Uber Banned in India for Right Reasons

In India, because we were ruled by corrupt parties/politicians in the past, we developed an attitude which said, "if govt has done something, it must be wrong." This theory explains why as soon as we heard about any decision made by govt, our first reaction was, "it is wrong". After recent crime in Delhi by its driver, govt banned Uber. Since Delhi is under central control, opposition got chance to target BJP/Modi govt over it. But if we care to read the news, Uber was banned for right reasons.

Uber does not even have a call center. No emergency number passengers can contact. Also no police verification for drivers. No permit for rent-a-cab. Uber also violated RBI's guidelines on its payment service. The only problem is that it was not banned before and banned only after something horrible happened.

Delhi is too important a place for Govt not to be knowing about this service. They should have banned it from the beginning until it complied with the rules. And we should thank govt for taking actions like these - if govt continues like this, all companies will become responsible in maintaining safety services for us. This ban shows, that govt is decisive, it took big decision to ban companies because of one incident of rape. In the past what was govt's attitude? "It is only one case", "it is exceptional case" etc etc..  and now? We shall ban a company if they fail in maintaining safety features for women. We should note this change in attitude by the govt and we should appreciate it.

And if we think that only a poor and uneducated country banned it in one state - we should know that others like Spain have done it too for same reasons:

Uber banned in Spain & Thailand, sued in Portland, hassled in Rio

On Tuesday, both Thailand and Spain banned Uber. You know the drill by now: The company’s drivers don’t have taxi permits and/or insurance, and the authorities have had an earful from furious cab drivers who do have to pay for such things. Yesterday it was authorities in Delhi that told the firm to stop operating locally, after an Uber driver allegedly raped a passenger. Meanwhile, the cities of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, and Portland, Oregon, have also told the firm to stay off the roads (via police complaint and lawsuit respectively), and an Uber driver in San Francisco has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter for driving over and killing a six-year-old girl.

https://gigaom.com/2014/12/09/uber-banned-in-spain-thailand-sued-in-portland-hassled-in-rio/

Also at: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30395093

Also, I wonder why we (people like us) also did not notice the potential threat. Many people in our office were using this service; they were giving away some code to get Rs 300 discount on Uber app; no one thought that absence of an emergency number or even a call center could be security threat... Uber's marketing was so strong that people did not doubt it or expected anything wrong from Uber's part.. Media was busy writing articles about Uber's Mercs and BMWs and at the most about its payment service which saved customers' credit card numbers (as if we did not want to burn calories in swiping our cards every time). If this is to indicate, we must do safety audit in many other sectors and services too...

Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect views of any organization author is associated with. 

Grandpa and the Kid

Saw an old man carrying his small grandchild in his arms while they returned from a temple. Perhaps from a Shiva temple as the child had mark of white bhabhut on its forehead. Ever wondered what a kid would learn by visiting temples? A child does not know about gods, bhakti, karma, religion, or anything! I think the idea is to do indirect teaching. We don't learn most of the things we are taught (otherwise all of us would be Einsteins) and we learn most of the things not taught to us (like all the bad things mothers complain about). So let the child learn indirectly by observing what we are doing.

Now this is scary from the point of view of those parents who think the kid is too small to learn anything and hence they could do anything in its presence! Like arguing, watching excessive TV, smoking, or being lazy!

If the kid is watching you - you have to be worthy of being watched by an innocent cute kid!

© Rahul

Image below just for a change; credits mentioned:

Anatomy of a dream

This morning I saw a dream - that I am an Indian soldier on the run while some Pakistani rangers are chasing me. It is happening in the snow clad mountains... I know that it is Wednesday. I have been running since Monday and in the dream I know that I have to run till Friday. So I am running; trying to outsmart the enemies.

Now, this Monday-Friday schedule indicates that in the dream Pakistani rangers must be work-related stress/challenges and I must be waiting for the weekend so as to avoid those. It should be mountains because running is tough there and it must be snow because in the morning my blanket must be off and I must be feeling cold in reality while sleeping.

Anatomy of a dream :)

© Rahul

Annie Menni Talk

“Hello, Rabbit,” he said, “is that you?”

"Let’s pretend it isn’t,” said Rabbit, “and see what happens.”

― A.A. Milne, Winnie The Pooh

"Did you ever walk into a room and forget why you walked in? I think that is how dogs spend their lives."

― Sue Murphy

“What's your name,' Coraline asked the cat. 'Look, I'm Coraline. Okay?'

'Cats don't have names,' it said.

'No?' said Coraline.

'No,' said the cat. 'Now you people have names. That's because you don't know who you are. We know who we are, so we don't need names.”

― Neil Gaiman, Coraline

“Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are god. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are gods.”

― Christopher Hitchens, The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever

“Women speak because they wish to speak, whereas a man speaks only when driven to speak by something outside himself - like, for instance, he can't find any clean socks.”

― Jean Kerr

Future

Some rich people made mansions and big strong buildings, so that their future generations could rent those to film-makers to shoot some pathetic horror movies in those; or convert those into hotels so that any Tom and Peter on earth who could afford a few bucks could eat, drink and pee in those for a few days... Point is - you never know what future has in store for all you achieve through so much hard work and money...

Plight of Yazidi Women in Iraq

We were being sold the Globalization and One-World stories; where boundaries were fainting and thanks to internet and social media whole world, as per the theory, had become one global-village. Finally humans were becoming one race... But then something like IS in Iraq happens and you wonder what went wrong? 

Unaffected nations go on partying and conferencing, Noble prizes keep churning out, so do movies, art and literature in rest of the world while some people are subjected to the worst in places like Iraq. What happened to the one-world story? In India, human rights activists are busy promoting public kissing on the streets; women rights orgs are busy talking on television and yet are immune to what happens to other "humans" and other "women". What happened to the great Obama and UNO? 

I think what is happening there has proved that humans are not yet civilized, all humans are not yet equal, women are still livestock, and ancient rule of animal kingdom "might is right" still works..

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2014/11/28/rescue_might_be_too_late_for_kidnapped_yazidi_women.html

Interesting Movies - Period

Impromptu (1991)

Cast: Judy Davis, Hugh Grant

Recent Book Reads

Corporate Atyaachaar – The Comical Journey of an Office Doormat

By: Abhay Nagarajan

Highly recommended – it’s a hilarious story touching real life scenarios…

The Master Key to Riches

By: Napoleon Hill

Book has good points but it is written in a language which appears old and uninteresting in the current times...

Customer Centric?

Water purifier had something broken in the inlet pipe so I called up the company’s customer care number and a serviceman came to repair it. He opened up the purifier, removed and discarded the broken part and started putting the machine back as his work was done. I felt like a fool – if it were so simple, I could have done it myself! (I did not realize that the smart companies are making their appliances so simple to maintain, not for us, but for their service personnel to save time!) He said like a monk, “why should we replace this part when we can do well without it? Why spend unnecessary money?” Amusing!

I saw there was a hole left because of the discarded part, so I acted intelligent by asking, “what if a cockroach enters the purifier through that hole?” Smart guy asked me back, “has your house got too many cockroaches?” I said, “Well, what if one is too adventurous?” (Just like all ancient human civilizations settled near rivers, insects choose to multiply near water sources till date! All I am not sure is if they pay premium for ‘purified’ water sources!) On afterthoughts I realized that I was supposed to say “no”, because it was supposed to be embarrassing to say your house had cockroaches!

When he started to plug the hole, good sense prevailed in me and I asked him to leave it. I decided to utilize my 2 year old pink cello-tape for the purpose.

When job was done, the service person gave me his personal number and said, “Call me directly; why waste money and time by calling through customer care?” Was he dishonest? May be, but if Customer Care calls me to ask if I was satisfied, I would say “hell yes!” And if his company has customer feedback as the basis of his performance rating; he surely will get most stars! So he will get salary hikes from his company and also earn personal money through out-of-the-channel work! I think his apparent dishonesty can also be called his ‘customer centric’ approach :)

God save the companies which plan to fill up tanks with holes in the bottom-line!

(C) Rahul

Debating - Then and Now...

Once Adi Shankaracharya went to debate with Kumaarila Bhatta (around 700 AD) in Prayag (modern Allahabad) on their respective philosophies. Kumaarila Bhatt, a Maithil Brahmin scholar and philosopher had defeated Buddhist philosophers and proven their doctrine wrong and is credited for decline of Buddhism in India along with Adi Shankar. Kumaarila Bhatt by the time was doing penance by slowly burning his body in a pyre and asked Adi Shankar to debate with his disciple Mandana Mishra of Mithila (Bihar)... 

So Adi Shankar went to debate with Mandana Mishra who was a great philosopher and believed that life of a householder was far superior to that of a monk. Mandana Mishra's wife Ubhaya Bhaarati was chosen as judge as she was a great scholar herself (tells about women's empowerment in those days) and it was decided that whoever lost debate would become disciple of the other... 

At last Adi Shankar won the debate - Ubhaya declared her husband defeated - although knowing that he would have to renounce the world and become a monk to be disciple of Adi Shankar. Then she challenged Adi Shankar for a debate with herself and asked him questions on relationships, which Adi Shankar a celibate Sanyasi won't know (ladies were tricky even in those days). Adi Shankar asked for 15 days break in debate; (his soul) left his body and entered into a king, learnt the answers, and came back into debate and defeated her also. Ubhaya Bharti also renounced world and took Sanyas like her husband. 

In our time if the debate happened, the two would simply 'unfriend' each other on facebook and go on in their respective lives. Also, the one with maximum friend-list count will get more 'likes' and hence will win the debate!

(C) Rahul

Book Reading: Good or Bad?

I am certainly a book-lover; and since it is always fashionable to say books are our best friends I might have said that too sometimes. But at times I feel books have also been my enemy. In my growing years, when I read a few on Psychology for example, books gave me a feeling as if I “knew it all” after reading those. Now I feel books give pseudo feeling that we have become learned after reading.

I like to observe little things. I know everyone claims to be sensitive, since it is good to say so and it is true also to some extent, but does everyone really “care” about sensitivity? Books made me consider all people as reasonable individuals with sensible thinking; but real life has been urging me to “unlearn” these things.

I have so many friends who have not read many books but know this world better than any book-readers. And I respect them for not reading books; most books are anyway second-hand opinion. I guess this is why they made terms like “bookish” with a basic premise that this world is not as they write in books.

I think I love Shahid Bhagat Singh’s view on books best – reading a book is a conversation with the writer. Nothing more than that…

(C) Rahul

It is Raining Outside...

I look out of the window - it is raining outside... Rains on a weekend means no going out... In childhood when it rained, that also meant not going out. But we kids stood on a window holding iron rods and looked at the rain drops falling on the water lodged ground... and we were told that the splutters were actually small frogs jumping in joy! So many frogs! And we could not see as many! 

In our small town, rains brought out frogs playing high and long jumps; snails starting on their slow pilgrimage to somewhere; wet birds playing around among themselves while trying to make it appear they were searching for shelter; sometimes yukky insects - Ramji ka Ghoda (grasshopper) appeared to be some alien species landed on earth by mistake! 

Once our cousins-brigade was jumping over our grandpa's bed and it actually came down! The joy of breaking down something was higher than any guilt which could filter down our childhood consciences!

(C) Rahul

Who Did Better - Those Who Sacrificed Or Those Who Didn't?

In our school textbooks, sometimes when I read about our freedom struggle and noncooperation movement; where students left colleges and studies; employees quit their govt jobs; so as to put pressure on the British and strengthen our movement; I wondered what a great sacrifice it was... To quit studies and jobs meant sacrificing not only their own individual future prospects but also of their kids; all for the greater good of our country...

But then I used to read about the likes of Gandhiji and Nehruji; who went to England to study Law; established themselves in professions of power and prestige, and then later on when the time was right, joined the freedom movement. They did not establish the Cong Party; they only overtook it. They were certainly late-risers, or slow-movers; but went on to grab the opportunity with great strength when time was right.

And they not only earned their name and fame but also positions of power because of their education (since they did not quit college), knowledge (since they established themselves in their professions; often law - which gave immense mass popularity), had seen the globe (always appreciated in national leaders); spoke flawless English (because of which many Indians thought these were better fitted to negotiate with the British). So those who sacrificed their personal lives and quit colleges earned meager Freedom Fighters Pensions while those who did not quit colleges but joined the race to the top when the time was ripe, established their family dynasties which are still in power... (Again, truly ethical Gandhiji did not promote his dynasty; so he witnessed dispute with his sons and in general his kins are not as well-off as those of the leaders who chose to acquire positions of power and privilege...)

So can we say that in general selfish people benefited while sacrificing people suffered?

I think it is not so easy to conclude so. One, those who quit their studies and jobs, if they understood the importance of these should have made sure to send their kids to schools and colleges after India got freedom. Though I think it was not always possible to do so; once you are down, it is easier for you to go down than come up. Secondly, for those who were slow-movers and earned qualifications; though their kids had competitive advantage, there was no guarantee of success unless they labored hard and earned their merit. Though again, I think many times it is easier to succeed if you have succeeded in the past; than to succeed if you don’t know how success is gained in general. In any case there are always exceptions. 

(C) Rahul