Saturday, May 28, 2011

Strikes by Doctors

The following has been told by one doctor.

Whenever there is strike by doctors, news papers mention how many people died during the strike. They talk as if the doctors are killing the patients and ask doctors to withdraw the strike. But, the fact is, everyday, we are seeing the same no.of people dieing in front of our eyes. The media or government does not care about that. But, it cares about only the people who died during the strike. We ask for minimum facilities in the hospitals, which can save many lives. Even if we don't do strike, the people would die anyway, because of lack of medicines and facilities in the hospitals. Instead of providing medicines, government looks us as criminals.

There are significant no.of good doctors in the government hospitals who want to serve people. If the government does not have funds for whatever reasons, atleast, if it allows the hospitals to charge money from those who can afford to pay the fees, that would improve the situation little better. Unfortunately, our socialist government does not allow discrimination of any kind (Reservations based on 16 different criteria is out of context here.)

Sunday, May 22, 2011

It is Women's World

Amma (Jayalalitha) in South (Tamilnadu)
Didi (Mamatha Banerjee) in East (West Bengal)
Behenji (Mayavathi) in North (Uttar Pradesh)
Aunty (Sheela Dixit) in the Capital (Delhi)
Madam (Sonia Gandhi) at Center
Nani (Prathiba Patil) on top (The President)
Meera Kumar controlling the Lok Sabha
Sushma Swaraj as opposition leader in the Lok Sabha

Still Government thinks that, women are not getting enough opportunities. For that, Andhra Pradesh Government increased the reservations for women in the local elections from 33% to 50%.

Only people of India can save India. Unfortunately, people of India think that only God can save India.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Starting With the Problem or Technology?

Few years back, I attended a project meeting where there was a discussion about the new technology that we were using for the project. The senior developer proposed that, there is one concept in that new technology which is a good feature, and we should use that. Immediately, the manager said, "No. No. No. We cannot use all those. We don't have enough time for all those things. We will just deliver the basic things for this release, and we will see those for the next release." After that both the manager and the senior developer aborted that concept in that technology.

After few days, I used the same concept in the same release. Neither the manager nor the senior developer knew it. (Because, I did not tell, and there was no need to tell.)

For the functionality that I was working on, I felt that, using that concept was more efficient, and I used it. If that concept was not efficient for my functionality, I would not have used it. You should use a concept/technology, if that solves your problem efficiently, and you should not use it, if it does not solve. The statements, "We will use this technology" and "We will not use this technology" in isolation does not make any sense.

Whenever you want to do anything, you have to start with the problem and find the best approach rather than, starting with a technology and aligning that to solve your problem. This may look funny, but, unfortunately, I have seen many people who start with the technology rather than with the problem.

By the way, I still use 40 years old VI editor, and I am very happy with that.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Few Questions on Independence Movement

During the Independence movement, many people left their jobs/colleges/schools on the call of Gandhi and Congress. What happened to all of them? How was their life before and after joining the movement?

What happened to the people who were put in jail?

What happened to the families of those who were in jail?

If we had not got the independence, what difference would it have made to those people?

If we had not got the independence, what difference would it have made to the common man (atleast to 99.9% of the Indians)?

If Britishers were robbing our country, what are our leaders doing? (Rs.1,700,000,000,000 in a single year is not at all a small amount.)

Did we get independence, so that, Indians can rob the country instead of Britishers?

If we criticize Britishers for Divide and Rule policy, are not our leaders doing the same in the name of religion, caste, locality, language, dialect and by many others?

Does the Nationality matter (British, Indian, or Italian) or do we need someone who can improve our Life?

Why no history book (atleast what is available to 99% of the people) talk about the elections that happened before Independence except as one line in 500 pages book?

Why no history book talks about the Britishers giving the maximum control (in writing and spirit) to the elected governments (who are Indians) in the states many years before the Independence?

How many incidents were there when Britishers violated the constitution that they had written for ruling India?

Was the constitution that they had written for India, too bad for Indians?

How many times, Indians were arrested/killed, by violating their constitution (barring Jallianwala Bagh and couple of other similar incidents)?

Was the only motive of Independence, ruling by Indians and nothing else?

If not that many people sacrificed their life, when would we have got the Independence?

Do our freedom fighters know that, Ruling cannot be and should not be changed overnight? (One great leader asked for the freedom that night itself, if possible)

Indian Leaders rejected Simon Commission because, it does not have any Indians in it. Is it justifiable? Clement Attlee, who was a member of Simon Commission then, subsequently became the Prime Minister and gave Independence to India. Have not we blocked Clement Attlee to some extent in giving Independence to India?

There were 500 Kingdoms in India till 1947. What was the stand of the freedom fighters on those kingdoms? Just because, they were paying royalty to British, did they think that, they would be automatically merged in the country after Independence?

If we see the present andhra pradesh area, people in Hyderabad state suffered more because of Nizam's rule than the coastal andhra people by Britishers. Didn't our freedom fighters know that?

Unrelated Note:

In Chennai, I overheard a conversation of a young telugu couple. The person was telling his wife that, at the time of the separation of the state, NTR asked for Tirupathi, and MGR asked for Chennai. That's why, Chennai went to Tamilnadu, and Andhra got Tirupathi.

That was one of the funniest conversations that I heard. Probably, I can convince him that he was not correct. But, after 15-20 years, convincing his child would be more difficult, because, if anyone is believing something for more than 15 years, it requires lot of effort to change their belief.

I feel, Given enough power, history can be changed. (Atleast to what is known to 99.99% of the people.)

Wednesday, May 04, 2011

We are closing one business to focus on our Mission

The standard dialogues from the top management who are closing a business are
  • We are closing one business to focus on our mission.
  • Our strategy has been changed, and we no longer want to be in this business.
  • The business is no longer aligned with our vision of the company.
Would any entrepreneur close a business, if they are getting profits? If there are profits in the business (even if they are very tiny), then anyone would try to sell the business, rather than closing it.

If they are not getting profits, and closing the business, cannot they tell the same thing directly rather than telling all the management words like Focus, Strategy, Mission etc.?