Thank you for showing support for so long. I have decided to move ahead and am up with my very own site. You may click here to visit it or copy and paste the following url to a browser of your choice:
From now onwards, I will be posting my stuff there.
||Home Page (this ugly page)
||Home Page in Normal Mode (not commandline)
||Code Repositories on Bitbucket
||Code Repositories on Github
Commands are in bold and their description is given on the right. Just select the task you want to do, type the command related to it in the textfield and press/hit enter.
If you are not comfortable with this and wish to visit the normal interface, then just type “ph” (without quotes) and press enter. You will be taken to the comforts of a normal site.
I would request you all to visit the site and send me your comments/mails as usual. Also, please let me know if you find any broken links. Till then thank you once again. Take care.
Part III of The Constitution of India guarantees Fundamental Rights to citizens of India which includes right to freedom of speech and expression. However, with series of recent incidents that have taken place, it seems that it is available only to few people who have reach and means to show their clout – physical or monetary. And the recent incident of the arrest of 2 girls for posting their point of view (totally harmless from any perception) only aggravates this view and issue. Have we totally lost it?
The FB comment posted by Shaheen Dhada, one of the girl arrested for “hurting religious sentiments” just mentions that there was no need for the bandh because one leader of a political party has died. And just asked why can’t anyone remember the great martyrs like Bhagat Singh, Azad, Sukhdev or any of the likes because of whom we are living in a free India. But are we really living in a free India? Or we are living on the whims and mercy of the political mafias and gundas?
And the police seems to lost it totally. There is a saying in Hindi,
पढ़े पर गुड़ें नहीं
Read but neither understood nor imbibed. (rough translation)
The policemen (barring few) are just doing jobs because they couldn’t clear any other exam. Or it was the last resort for them. How do you expect such people without passion for their job do the rightful thing?
And what Shiv Sainiks are talking about. They can say anything they wish and want. They can go on blabbering hatred comments and no one will take action against them. But a common Indian doesn’t even have the right to say something on something as trivial as Facebook.
What a Shame?
politics – Clint’s Nolan Chart – 20020718 – slightly inaccurate but good (Photo credit: Rev. Xanatos Satanicos Bombasticos (ClintJCL))
#I wrote this on PG on 13th Oct 2010. And posted on FB Notes on 30th Jan 2011.
We have been for long talking about changing the role of the government from being the regulator to that of a facilitator. It is impossible for the government and its administrators to handle the role of a regulator successfully. Therefore, Indian bureaucracy, which have people selected through one of the toughest exams and who boast of great knowledge and ability, are overburdened. This burden can be reduced if we make them the facilitators and not the regulators. Thus, they will be able to use their knowledge and ability in the right direction.
There is a scheme suggested by Finance Ministry of the alternative solution to PDS system. I would like to implement that. It is based on practical thought and behavioral economics. If you want details then read Chapter 2 of Economic Survey 2009-2010.
In India, we discuss about the bad situation of sports other than Cricket. I would like to implement the strategy used by administrators of cricket to bring it to the fore for other sports as well. A private club consortium structure for all the sports body will be the first step towards that goal and the government will provide tax benefits to the body. The government will act as a facilitator by running stadiums and giving them to these bodies on annual rent.
The foremost reform that I would like to see would be in the working of political parties. I would like to bring in the regulation/law for the internal functioning of the political parties. Members of a political party will follow career service, i.e., they will join at the lowest rung and will have to make their way to the top by working effectively. Pre-independence democratic structure of Indian National Congress will be the basis of any such regulation or law.
Posted in Economy, India, Insane Thoughts, Social Issues
Tagged behavioral reforms, cricket, government, India, Indian National Congress, New Delhi, Palak Mathur, PalakMathur, political parties, politics, Reforms, Reforms in India, sports, Sports in India
This was one review that has long remained pending.
This is a fantastic book. The portable form of Yes Minister sitcom that rocked BBC in 1980s. In India, we have had a hindi TV-series by the name of “JI Mantriji” and many countries have had TV series based on this book.
I love humorous books and stories and am a pucca Wodehousean and a great fan of Jeeves, Wooster and Psmith. The characters created by Wodehouse are immortal. Similarly, the characters of Yes Minister are straight from the world near you. You can see the same politics happening around you in your own country.
It is really a nice book. Recommended for all.
I have moved technical content to my new blog Tech Jaunt - http://techjaunt.wordpress.com
It has been a quite a good time that I have been writing on social issues. Now, I am changing my focus to technical stuff – Programming Languages, etc. There will be posts on social issues and other regular stuff as well but their frequency (though I am not that frequent) and number is bound to go down. I may not be regular on technical stuff writings here as well. My main focus is to learn and explore new things technically. I have lagged behind – yes – a long six years. But now I plan to reclaim my technical brain. Hope that it happens soon.
I do not know how long will I be able to focus on this. For past few months I have been thinking on this and since past two weeks I have been trying to make up my mind for the same and finally I have made up my mind.
You will see some technical stuff flowing in over here. Hope you will like it. The main reason I am not separating the technical stuff from my main blog is that I do not know how frequent I will be in technical stuff. Once I am sure that I can continue with technical stuff all alone, I will move to a new blog.
Moreover, I am planning to work on some open source project as well. However, I am not able to decide on anything. Or to be more specific I am not even sure how can I go about it. Any help will be appreciated.
Also, you may not see any actions for sometime on this blog. I will surely reply to your comments, but the response may get delayed.
In the end, I would just like to say thank you all to be here and hope that we all will be here for times to come.
Thank you once again.
If you doesn’t know it already, then let me introduce it to you. This law was propounded by C. Northcote Parkinson and it argues that organizations give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. Parkinson demonstrated this by contrasting the triviality of the cost of building a bike shed in contrast to an “atomic reactor“.
An interesting note from the Parkinson’s Law – And Other studies in Administration by C. Northcote Parkinson, as quoted from Wikipedia article,
In the 3rd chapter - High Finance or The Point of Vanishing Interest - Parkinson writes about a finance committee meeting. In it three items are on the agenda. The first is the signing of a $10 million (1957 dollars) contract to build “an atomic reactor” [sic], the second a proposal to build a $2,350 bicycle shed for the clerical staff and the third proposes $57 a year to supply refreshments for the Joint Welfare Committee. The $10 million number is too big and too technical, and it passes in 2.5 minutes. The bicycle shed is a subject understood by the board, and the dollar amount within their life experience, so Mr. Softleigh says that an aluminium roof is too expensive and they should use asbestos. Mr. Holdfast wants galvanized iron. Mr. Daring questions the need for the shed at all. Mr. Holdfast disagrees. Parkinson then writes “The debate is fairly launched. A sum of $2,350 is well within everybody’s comprehension. Everyone can visualize a bicycle shed. Discussion goes on, therefore, for forty-five minutes, with the possible result of saving some $300. Members at length sit back with a feeling of accomplishment.” Parkinson then described the third agenda item, writing “There may be members of the committee who might fail to distinguish between asbestos and galvanized iron, but every man there knows about coffee – what it is, how it should be made, where it should be bought – and whether indeed it should be bought at all. This item on the agenda will occupy the members for an hour and a quarter, and they will end by asking the Secretary to procure further information, leaving the matter to be decided at the next meeting.
You can find it to be right in every setting specially true in Software. Want details? Read this!!
I somehow like these kind of observations. I have read many such while reading books on Public Administration. If you know any laws of the kind then leave a comment with link where I can read about it. :D