The world of Cloud Computing [infographic]

Via: Wikibon

Osama Bin Laden, Terrorism, What Now?

Today, President Obama announced to the world that Osama bin Laden, founder of the Al Qaeda has been killed in an operation led by United States Armed Forces personnel at Abottabad (District) in the North-West Frontier Province in Pakistan. Before the announcement the Social Media Network was afire with speculation of the announcement. The People of the world believe that the removal of Osama bin Laden is a key victory in the war against Terrorism - which is what the United States administration from George W Bush's government has been targeting. This also comes at a time when Obama begins a crucial campaign for a second term of Presidency. As the announcement came out, news channels were keen to point out that defense forces of the USA and several other nations  will be on full alert to watch out for any backlash from the Al Qaeda.

Does the assassination of one man spell a major victory over a political ideology that has troubled several nations worldwide? The answer at this point seems to be affirmative. The elimination of the leadership of the LTTE in Sri Lanka created a sense of victory to the Sri Lankan forces and a semblance of stability in that region. Despite that, a permanent humanitarian solution for the ethnic conflict in the island nation of Sri Lanka is  yet to be found.

As President Obama reminded his audience of the resolve of his people after the infamous 9/11 attack - he definitely conveyed the opinion that elimination of one man, who masterminded several terrorist strikes that threatened civilians worldwide, an apt counter strike, akin to a victory in open war.

True change however will have to come as secular and inclusive ideology in countries where this ideology has been threatened - particularly by terrorist & extremist elements. Each country will have to respect the people of other countries in settling their own internal disputes. At this time there are several countries including Libya where their is internal turmoil threatening the stability & being of those nations. Despite what everyone may say, humanity has shown that concerns for people go beyond borders. As this influence beyond borders can only increase, people and leaders need to take great care in exerting their influence to initiate any change.

Here is another pragmatic, rather skeptic view of the claimed "triumph" - http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/02/neil-macdonald-osama-bin-laden.html 

Education System - Today

I have been always thinking that the education system needs a major change. Recently, I came across a video animated by RSA Animation, a talk given Sir Ken Robinson on (posted here http://bit.ly/gRi2pP). The similarity of the present education system to Industrial manufacture (batches graded in terms of years [of manufacture]), the absence of emphasis on creativity and the systematic removal of divergent thinking is definitely counter-productive to humanity. While we spend a vast portion of time dedicated to education, the entire process would be wastage unless we correct it. The best way to start improving the system is to first understand it.

Watch this video - the animation makes it easier to stay with the talk.

Sachin Tendulkar, the Bharat Ratna or What?

As Cricketing nations celebrated in fervor, the grand finale of the ultimate championship in cricket, the ICC Cricket World Cup, in this year 2011 - fans had already started backing 'Sachin Tendulkar' for a Bharat Ratna.

The "Bharat Ratna," in India is given for exceptional contribution in the fields of art, literature, science and social service. The criteria does not have any mention of sports.

Considering the prior recipients of the Bharat Ratna are either involved in politics in the interests of the people or are exceptional in a form of art. Cricket, insofar is not defined as a form of art either.

The real question is whether a Sports Person should be bestowed the "Bharat Ratna". The tradition of the gems of India predate our colonial history. Not even in those ancient courts adorned by the Ratnas - was a seat reserved for a sportsman.

To get through the red tape, someone from the sports ministry will have to present a proposal to include sports  among the criteria for selecting candidates for awarding a Bharat Ratna. This proposal will have to accepted by the union cabinet. After this, a debate on which sport first, recollecting great names in sports, in much earlier times will definitely ensue.

So we are presented with a new problem; we seek new solutions. For incomparable commitment to a game, taking the game beyond its limits with performances that kept on eclipsing prior performances, an award that salutes the genius of the Cricketer that Sachin Tendulkar is, must be instituted and given to honor him, for he has already honored the sport, his team and his country. Looking at a Sports Award that indeed does some of what we've listed, the Laureus which has already been awarded to Rafael Nadal. All winners of this award seem to be European.

To recognize the likes of Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, a new cricketing award can be instituted. It is most important that the award recognizes the team commitment and honors the person beyond borders. His achievements are jewels to his home nation and his team, never lesser. As a core cricketing nation in the world, we could institute an award that lauds exceptional achievement in Cricket. Should the award be given when the player announces retirement or prior should be decided. Sachin deserves a new award, one that will define cricketers and sportsmen of the future! At what better time can the ICC institute such an award?

FTA: EU & India -- Medical Impact

India is on top in manufacturing and delivering generic pharmaceutical drugs. India is also the world's largest democracy and the second most populous nation. The first HIV/AIDS case was reported in India in 1986. By 2007, over 23 lakh people are reportedly suffering from HIV/AIDS. Treatment of HIV/AIDS cases in India would be unaffordable if generic drugs were not available. Only 10% of these cases are provided "free" treatment by the government. This is possible only because of the availability of generic drugs.

The "Free Trade Agreement" (FTA) between the European Union (EU) and India has been pushed rather discreetly by the Prime Minister's Office.  Intellectual Property Rights on pharmaceutical drug manufacture has been interpreted correctly in India. This has given freedom to the pharmaceutical industry to manufacture medicines with innovative processes, while delivering them at affordable costs to the public. The situation insofar has favoured the citizens.

Patenting a mathematical formula is impossible. In simplistic comparison, patenting a discovery is also not possible. The discovery of Penicillin (the antibiotic) by Alexander Fleming and the X-Ray by Röntgen are attributed to be accidental. Knowing that discoveries cannot be patented, we could safely assume that neither Penicillin nor the X-Ray can be patented. A method or process or machinery to produce them can be patented, but the X-Ray itself or Penicillin (the molecule) itself cannot be patented. Our understanding so far is correct. Industrial production of Penicillin during World War II was critical. Rightly so, techniques for production of Penicillin were patented.

The advent of industrial biotechnology and nanotechnology would provide us with new methods to create substances that we have discovered. Pharmaceutical companies spend huge budgets in research. This research ultimately leads to the creation of new drugs that benefit people. The Pharmaceutical companies hope to recover the money invested in research when they sell drugs. However this slows down their ability to fund themselves. By licensing the manufacturing method they could enable multiple entities to manufacture and distribute a drug in return for a licensing clause-of-multiples. The volume of drugs produced could increase and therefore benefit both the company and the people. So Intellectual Property Rights on the whole seems good.

Now, if a company patented one method to manufacture a pharmaceutical drug and forced everyone to use only that method to manufacture a drug while imposing their Intellectual Property rights, they would (in an evil way) make more money. They would also stifle innovation, thereby preventing people from affording medicines that could save lives. This issue is certainly not new. Jonas Salk, during his famous televised interview with Edward Munrow quipped, "Would you patent the sun?"

Complying with a Free Trade Agreement with the European Union to permit a single manufacturing process to take over will inflate the prices of drugs, make generic drugs unavailable to the truly needy and ultimately hurt society. A "Free Trade Agreement" must facilitate trade and be mutually helpful to all people involved. Concerns on this FTA have been voiced several times last year.

They haven't reached the ears of the policy-makers though, until NGOs made a public demonstration to bring this to light. Let their concerns be heard and answered. While trade needs to be liberal, no policy should ill serve the people, and definitely not scourge those who are suffering from HIV. If we want to help those suffering from HIV let us not burden them, not by blindly signing policy in the name of development. We need to actively research and find ways to cure them. Such research and cure are truly not stifled in the absence of this FTA.