unyielding, claiming that Congress would shoot it down. But the Indian side did manage to push through another article, 16.4, that the agreement “shall be implemented in good faith and in accordance with the principles of international law.” The phrase “principles of international law” is a clear reference to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Article 27 of the Convention, which, as a part of customary international law, does not have to be cited to be applicable, states: “A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.”

India Today

An article, “Tactical Hold”, in India Today (2nd Sept) states: ” On the argument of which statute takes precedence - the Hyde Act or the 123 Agreement - Government expects to come out the winner. Much of the Government’s confidence stems from the fact that there is weighty legal opinion in the US to back its assertion that the 123 Agreement, not the Hyde Act, will be the final binding agreement between the two countries.

Sean Murphy, professor of Law, George Washington University Law School, explains, “An international agreement like the 123 if approved by the Congress does take precedence over any earlier statute. So to the extent if there were any changes that the 123 Agreement brings about those would supersede the earlier Act”. Frederic L. Kirgis, Emeritus Professor of Law, Washington and Lee University School of Law and a constitutional diplomacy expert, concurs when he says, “Whatever the authorized representatives of the two countries have agreed upon would supersede any other previous agreement or any internal law of either country as a matter of international law”.

Summary

It is clear that even in terms of fine prints and legalities, we’re still safe with respect to our sovereignty, our choice not to sign the NPT, and are not bound by the restrictive clauses of the Hyde Act. More importantly, as I’ve noted before, in times of international disputes, it is not these laws that really matter, it is the diplomatic relationship.

Those who oppose a strategic relationship with the US will never like closer cooperation between the two countries - whether economic, strategic, civilian, or military. They will only end up isolating us, keeping us bogged down fighting a proxy war with China through Pakistan, and curbing our phenomenal growth.

Those who are in favor of closer Indo-US ties, and have been concerned that India should not compromise its sovereignty and freedom by succumbing to the US - be rest assured. Our negotiators have done a good job so far. They need our support, not politicized, mindless, rhetoric.

Technorati Tags: india, america, politics, indo-us nuclear deal, current affairs, 123 agreement, hyde act

Share this post :

Email Inboxes for 100+ Embassies Hacked

Usernames and passwords for more than 100 e-mail accounts at embassies and governments worldwide have been posted online. Using the information, anyone can access the accounts that have been compromised. InfoWorld broke the news, and The Register has more information here.

The list of Indian hacks includes:

• Indian Embassies in USA, Sweden, Oman, Italy, Belgium, China, Germany, and Finland
• Defence Research & Development Organization (DRDO)
• National Defence Academy (NDA)

The Indian Express verified the accuracy of the claim: It sent a test mail to the Indian Ambassador in China on her official email ID and was able to read it. It also accessed transcripts of high profile meetings, and commercial documents from NDA and DRDO.

Now, before we go about asking Google to hide sensitive facilities from Google Earth, we should first get our own house in order.

Technorati Tags: india, security, hack

Share this post :

Response to CPI(M) Objections against the Indo-US Nuclear Deal

Background

Woke alerted me to a “concern questionnaire” by the CPI(M) on the Indo-US nuclear agreement. The CPI(M) has asked for “clarification” on 9 issues. It wants answers to 9 questions, that are detailed in this article in the DNA. It is not clear if the journalist herself believes in those objections or is simply vomiting those concerns morsel-by-morsel.

To be clear what we’re talking about, the actual, full, text of the 123 agreement between India and the United States on the nuclear deal can be downloaded here (PDF). If you’re not interested in the detailed response to each of their objections, jump to the Summary. Now, let’s get to work with the CPI(M) objections!

Response to CPI(M) Objections

#1: The CPI(M) was concerned that the deal required India to pursue a foreign policy congruent to that of the US; and to secure India’s full and active participation in US efforts to sanction and contain Iran.
There is no reference to any aspect of foreign policy in the 123 agreement. The 123 agreement does not mention Iran at all. This “objection” or “concern” is the result of viewing everything through “imperialist” glasses and being completely misguided as a result. Also, see response to Opposition #2 in my Trilogy Part 3.

#2: The deal would not allow full cooperation on civilian nuclear technology, denying India a complete fuel cycle. India will continue to face an embargo on importing equipment and components related to enrichment, reprocessing and heavy water production, even when such activities are under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections and for peaceful purposes. Article 5(2) in the 123 agreement makes this very clear.

Article 5(2) of the 123 agreement states (in full):
“Sensitive nuclear technology, heavy water production technology, sensitive nuclear facilities, heavy water production facilities and major critical components of such facilities may be transferred under this Agreement pursuant to an Amendment to this agreement. Transfers of dual-use items that could be used in enrichment, reprocessing or heavy-water production facilities will be subject to the Parties’ respective applicable laws, regulations, and license policies.”

Where is the embargo? Has the writer of the article actually read the 123 agreement? Instead of applauding the terrific job done by India’s negotiating team (which the whole world is surprised about), our critics are twisting interpretations to suit their pathetic objectives!

#3: Steps to be taken by India would be conditional upon and contingent on action taken by the US. It is clear from the 123 agreement itself that all restrictions are not being lifted. Embargoes are still in place, and the US President is still required to annually certify to the Congress that India is in “full compliance” with the congressionally imposed non-proliferation conditions.

There is no “embargo” in the 123 agreement. How can a requirement between the US President and the US Congress be a part of an international deal between US and India?! The 123 agreement is between the US and India. It does not, and cannot, contain any clauses regarding what the US President needs to do for the US Congress. The 123 agreement has no such requirements. It is the Hyde Act that has reporting requirements for the US President, not certification requirements.

#4: The US will not take the necessary steps to change its laws or align the NSG rules to fulfil the terms of the India-US nuclear deal. The 123 agreement does not change the requirement of the Hyde Act that the NSG exemption for India be “made by consensus” and be consistent with the rules being framed by the US. The legislation requires the administration to ensure that the NSG exemption for India is no less stringent than the US exemption.

The US cannot and is not willing to take the necessary steps to change the rules of the 45-member NSG. Why should it? It is up to India to diplomatically deal with each NSG member, many of whom are already willing to make all the exceptions in India’s favor (except China)! Observe the repeated references to the Hyde Act and attempts to blur the distinction between the Hyde Act (an internal US legislation) and the 123 agreement (a bilateral agreement).

Further, clause 5.6(a) of the 123 states: “As part of its implementation of the July 18, 2005, Joint Statement the United States is committed to seeking agreement from the US Congress to amend its domestic laws and to work with friends and allies to adjust the practices of the Nuclear Suppliers Group to create the necessary conditions for India to obtain full access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninterrupted and continual access to fuel supplies from firms in several nations”. To further guard against any disruption of fuel supplies, the United States is prepared to take additional steps. Read about them in clause 5.6 (b).

What more can you ask for?

#5: The additional protocol referred to in the original agreement would be intrusive and not India-specific…One prerequisite to bring the deal into force is that India and the IAEA should have “concluded all legal steps required prior to signature” to enforce inspections “in perpetuity”. A second prerequisite mentioned in the 123 agreement is for India to make “substantial progress” on concluding an additional protocol with the IAEA.

Article 5.6 (c) states (in full):
“In light of the above understandings with the United States, an India-specific safeguards agreement will be negotiated between Indian and the IAEA providing for safeguards to guard against withdrawal of safeguarded nuclear material from civilian use at any time as well as providing for corrective measures that India may take to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign nuclear supplies. Taking this into account, India will place its civilian nuclear facilities under India-specific safeguards in perpetuity and negotiate an appropriate safeguards agreement to this end with the IAEA.”

Article 10.2 states (in full):
“Taking into account Article 5.6 of this Agreement, India agrees that nuclear material and equipment transferred to India by the United States of America pursuant to this Agreement and any nuclear material used in or produced through the use of nuclear material, non-nuclear material, equipments or components so transferred shall be subject to safeguards in perpetuity in accordance with the India-specific Safeguards agreement between India and the IAEA and an additional protocol, when in force”.

First, the term “India-specific” is recurring in the agreement because India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. No such exceptions have been made to any nation in the history of mankind.

Second, to expect the United States, which has a binding legal agreement with the IAEA, to make exceptions to India, that would make its legal agreements with the IAEA illegal, is foolish.

Third, Concluding all legal steps required prior to signature is obviously required. What is the specific problem with that?

Fourth, as you can observe, the “inspections in perpetuity” that are referred, are only in the context of the India-specific Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA, which has not been negotiated or signed yet. This only goes to show that we have a long way to go before we enjoy the benefits of this deal. But to castigate this signed agreement on the basis of an as-yet-unsigned agreement, shows that the critics of this deal do not share the long term objectives, but only choose to criticize whatever we have achieved so far.

#6: India is placing its facilities in perpetuity while the US President can prevent the transfer to India of equipment, materials or technology from other participating governments in the NSG, or from any other source.
Oh, I thought the CPI(M) was opposing the deal because it would make India a subservient country to the US! I wasn’t aware that they knew we could also deal with other nations like communist Russia!

India is only placing its civilian facilities under safeguards in the 123 agreement. The US President can (and should have the right to) prevent transfer of equipment, materials, or technology. When this 123 agreement wasn’t in place, we’re still living in exactly this kind of isolation. Also see responses to Opposition 2 and 6 in Part 3.

#7: India’s fissile material stockpile will be restricted.

Talks only about the Hyde Act. India has never negotiated and has not been part of the deliberations behind the Hyde Act. See response to Opposition 2 in Part 3.

#8: The deal includes physical verification and suitable access to be provided by India to US inspectors, and not just IAEA safeguards. US end-use monitoring is reflected in the 123 agreement’s Article 12 (3). Also, the provision for US fallback safeguards in Article 10 (4) states, “If the IAEA decides that the application of IAEA safeguards is no longer possible, the supplier and recipient should consult and agree on appropriate verification measures.”

Article 12 (3) states (in full): “When execution of an agreement or contract pursuant to this Agreement between Indian and United States organizations requires exchanges of experts, the Parties shall facilitate entry of the experts to their territories and their stay therein consistent with national laws, regulations, and practices. When other cooperation pursuant to this Agreement requires visits of experts, the Parties shall facilitate entry of the experts to their territory and their stay therein consistent with national laws, regulations, and practices.”

So much for US end-use monitoring. The agreement doesn’t state any criteria for deciding when expert inspections would be ‘required’. Again, as mentioned in my response to Opposition 2 in Part 3, it is the diplomatic relationship that matters and is the key deciding factor.

Article 10 (4) states (in full): “If the IAEA decides that the application of IAEA safeguards is no longer possible, the supplier and recipient should consult and agree on appropriate verification measures.”

Observe that the article is not about US, but about IAEA. However, our critic chooses to term it as “the provision for US fallback safeguards”. Now, what is wrong with this clause in the 123 Agreement? Here, an ostracized country that has refused to sign the terms of joining the IAEA (the NPT), is agreeing that if, under some circumstances, the IAEA doesn’t approve of its safeguards, then it will consult and agree (in other words negotiate) on appropriate verification measures.

I have not touched upon this earlier, but I probably should. Nuclear proliferation is a very real concern. The possibility of nuclear weapons landing in the wrong hands is enormous. No country can afford to say it will use nuclear power without being transparent about it to some extent. Those who do - like Iran and North Korea - face economic sanctions.

#9: The military program will also be subject to monitoring by the IAEA and the US. The 123 agreement does not change that requirement in the Hyde Act.
This is complete misrepresentation, exaggeration, and disinformation. The 123 agreement does not refer to monitoring of military facilities by the IAEA at all.

Regarding the other objections with respect to the Hyde Act, see response to Opposition 2, Part 3.

Summary

It is clear from these nine objections of the CPI(M), that either they’re misinformed about the 123 agreement (a fault of the Congress government) or they’re immune to the sensitivities involved in negotiating an international agreement. Their scholarly stand of nitpicking over clauses of the 123 agreement, picking words and phrases out of context, and misrepresenting them towards irrational conclusions is just a political gimmick. It is instructive to note that the Left has not negotiated anything with any other country ever. It has only negotiated with other Indian political parties towards the objective of getting representation in the Indian parliament.

It works because hardly anyone from the Indian public questions anything like “Article X.Y(Z) restricts India’s right to…”. Remember that the Left leaders are intellectual, bookish, and scholarly. It is precisely their intellectual stance that makes them appealing even to the educated Indians. The need of the hour is to really dig into their so-called intellectuality and question them. Unfortunately however, our public will read stories and stories and articles upon articles describing each and every movement, behavior, nod, glance, and expression of a Bollywood hero being freed from prison, and spend time voting via SMS about them, rather than read the 123 and oppose the Left. That is why they wield such a power in India.

Photo Credits: The subject of this post deserved a photo of a Left leader, but I decided against (dis)gracing my blog with it!

Technorati Tags: india, america, politics, indo-us nuclear deal, communism, current affairs

Share this post :

Intelligent Image Resizing

Few weeks back, I had written about Photoswapping images instead of Photoshopping them. Here’s another groundbreaking algorithm for “content aware image resizing”, thanks to Michael from Techcrunch:

The research paper, as well as a downloadable video, by Dr. Ariel Shamir and Dr. Shai Avidan is available here.

Note the differences between the earlier algorithm and this one. The earlier one used a large database of images to add or replace image sections. This one doesn’t work with any external images, and is purely an algorithmic advance towards higher content awareness of the existing image itself. Now you can easily use photos from your Ibiza vacation to print family-friendly photo albums!

It is fascinating to see how we’re making advances in algorithms even today - why wasn’t this invented all these years that Photoshop has been around? (Simple answer: because no human mind had conceived and invented such an algorithm before).

I do wish the inventors get richly rewarded for this magnificent piece of work!

Technorati Tags: digital photography, image manipulation, image resizing, photoshop, image editing

Share this post :

Can an open GPhone kill the restrictive iPhone?

Imagine you buy a car that comes with a 2 year warranty on defective parts and 3 free servicing trips. But what if those were valid only if you filled fuel from a specified provider - say Indian Oil or Shell? Or you buy a DVD player or home theater that can only play movies produced by Universal? Sounds ridiculous, right?

I’ve always been surprised how Apple gets away with its restrictive policies while Microsoft gets dragged into court over anti-trust laws for anything and everything. Until recently, you couldn’t run Windows on a Mac, while you could always run even Linux on a PC. You could choose whether you wanted an Intel or AMD processor to power your PC, but no such choice with the Mac, until recently. iPod doesn’t work with anything except iTunes. And the iPhone doesn’t work with any cellular service provider except AT&T.

It was one thing with computers, but another with cell phones. The cell phone market is much, much bigger. How long will this restrictive practice of binding you to a specific service provider work? The reasons why Apple did it are clear. Apple gets a monthly revenue cut from AT&T for each iPhone user. Though some say that there are alleged benefits to this restrictive policy, it just doesn’t cut it for me. After all, these revenues are not comparable to what Apple gets from the actual sale of iPhones.

Well, the inevitable has already happened. The iPhone is now unlocked. What this means is that anyone anywhere in the world can buy an iPhone in the US (or get their friends to buy it for them) and use it in their country. Yes, so you can now use the iPhone in India. Read the original Engadget news here. The second image below shows the iPhone working with the T-Mobile service provider in the US.

Is it illegal in the US to unlock your iPhone? Engadget says no, as long as you’re doing it for your personal benefit, and and agree to forego your warranty and Apple support. Predictably, the second team developing such an unlocking software has already received threatening calls from AT&T’s legal team. Being one of the worst service providers in the US in terms of quality, they need to get their act together quickly!

How will the iPhone be marketed outside the US? How can Apple force consumers in Europe and fastest growing cellular phone markets like India to select Apple’s choice of service provider? I just don’t think it’s possible. And if that’s true, can Apple have different marketing strategies for the US and outside the US?Can the iPhone withstand competition if an equally sophisticated telephone were to offer users their choice of providers?

The Business Standard has just broken a story that has made headlines all over cyberspace. It says the Google Phone, or GPhone, is just two weeks away from an international launch:

Talks are believed to be taking place with Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Essar, respectively India’s first and third largest mobile telephony operators, and state-owned Bharat Sanchar Nigam.
Sources close to the development said a simultaneous launch across the US and Europe is expected, and announcements would be sent to media firms in India and other parts of the world. US regulatory approval, which is expected soon, is the only hurdle that Google is waiting to cross, they added. Google plans to invest $7-8 billion for its global telephony foray.

TechCrunch gives a nice summary of the history of the GPhone rumors and says that a 3G GPhone worldwide release can be a strong competitor to the iPhone. Also see this ComputerWorld article that quotes the Wall Street Journal. If you’re skeptic about whether Google will indeed foray into consumer electronics, or simply want to know how studying a company’s job listings is being used for competitive analysis, I’d highly recommend this Forbes article.

So, will the GPhone kill the iPhone? I believe it can, provided Google comes up with something comparable to the iPhone. And just like Apple eased its restrictive policies with other products, I think it will soon have to warm up to the competition in this case.

Photo Credits: CNET, Engadget.

Technorati Tags: apple, microsoft, google, iPhone, Gphone, wireless, telecom

Share this post :

Yearning for Sense Beyond the Earth

At the start of the day, I was almost sure I was going to write about how the world doesn’t seem like a place that I’m proud to be in.

Depressing Scene

The Indian Left wanted India to be Left behind. The Indian Right didn’t know what was Right anymore.

China, a communist nation, seeks to achieve a nuclear deal with Pakistan, a military dictatorship, which has a proven record of having proliferated nuclear weapons technology.

A group of eight Indian men were attacked violently in what appears to be a racist crime against Indians, not a common occurrence in recent times. But the media headlines in India and the Indian blogosphere continue to be obsessed with whether one Indian, once accused of a crime and now acquitted, gets a visa or not. Controversial racist slurs against Indian celebrities paid to act in shows abroad get wider attention in India than actual racist violence against innocent Indians in a foreign country.

It is at such times, that I feel the world is hopeless. It is not a place where I would be proud to be living. These are the times when I yearn for meaning; I’m yearning for sense, to make it all meaningful, somehow.

My mind becomes very unquiet. That’s when, like rays of sunlight in a darkened room, comes news like this.

NASA Audio Video History on the Web

I used to watch Carl Sagan’s Cosmos series on Doordarshan during the 1980s. I read Cosmos and many other books that increased my fascination of astronomy. I constructed my own homemade telescope in my school days, getting Rs. 75 from my father, and using paper calendar rolls for the tubes. I used it to watch the craters on the Moon and the satellites of Saturn.

With select friends, I used to marvel at the NASA Apollo and Russian Sputnik launches. It was not until 1997 however, that I was able to watch the real action. I used to monitor the Mars Pathfinder’s movement across the Martian landscape with bated breath and indescribable excitement. Every movement of the Pathfinder against a rock, crater, or soil sample was relayed by NASA over the web, and we were enthralled by it all.

For all such aficionados, there is great news. Decades of NASA photos and videos are coming to the web!

The space agency and the Internet Archive said Tuesday that they plan to scan and archive more than 12 million NASA photographs and 100,000 hours of film and video footage for free access online, under an exclusive five-year agreement. As part of the deal, the Internet Archive will host the media album on a new Web site, Nasaimages.org.

Free Home Planetarium: Google Earth is now Google Universe!

This is absolutely wild. I used to have a DOS 3.1 based program in the late 1908s, that depicted the stars in the sky above your actual location, depending on your latitude and longitude. Now, it’s for free. Google Earth has now launched Google Sky! I think it puts the Earth in perspective!

How fascinating and unbelievably true?! Imagine, you can now traverse 100 million stars and 200 million galaxies from your desktop! I’ve spent numerous hours teaching friends, colleagues, and relatives, about the constellations and galaxies, and nebulae during cloudy skies. Imagine being able to do it using your net-connected-PC! Teach your children using Google Sky about astronomy. They might one day become Sunita Williams!

It’s often said that Google Earth and Google Maps took Cartography to the masses. TechCrunch says “Google Sky could well do the same for Astronomy.”

I do not know if this is going to bring Astronomy to the masses. There was once a time, when it was also often said, that looking at the heavens brings mankind closer, as he realizes he’s just a speck of dust on an insignificant planet, on an ordinary sized star in one corner of not just his galaxy, but completely irrelevant as far as the universe is concerned. There was a time when this thought did bring men together, either in the spirit of fear, or in the spirit of science. I don’t know if this is going to mean anything at all in today’s world.

In fact, I’m inclined to think quite the opposite. Rather than studying the stars, mankind will be more interested in how the stars positions affect his or her chances of making it with that other person, how his or her chances with this particular career lie, and so on. Will astrologers use Google Earth to pinpoint horoscopes? Is this going to be the modern panchang or Vedic calendar?

Making Sense

I’m sorry this is a long post. My point is, when such news about such great initiatives by human beings come along, I feel hopeful about this world again. That there are some people who understand what it all means. And then I’m proud to be living in this world again! I’m not sure if anyone will understand what I mean, so I guess I may be writing just for myself.

Images Credit Myself (of objects seen by naked eye myself)

Technorati Tags: india, nasa, politics, astronomy, google, carl sagan, cosmos, science

Share this post :