Why India Is Corrupt?

Can we trace the reason of corruption in Indian society to her culture? Is there any correlation between a highly religious society (Catholics, Hindu) and high levels of corruption? 

These are some of the interesting questions asked by Aakar Patel in his piece in Mint today.

Though anybody would agree that corruption is not so simple a phenomenon, there seems to be atleast some truth in what he has hypothised in the article. Ambiguity or complexity or dogmatism in religious code can be a reason which leads to a self-deceptive individual and a similar society.

Actually Fred Riggs, an influential thinker, has a beautiful model which can be more helpful in tracing the causes of corruption. He talked about three types of societies - Agraria (primitive societies where there is little development of structures and functions), Industria (developed societies where there are clearly developed structures and respective functions), and Transitia (a society which is in transition from an agrarian society to an industrial society).

Riggs's model was based on his observations about the third world - first world classification, to which he later added 'Developing World' - typified by a Transitia society.

These societies which are in transition, in some way or the other, are more susceptible to corruption. These societies are characterized by three qualities - heterogeneity (i.e. simultaneous existence of traditional as well as modern viewpoints and structures), formalism (i.e. there exists a difference between what is formally prescribed and what is actually followed.), and overlapping (i.e. modern and traditional methods/practices/structures/behaviours overlap. E.g. A court takes cognizance of a case only when there are riots).

From these characteristics of the prismatic society, it is clear why corruption is a practice in such societies. We can also see a clear picture of Indian society in the prismatic description.

Let's hope as the Indian society evolves, as we are more transparent about ourselves, there will be a change.

 

Nice Article By Shubha Mudgal

Social/cultural sentiments is a funny and controversial phenomenon. You never know whose sentiments are you hurting with even a casual comment or remark. And in India, the controversies arising out of sentiment-hurting are as widespread as are the types of religions, castes, practices, languages, dialects, mores. 

When the sentiments of people and groups are ever alert for catching anything pointed at them, it is rare to hear sane voices amongst the din. But I was surprised (and glad) to see this piece in Mint newspaper, by Shubha Mudgal - noted vocalist and a good writer too. 

Read this opening -

Those Western Values

For a nation with the wealth of art forms and musical genres that India has, it has never shown too much concern for the preservation of its artistic heritage. Or for creating channels of dissemination for the traditional art and music that has survived against the greatest odds.

She writes further -

Not for a moment am I considering joining hands with the brigades of buffoons and goons who—in the name of upholding Indian culture—bash people up in parks for holding hands or indulging in a bit of necking. I am merely suggesting that it might be a good idea to emulate paschimi sabhyatanow and again, especially when it comes to the organized manner in which the West preserves musical and artistic heritage.

Here, she is referring to the work Smithsonian Institute is doing for preserving vocal traditions not only from USA but from all over the world. She was surprised to find a 1938 collection of Marathi songs - collected by a dutch fellow Beck, on the site.

Now this is what preservation of culture is.

Read the article here.

 

The Challenges of an Urban Millennium

United Nations Population Fund, also known as UNFPA, has come out with its 'State of the World Population Report 2007'. The theme for this year's report is 'Unleashing the Potential of Urban Growth'. The findings of the report are not very surprising. The report says exactly what was being said during past few months - the future is urban. By 2030, almost 5 billion of the world's population will live in cities and major contribution will come from Asian and African nations. However the cities will not be rose-beds for the poorers, who will dominate the cityscape. The report insists on need for urban planning, especially for the 2nd rung cities which will be engines of urbanisation. One more point that the report points out corroborates what I said in one of my previous posts. The report says that the mega-cities will actually face outward migration rather than inward. Here is an excerpt from the report which is available on UNFPA's site for online reading and downloading.

Although mega-cities have received most of the attention, conditions in smaller urban areas call for even greater consideration. Contrary to general belief, the bulk of urban population growth is likely to be in smaller cities and towns, whose capabilities for planning and implementation can be exceedingly weak. Yet the worldwide process of decentralizing governmental powers is heaping greater responsibility on them. As the population of smaller cities increases, their thin managerial and planning capacities come under mounting stress. New ways will have to be found to equip them to plan ahead for expansion, to use their resources sustainably and to deliver essential services.

One of the Report’s key observations is that poor people will make up a large part of future urban growth. This simple fact has generally been overlooked, at great cost. Most urban growth now stems from natural increase (more births than deaths) rather than migration. But wherever it comes from, the growth of urban areas includes huge numbers of poor people. Ignoring this basic reality will make it impossible either to plan for inevitable and massive city growth or to use urban dynamics to help relieve poverty.

Once policymakers and civil society understand and accept the demographic and social composition of urban growth, some basic approaches and initiatives suggest themselves. These could have a huge impact on the fate of poor people and on the viability of the cities themselves. Throughout this Report the message is clear: Urban and national governments, together with civil society, and supported by international organizations, can take steps now that will make a huge difference for the social, economic and environmental living conditions of a majority of the world’s population.

Three policy initiatives stand out in this connection. First, preparing for an urban future requires, at a minimum, respecting the rights of the poor to the city. As Chapter 3 shows, many policymakers continue to try to prevent urban growth by discouraging rural-urban migration, with tactics such as evicting squatters and denying them services. These attempts to prevent migration are futile, counter-productive and, above all, wrong, a violation of people’s rights. If policymakers find urban growth rates too high, they have effective options which also respect human rights. Advances in social development, such as promoting gender equity and equality, making education universally available and meeting reproductive health needs, are important for their own sake. But they will also enable women to avoid unwanted fertility and reduce the main factor in the growth of urban populations—natural increase.

Secondly, cities need a longer-term and broader vision of the use of urban space to reduce poverty and promote sustainability. This includes an explicit concern with the land needs of the poor. For poor families, having an adequate piece of land—with access to water, sewage, power and transport—on which they can construct their homes and improve their lives is essential: Providing it requires a new and proactive approach. Planning for such spatial and infrastructure requirements, keeping in mind poor women’s multiple roles and needs, will greatly improve the welfare of poor families. This kind of people-centred development knits together the social fabric and encourages economic growth that includes the poor.

Similarly, protecting the environment and managing ecosystem services in future urban expansion requires purposeful management of space in advance of needs.

The “urban footprint” stretches far beyond city boundaries. Cities influence, and are affected by, broader environmental considerations. Proactive policies for sustainability will also be important in view of climate change and the considerable proportion of urban concentrations at or near sea level.

Thirdly, population institutions and specialists can and should play a key role in supporting community organizations, social movements, governments and the international community in improving the nature and form of future urban expansion, and thus enhancing its power to reduce poverty and promote environmental sustainability. A concerted international effort at this critical time is crucial to clarify policy options and provide information and analyses that will support strategies to improve our urban future.

More news stories about the report here.

Grand Myth of Indian Inequality...Or is it not?

This is really good edit in Times of India today. It is bang on target. Read it -

...It brings up questions of inequality and class envy — notwithstanding that India's score on the Gini coefficient, the measure used by economists for inequality, stands at a moderate 0.33. It's far more egalitarian than comparable economies in BRIC — Russia scores 0.40, China 0.45, and Brazil is off the charts at 0.54.
India does well even by the standards of developed economies, scoring the same as Canada and Belgium and better than the United States (0.41). Looked at in this frame inequality is not India's most pressing problem, poverty indubitably scores higher...
The moment the economy does well, it becomes incumbent on every one of us to develop a bad conscience. Which is why the prime minister who, in his capacity as finance minister in a previous government had launched India's economic reforms, succumbed to the established political wisdom of the day and called for capping CEO salaries to stop the poor from being discontented. The hackneyed ideology of trusteeship evidently dies hard — poverty is a constant, but the rich can help by hiding their riches better...
Inequality could be the hallmark of dynamic societies undergoing rapid economic growth, but that's better than wallowing in the stagnation of universal poverty. We celebrate our IITs, yet see merit as an elitist principle. Rather than obsess about inequality of outcomes India would do better if it focused, instead, on opportunity. Every Indian should have the means to fulfil her aspirations. Rather than pushing for reservations at higher levels, it's much better to provide universal access to infrastructure and education...
...China is more unequal than India, but far more successful in addressing poverty than India...

Intelligently Artificial - Shape of the Future

Sometimes you come across something intellectually refreshing and fulfilling. Palo Alto based Singularity Institute of Artificial Intelligence [SIAI] which is at the forefront of expanding our limits of ignorance about Intelligence has started its own blog. Look what SIAI has to say about its mission - "In the coming decades, humanity will likely create a powerful AI. SIAI exists to confront this urgent challenge, both the opportunity and the risk. SIAI is fostering research, education, and outreach to increase the likelihood that the vast promise of AI is realized for the benefit of everyone." Read this post on SIAI blog named '5-min Singularity Intro' -

Sometime in the next few decades, we’ll start developing technologies that improve on human intelligence. We’ll hack the brain, or interface the brain to computers, or finally crack the problem of Artificial Intelligence. Now, this is not just a pleasant futuristic speculation like soldiers with super-strong bionic arms. Humanity did not rise to prominence on Earth by lifting heavier weights than other species.

Intelligence is the source of technology. If we can use technology to improve intelligence, that closes the loop and potentially creates a positive feedback cycle. Let’s say we invent brain-computer interfaces that substantially improve human intelligence. What might these augmented humans do with their improved intelligence? Well, among other things, they’ll probably design the next generation of brain-computer interfaces. And then, being even smarter, the next generation can do an even better job of designing the third generation. This hypothetical positive feedback cycle was pointed out in the 1960s by I. J. Good, a famous statistician, who called it the “intelligence explosion”. The purest case of an intelligence explosion would be an Artificial Intelligence rewriting its own source code.
The key idea is that if you can improve intelligence even a little, the process accelerates. It’s a tipping point. Like trying to balance a pen on one end - as soon as it tilts even a little, it quickly falls the rest of the way.

The potential impact on our world is enormous. Intelligence is the source of all our technology from agriculture to nuclear weapons. All of that was produced as a side effect of the last great jump in intelligence, the one that took place tens of thousands of years ago with the rise of humanity.

By the way, I also love the term Singularity. Singularities are of various types. I think SIAI takes it as a Technological Singularity, which denotes a point of 'next leap' of a scientific civilization.

Update: Villages or Cities

After I wrote the post 'Villages or Cities', I mailed the abstract to Atanu Dey for his reaction. He was kind enough to post a prompt reply to me. He wrote - "...For all I care, India can continue to live in villages and be -- as reality dictates -- be dirt poor. It's a choice we make -- to be poor and underdeveloped. In fact, it can be argued that village life for some is so unbearable that they prefer to live in urban slums -- these are hellholes but still people vote with their feet and live in slums over the life in villages." He has elaborated his views on Urbanisation on his blog 'Atanu Dey On India's Development'. No one can debate his commitment towards India's development and he has his reasons, when he asks, 'Can India Afford Its Villages?'
The main issue here is Development of India, her people. When we say 'development' in context of India, we can't just bypass her villages where almost 72% of people live [Census 2001]. There can be a lot of ways as to how we can achieve status of a developed country. Atanu suggests one of them.
His formula is something like this - The cure for under-development is Urbanisation. Thus, what we should do is, urbanise the village population (not village 'areas', he says). This is not PURA [Provision of Urban Amenities in Rural Areas], when he says 'urbanise', he means 'cities' (areas not people). He wants 600 NEW city centres which will accommodate 1 million people each. Thus there won't be any villages in India. There will be vibrant cities which will provide progress opportunities to the city inhabitants, on the logic of economics of scale.

When I say the strategy proposed by Atanu is flawed, the reasons are -

• His solution is simplistic and rationalistic. Remember Muhammad Bin Tughalaq, who thought that Deogiri in Southern India will better serve as the capital of his kingdom. He forcibly moved whole population of Delhi to Deogiri, but had to return to Delhi within 2 years. But on course a large population perished.
  
• When all people live in cities, who will farm? Will India import ALL the food she would require? Even if we suppose that some people living in cities will also do farming, this will not work. In my village people prefer to stay on farms in season. The farms are typically at a distance of 5-6 km only. There is logic behind this. You get more time to do the work, thefts are prevented etc. When all people live in villages, the distances they will have to travel to their farms will increase manifold. Why the people who want to do farming would want to go to cities in first place?
• People want to do farming. That is the reason why farmers are rejecting the offers of money and jobs against their lands. It is not only politics. As I said in the original post, autonomy and ownership matter more than the monetary value of the lands. It is like saying 'Be the king of hell, rather than serving in heaven'. If you do not accept this then you are guilty of a biased view and of looking down to rural people as objects who can be moved at will.
  
• When you say that cities are better places to live, you measure happiness from your own city standards. The living conditions in slums in cities are worse than those in villages, though the slum dwellers 'vote with their feet' [I don't know what does this mean]. People who prefer slums to villages are a minute fraction of whole village population. If this were not so, there would already have been 600 slum cities in India, with nobody in villages.
  

Then what can be the answer?
The only answer is Decentralisation and autonomous villages. Gandhiji's ideal of Self-sufficient villages is better and workable than Utopia of theorists. To make decentralisation and autonomy work, Education is must. What happened to 86th amendment act which made Elementary Education as a fundamental right in Art. 21 (A) of the Indian Constitution?
A decentralisation along with Art 21 (A), and complimented by technology is the answer to many of India's ailments.

Politics For Youth

Why the political parties don't have anything special to offer to the young people? What is true for commerce, is also true for politics. Youth have high adaptability, they have high action power, they are receptive. Should not the politics be a bit younger in offerings as well as in composition?

Villages or Cities?

I just chanced upon two articles through Rajesh jain's weblog on Emerging Technologies. One of them is in Economist and other one in Mint, an economic daily in India. The article - 'World Goes to Towns' in Economist is a part of their survey on cities, which covers many facets of increasing rate of urbanization. The main argument made in this article is that urbane metroes will be the future and will be the engine of progress for whole modern civilisation. By 2020, 9 cities across the world will touch the figure of almost 20 million inhabitants. In Mint, Atany Dey and Reuben Abraham argue in their article, with similar tones that urbanization is the natural path of human advance and the earlier we get there, better will it be. The name of their article aptly describes this line of thought - 'Can India Afford Its Villages?'
Well. To me this article in Mint looks flawed. The writers say, for example -

Villages are not the proper object of analysis when it comes to economic growth, and hence economic development. By insisting on the development of villages, scarce resources, which could have been more efficiently used elsewhere, are wasted. The same resources can be used in the development of cities. It seems to us that the answer to the development of rural people paradoxically lies in urban development.

The flaw to me here is a visibly rationalistic attitude which treats village as a mere unit in the economy, to which some resources must be allocated and all problems in current societies are merely those of allocation of resources. Look at the Nandigram and Maan /Vagholi SEZ issues that enraged in W. Bengal and Maharashtra. Valuation of a village or land can't be done in monetary terms - a mistake which the economists are doing again and again.
There can't be any debate about the fact that the living conditions of villagers must be improved, but it is not at all convincing that lower living conditions means villages. What about the slums in Mumbai or Delhi then? Those are urbanization minus urbane conditions.
The main question here is not of living conditions off course. The question, as raised by the writers, is of productivity. Productivity and Urbanization are two different things. If we turn all the resources to cities on pretext of low productivity of villages then we will merely force the rural populations to migrate into cities. Even if new city-centers come up to accommodate these immigrants, what about the productivity in farm sector? We would have found no answers to this problem of low agricultural productivity. The results would be completely disastrous for whole economy.
Another curious phenomenon which negates this city-centric resources planning is, that most of the Special Economic Zones come up not on infertile land in some relatively remote places far off from cities. They are, in fact, proposed in close proximity to existing cities only. The logic behind benefit of proximity is clear. There is little infrastructural development in countryside. If we want to develop this infrastructure, again we must shift resources to villages, not cities.

How Second Life Is a Disruptive Idea?

What can be a truly disruptive idea? What can be said to take the business one step ahead of the competition? What can be the answers of these questions when they are asked in connection with media business? These are the questions which I ask myself again and again.

I think that in media the business ideas which succeed beyond expectations are those which truly exploit the potential of that particular medium. For example, what is the strength of Internet? Is it the fact that there are lesser or no size limits when compared with print medium, where you have to stuff all the news you have into 16 to 20 pages (in India)? Is it the fact that you can stream videos? According to me, until now Internet had 2 strengths – One, the hyperlinks [which make the Internet infinite, by always giving you some entry points and some exit points]. The other strength which Internet has is its ability of offering interactivity, or a window to react and be creative, for the users. For example, I can easily connect with a friend over content on a website using the same medium. Single medium is used as a content offering tool and at the same time also a tool to interact and communicate, unlike in any other medium except perhaps a mobile.

This takes us to a relationship between type of business idea and the characteristics of the medium. The relationship is –

[Extent of disruption caused by an idea] α [Extent of use of unique strengths of the medium for maximum benefit]

This point gets validated by the disruptive ideas on Internet in recent times. Google [connects you to resources on Web], Wikipedia, Youtube and Flickr [all 3 - window to create something], MySpace [connect with each others] and Amazon / eBay [imitate real life on Internet using interactivity and communication ability].

What will be the biggest disruption on Internet from its inception? I am sure it is going to be Second Life [as an idea. Current Second Life is not at all sophisticated in technology. Perhaps it will be Google’s similar offering that will change the game altogether]. If you look at Second Life, you will find that it has everything that I listed above – communication tool, transaction tool, creativity tool and a lot more than that like it is a real-time MMORPG which will keep you engaged, provide you an earning and also entertain you.

Keep your fingers crossed, because the Virtual World is going to change not only Internet – that will be a minute part. It is going to stir the Human Society to its roots by challenging the existing logic, notions, transactions, inter-relationships and Interactions in ordinary human life in most confounding way.

Verginia Shooting Spree Underlines Gun Control Necessity

While reading about the shooting spree in Virginia Tech, in which more than 20 innocent and bright people died shocked me to the roots. The real shock comes from the fact that this incident is not an isolated event. Earlier, there were similar incidents across USA and which happened on some campuses. Being from India, where there are is a strict gun control regime, the US liberty for owning the guns intrigues me. As I flipped through Wikipedia, I came to know that the right to own arms in US stems from the American Civil War. The forces which fought with British troops owned their arms. Thus, today's right is based on the assumption that owning arms is the last line of defence against the tyranny of the government. The government is nothing but some persons, in whom there can't be ultimate trust by the citizens. But from today's realities, doesn't this seem ridiculous? In a democracy, people elect their own government. Citizens invest in the government, the authority to regulate their lives. In this situation, is it assumed that the people will fight with their revolvers and shotguns with the government, which in case of US is sitting on piles of nuclear weapons? On ground what the gun liberty regime means is senseless and tragic deaths of innocents frequently (and hunting of deers and bears?). Or am I missing something here?
Another two issues here are - Why such incidents are happening on university campuses? Does this mean a lack of support system in US for the youngsters? Again, here the shooter was a Korean student. The immigrant students again have separate issues of their own and the Universities will have to strive harder to ensure a rich and beautiful experience to the immigrant students.

Update: MSN India has added a post today [23rd April] about Gun Control Debate sparked off by Virginia Tech incident -
Virginia shooting revives debate on gun control

Is the Democracy in India, a True Democracy?

In spite of some differences of varying extent in the association or separation, one fact that remains true about the governance set up in a democracy, that there are 3 basic functions of the State and these are Legislation, execution and judicature. There are 3 arms of state in a democracy, which performs these functions in – legislature legislates, executive executes and judiciary decides the legality within the ambit of laws made by legislature. The legislature makes the laws because it represents the will of the people. People elect their representatives in the elections and send the winners to the parliaments to protect their interests, on their behalf. Thus works the democracy. However, do the legislatures truly represent the people who mandate them? Theoretically yes, but on ground, the answer is a big no.

How can a person, whom I don't meet for the whole term of legislature said to be representing my aspirations? I would say that representing the aspirations of a few crores of voters is just not possible for a single member of parliament, more so in a highly stratified and fractured society like India. Further, here the system is 'first past the post' – he who gets highest number of votes, wins. So you can have a candidate garnering even 20 percent of votes and winning the election. Actually, had there been an option of 'None of the Above' in the voting list, I am sure that those who mark on this option would have been highest in number. Further do the interests of the representative as a politician, align with his interests as a legislature? Or, do they even align with my interests as a voter? A politician would certainly be a election oriented person, because there are no rewards for remaining politician. The returns, however, pour cats and dogs, once you win the election. Further, the unmanageable number of voters in a constituency means that rather than doing the hard work of winning heart of each voter, I would rather use the short cuts to win the elections. Here, the aspirations of people and representative nature of polity – both are compromised.

Now, if this is the situation, then why citizens should be bound by the laws made by a parliament which is not representative in true sense of the term?

What can be the solution to this issue?

Should There Be A Traffic Congestion Tax in India?

Whenever I look at the traffic chaos in Pune, the emerging IT hub in Western India, I always think about the possibility of levying a congestion tax, like in case of London and Stockholm. In London, for example, in central area, an entering vehicle is charged a congestion tax of 8 £, and in case of evasion, a fine of 50 £. This is true from 7 am to 6 pm, every day except Sundays and excepting certain types of vehicles like hospital ambulances. You can read more about London congestion tax here.
The enforcement system includes database of registered vehicles, a number of cameras guarding the entrance and exits of congestion zones, apart from the inner roads in the zone and Automatic Number Plate Recognition Software.
This means that this system implementation is not an easy task, more so for an Indian city like Pune, where the traffic flow is extremely heavy during peak hours. But nonetheless, this can be one of the solutions for the menace of traffic jams and loss of precious time for a lot of office commuters. What needs to be done to implement this solution in Pune?
The first thing that needs to be tackled is the strengthening of public transport in the city. In Pune city, the public transport is monopoly of Pune Municipal Transport, a semi-governmental agency. If the high number of two-wheelers which ply on Pune roads is to be tackled, the PMT must be able to take that load. This would need large investments over the years in upgrading and increasing the fleet of PMT. These PMT buses can then take over from two-wheeler riders who don’t want to pay the congestion tax, at the tax collection posts.
This will also mean that there must be huge parking spaces, near the congestion tax collection points, to serve the commuters who want to opt for cheap public transport, instead of paying hefty congestion charge. The parking may be charged at a nominal charge. The PMT buses will take over from here to the inner parts of the city.
The investments in updating database of vehicle registrations and connecting it with an updated database of all Road Transport Offices in other districts will be an imperative. This is so, because, there is a high level of vehicle immigration into the city. Further, the use of ANPR software will also be needed.
The things that may derail this project include the resistance from commuters, who will resist any idea of paying a tax for entering into the inner city. Daily commuters will fight against this measure, tooth and nail. Chances of politicization are also vary high, for the issue-starving political parties will definitely take advantage of this. Another thing is more taxes, more rules means that more corruption. Simplification in Right to Information Act may be a cure for this.

Do you visualize any other problems that may arise from Congestion Tax?
Also, how should, the taxes collected, be utilised to the best benefits of commuters?

Quote of The Day

"John might prefer apples to bananas, bananas to cherries, but cherries to apples."
- This tells the irrational nature of human decisions. Human preferences can't be assigned with ascending/descending values. 'a>b' and 'b>c' means that 'a>c' in mathematics, but not in Human Life. Human choices vary from person to person and for a person, from time to time. I read it on website of American Mathematical Society.

Mystery Is Easy - How to Crack Agatha Christie?

I just finished reading 'Murder Is Easy' by Agatha Christie, the queen of mystery. Here the lead of novel meets an old woman on a London bound train and gets to know about mysterious deaths taking place in a desolate village, not far from London. The old lady mentions to this retired police officer, that she is going to report to the Scotland Yard the murders and the suspect according to her. But, the police officer reads in next day's newspaper that the old lady has been knocked down by some vehicle in London. Determined to see to this affair, the lead goes to village, falls in love with a lady besides trying to unfold the murder mysteries. Regular stuff.
I actually had zeroed down on 3 persons in novel as possible murderers when I was somewhere in the middle of novel. And bravo! Here are the actual results - First one the pompous Lord is closely related to the murderer; Second, the lady - in whose case I failed - is not the murderer, but in fact becomes muse of the lead; the third one - the old lady once engaged to the Lord is the actual murderer.
Now, here is my formula of how to crack murder mysteries before Agatha Christie does that on
last/secondlast/thirdlast page.
It is quite simple. Just remember following facts about the murder mystery - 

• The murderers appear at the earliest stages of novel.
  
• They are delved upon to lesser extent inspite of being lead players
• Those, whose eccentricities, murderous sides are exposed again and again in the novel are NOT murderers. Stay away from them (and pray the hero doesn't waste much time on them)
• The investigators are silly fellows - ignornig obvious facts. You don't be silly.

• Inspite of this, if you fail, then don't be sad. The mystery novel is meant for that.

How about writing a mystery novel, like Agatha Christie? More than writing skills, it needs some mathematical, analytical mind.

1. Write a simplest murder story with all facts.
   
2. Now you have characters - facts - character info; one murderer; one investigator
   
3. Wipe down character info as much as possible, without making the character look suspicious by lack of info about him/her
   
4. Now, make one more pseudo-murderer. He/she will come handy to create twists
   
5. Your murder mystery is ready now. Just don’t tell the readers some facts here and there. Create small twists throughout [twist=suspect somebody-show that he is not the real one].
   
6. Finally, twist before main exposure is extremely important for the ‘Orgasm’ at the climax. Here you make the reader believe that the pseudo-murderer is the real one. Obviously, you make reader think like that by making your investigator think like that. Readers will read it and draw desired conclusions.
   

Here is the graph -

No Child Porn Or No Porn For Child?

A federal judge in USA, thrashed down a law of 1998, which made it a crime for websites to allow children to gain access to explicit material on web. New York Times reports that the judge said that - 

"the law was ineffective, overly broad and at odds with free speech rights. Judge Reed added that there were far less restrictive methods like software filters that parents could use to control their children’s Internet use."

The question here is the clash between our desire to protect our children from anything which may destroy the joy of childhood, and freedom of expression, which more or less all constitutions guarantee their citizens.

Let's have a look at the first of the two contestants of clash here, viz. 'our' desire to protect our children from anything that destroys their 'joy of childhood'. Now the interesting part is who is this 'our' here? And what exactly is 'joy of childhood'? My doubt is whether parents [if they constitute 'our'] or elders can decide really as to what constitutes 'joy of childhood'? I mean if I am a child, then I may genuinely please myself by watching the explicit material. Isn't it true that as children we all felt an invisible desire to be able to at least watch 'such' things? Offcourse, there is no chance that we might be knowing where we were heading or where we would end up by such desire, unless the parents are psychopaths. Now if on the other hand, I am a parent, a normal parent, then what I would wish? Hmmm. Here is the tricky part – I would want to protect our children from the same things for which I had craved as a child.

If we go by this logic/ argument/ line of thought, then it is all a messy dilemma which leads us nowhere. Then what can be a plausible line of thinking for this question? Let’s look at it in this way – how about the child porn industry? Isn’t it the real issue? More than trying to protect my children from porn material, the important thing is protecting the children who are the exploited for quenching the carnal desires of some psychopaths by making them the unfortunate stars of third rate porn flicks. Earlier, on my previous blog, I had written a post about a story of frustrating battle with child porn. It seems to me that where the market forces enter the regard for humanitarian concerns is seriously and irreversibly undermined due to the complex web of survival that is woven around the illegal activities. A drug peddler supplies drugs, his business grows and turns into an empire and wealth is generated, a lot of people who support this illegal activity through totally legal professions [e.g. a transport man who doesn’t know what is inside those bags]. Now this does not remain a question of a drug peddler only. Along with him a lot of other innocent people are involved. Now magnify this situation to an international level where on one hand there is very high demand for child porn, on other there are all those innocent - guilty suppliers, and on the third side, there are thousands of children out there who have lost their human dignity even before they understand what exactly does that mean.

What should be done? Why there are no free and powerful apps that filter out / block out child porn content? Why there are no stringent sanctions on financial transactions which are related to this industry – this is possible, remember how effectively US has choked the finance channels of Al Qaeda. Is the question of child porn not critical enough?

[It would be interesting to see which ads Google Adsense throws up for this post!]

Youtube Video - Japanese Prank & Some Behavioural Science

Are Japanese the greatest pranksters? Watch out the social behaviour aspects of the prank. The prank forces a single person to follow a mob blindly, without resorting to rational judgement. Great prank.

[Youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KXviPd0fRA]

Frustrating Battle With Online Child Porn

This is one story everybody must read & take seriously -

With all the intellectual firepower at society's disposal, why do the good guys forever seem to be playing catch-up to the sleazebags? Why can't they turn the tide? So it's understandable that when it comes to children and pornography, the frustration with the status quo is boiling over...

read more | digg story