Foreign companies operating in India shouldn't be allowed to take Indians for a ride

I've frequently read complaints (on Consumer Complaints, MouthShut and other websites) about cheating, fraud, poor service, etc., given to Indians by foreign companies operating here (AIG, Allianz, Barclays, GE Capital, HSBC, RBS, etc.). I feel outraged when I read such complaints, and I wonder why foreign companies operating in India are allowed to deceive Indians and get away with it. Why aren't they punished harshly, making it clear to the world that if you're coming here to make money, you won't be allowed to cheat Indians.

I'm not suggesting that Indian companies should be allowed to deceive Indians, but I'm proposing significantly harsher penalties for foreign companies. I would also like to see these penalties delivered quickly, so that the affected customers don't have to wait for remuneration for a long time.

Antennagate, iPhone 5 and Apple's opportunity

As an attempt to calm down the negative publicity about iPhone 4, Apple had initially posted a webpage (since taken down and replaced by a milder version) comparing the antenna performance of various smartphones from Apple's competitors (HTC, Nokia, RIM, Samsung, etc.). The comparisons showed that phones from Apple's rivals had at least as many antenna issues as iPhone 4 has. A backlash ensued and Apple quietly removed the offending material from its website.

If the following assumptions are true, Apple has a nice opportunity in its hands to humiliate and hurt its rivals:

1. Apple, based on innovative engineering, virtually eliminates the antenna/signal issues from iPhone 5.
2. Apple's rivals do not take any material steps to eliminate the antenna issues highlighted by Apple's original comparisons.

Assuming that the above two assumptions come out as true, Apple can reinstate the offending material that it had put up on its website, and this time (with iPhone 5, that is) its rivals won't be able to claim that the comparisons are false. Apple will have a potent marketing weapon in its hands with which to strike at the heart of its rivals.

A dealbreaker weakness in Web standards (CSS, HTML, JavaScript, SVG, etc.)

For me, the fact that all of the code written in Web standards (CSS, HTML, JavaScript, SVG, etc.) is readable by anyone is a dealbreaker. Why do Adobe and Microsoft protect the source code of their desktop applications so fiercely? Because the source code is their most important piece of intellectual property.

These companies, and others, cannot extend the same protection to client-side software (or documents) built using Web standards. These standards have been designed to be human-readable.

An example of a company that's facing serious issues because of this openness of Web standards is Google. Because documents built using Web standards can be read by humans and parsed/processed by machines, Google's rival Bing is able to process Google's search results to better its own ranking. Would this have been possible if Google SERPs were served inside proprietary desktop software? Probably not.

I consider the openness of source code of applications and documents built using Web standards a serious issue. Frankly, I don't like it. I'm not in favor of it.

Disclaimer: I do understand that it is openness that has led to the proliferation of the WWW. I also understand that the proliferation of the WWW and of Web browsers has been a significant contributor to Google's success. I'm not contesting any of this.

Corrections needed in India's NEFT/RTGS systems

1. Make NEFT and RTGS free: There's no fee charged for using cheques, and so should NEFT and RTGS be. More so because cheques cost banks much more than the cost of NEFT and RTGS systems. It's unfortunate that these fast, electronic systems are not free, forcing people to use slower, paper-based methods.
2. Abolish IFSC: We don't need this. Really. If a customer of HDFC Bank wants to transfer some money to someone who holds an account with SBI, only the account number of the recipient should be required. The NEFT/RTGS systems should be redesigned so that the communication is from bank to bank, rather than from branch to branch. HDFC Bank should be concerned with transferring money to the specified account number of SBI. It should be up to SBI's computers to determine the branch and transfer money to it.
3. Allow hot transfers without addition as beneficiary: It's possible to write anyone's name on a cheque, but it's not the same with doing a NEFT transfer through a bank's website. You have to first add a beneficiary, a process that, for some banks, requires a mandatory 24 hour waiting period before a payment can be made to that beneficiary. Ridiculous! Reminds me of License Raj and how it inhibited India's progress. It should be possible to do hot transfers to anyone without having to go through the ordeal of adding a beneficiary (I'm not sure if this step is mandated by RBI, but it's possible that it's the banks that have implemented this requirement and that this isn't an integral part of the NEFT system). The philosophy should be the one followed in online email services - you can add someone to your address book if you want, and this'll make your life easy, but you can also always send an email to someone without having to add him to your address book.
4. Introduce a NEFT/RTGS book, like a cheque book: The process of transferring money using cheques (clearing) typically takes two days. This can be reduced by one day if banks introduce a new NEFT/RTGS book (can be named Tatkal cheque book to make it easy to remember by the Average Joe in India). An individual or a firm needs to mention only the name, bank name and account number of the payee (this assumes that IFSC isn't required, as listed above). Give this Tatkal cheque to your bank and the transfer will be done on the same day (using NEFT, RTGS, etc.).
5. Allow NEFT/RTGS 24x7x365: I find it appalling that two of the most important/popular electronic methods of money transfer in India, NEFT and RTGS, have been handicapped by some arbitrary cutoff timings set by the RBI. Cutoff timings for electronic systems? What's the rationale behind this? Credit and debit cards work 24x7x365, and so should NEFT and RTGS. After all, there's no human involved in these transactions, and barring the occasional maintenance and rare outages, computers can work nonstop without breaking a sweat!
6. Eliminate "free-floating" RTGS forms: A gaping hole in the way RTGS transfers are conducted is that some banks (such as SBI) have placed booklets of generic RTGS forms at various counters, openly available to anyone. A signature is now the sole barrier to fraud. Unlike cheques, that must be issued to the firm/individual who wants to transfer money, these RTGS forms can be picked up and filled by anyone. This makes it futile to securely keep the forms in your locker (something most people do with their cheque books), since both payer and payee can be filled in these generic forms. This hole must be plugged, by issuing NEFT/RTGS books in the same way that cheque books are issued today.

These are just some of the improvements that I think will encourage the use of electronic money transfer in India, and also make the whole process more convenient, efficient, quick and secure.

Fiction books - a waste of valuable time or just another source of personal entertainment?

I'm not a fan of fiction novels. I consider them a waste of valuable time. I don't read fiction, and I suggest to others to not read fiction.

Why?

Because I believe that one should instead read a nonfiction book, because a nonfiction surely teaches you something, in addition to entertaining you. Better deal! Better utilization of time! And you can't disagree that there are tons of great nonfiction alternatives to fiction books, so you can't say that nonfiction ain't good enough.

This old belief became fresh once again when I read the following opening sentence in a recent article by Dwight Garner in The New York Times:

"Reading a dull, charmless nonfiction book is almost always better than reading a dull, charmless novel. With a nonfiction book, you might at least learn something."

But this time I thought - isn't my belief equivalent to saying that one should watch only documentaries [assuming that most documentaries are based on reality] and never watch movies [assuming that most movies are fiction], because documentaries both entertain and teach you. When I tell others to never waste their time reading fiction, why do I watch scores of fiction movies?

I guess I'll stop opposing fiction from here on and accept it as just another source of personal entertainment.

P.S. Interestingly, I just googled this and found that a lot of debate has already been done on this question!

Against naming airports after popular individuals

Indira Gandhi International (Delhi), John F. Kennedy International (New York), O. R. Tambo International (Johannesburg), Paris-Charles De Gaulle (Paris), Sri Guru Ram Dass Jee International (Amritsar), etc. These are names of some of the airports that come to my mind when I think of airports named after important individuals.

I'm against naming airports after individuals (political, religious, etc.). In my opinion, such names:

1. Are used by politicians and religious leaders to only further their interests.
2. Serve some sections of the society, but (can) make others uncomfortable.
3. Unnecessarily introduce additional complexity that could've been avoided.

Clean, easily memorable, neutral, self-explanatory, simple

I think names of airports should be kept clean and neutral. Airports should be named after the respective cities in which they are located. So the above five airports would look like - Delhi International, New York International, Johannesburg International, Paris International, and Amritsar International.

Interference to airliners from electronic devices, possible terrorism, and my vision for the future

That electronic devices might pose a threat to commercial aircraft through electromagnetic interference has already been discussed many times (for example here).

What I'm concerned about is the possibility of executing a terrorist activity through a nefariously modified electronic gadget. An iPod touch or a MacBook could be modified by adding high-power radio transmitters, and could be used to reliably cause interference with an aircraft's communication and navigation systems. Such a modified device would easily pass the security checks at airports, since it would look and work just like any other iPod touch or MacBook.

I'm not sure if anyone has ever thought about the possibility of what I've written above. Most of the published material appears to be concerned about electromagnetic interference from electronic gadgets used by travelers (and travelers either forget to turn their devices off or they deliberately don't turn them off - we all know this).

However, I can predict that in the near future, devices will begin to automatically recognize their current location and take at least some safety-related actions based on their location. For example, smartphones or tablets of tomorrow will realize that they're inside an aircraft or a hospital and will either alert their owners of the possibility of interference or will automatically turn off their wireless components. Alternatively, a transmitter in an aircraft's cockpit will send a signal (at the order of a pilot) ordering all electronic devices to turn themselves off. Compliant devices will either alert their owners or will automatically turn themselves off.

Why are humans the only intelligent species?

That's the question that struck my mind as I was driving back home a few days back. It seems odd that humans are the only species on the Earth that are intelligent (of course, this statement assumes that whatever intelligence is exhibited by non-human species, it's so primitive in comparison to the godly intelligence exhibited by humans, that it's easily ignorable).

(source)

This looks even more odd because the Earth is the only astronomical object known to possess life. So at least as of today, humans are the only intelligent species in the entire (known) universe.

Stunning!

I queried this on Google, and interestingly, so many people have already asked this question!

Update (9-Jan-11): A related question that just struck me - what would happen if there are two or more intelligent species on our planet? Would they fight against each other? Would they be able to live in harmony? Is it possible that there was at least one other intelligent species on the Earth, but the early humans killed it? When many animals species are physically similar to each other in so many ways, why has intelligence not spread to any other species?

An ultra-cheap, flight-based foreign tour from India. A wild dream or an achievable reality?

Of course it is possible! What an absurd question, considering the word cheap isn't objective...

Anyway, today me and my cousin had a debate on whether or not an okay foreign tour (starting from DEL) is possible in under INR 20,000. I was vehement that it is indeed possible, whereas my cousin asserted that INR 20,000 is too low for an acceptable foreign tour. The underlying question was whether or not making an ultra-cheap foreign tour (in under INR 20,000 per person), assuming it's even possible, makes more sense than spending a similar or slightly less amount to visit a place within India.

I've visited three foreign countries till date. And my experience strongly suggests to me that there should be at least a few foreign destinations which can be had from Delhi for under INR 20,000 per person. I spent a few minutes on Cleartrip to check ticket prices of flights from DEL to various foreign destinations nearby, and I'm largely convinced that acceptable tours (of two nights and three days duration) under INR 20,000 should be easily possible.

Specifically, return tickets from DEL to Kathmandu, Kuala Lumpur, Colombo, Muscat, Kuwait and Dubai are priced reasonably (click here for screenshots of prices seen on Cleartrip), and a bit of frugality should allow one to have an acceptable overall experience, while spending less than INR 20,000 per person (the per person cost is even more achievable if more people are added to the group).

A lack of an apology following an epic blunder is one of the ways to spot a shoddy "tech-journalist"

This "tech-journalist" at TG Daily published an article in which she committed an epic blunder - she attributed to Microsoft a technology being developed and promoted by Google. Is this an excusable mistake? In my opinion, no. Because she has mixed Google and Microsoft in the same article, and any sane person would've realized that mutually exclusive events don't occur together. Perhaps she was an intern. Whatever.

Now. When NYT or WSJ make a correction to an already-published article, these houses make sure that the edit is promptly highlighted. And this admission actually raises one's respect for these fine publications. On the other hand, when an outlet such as TG Daily makes an epic blunder, like it made today, it quietly changes all the instances of Microsoft to Google, and doesn't make any admission whatsoever. A thief always leaves some trails, they say. So did TG Daily - it forgot to:

1. Update the tags
2. Change the URL, which still includes Microsoft
3. Delete all the comments that blast this article and its intern author for this epic failure

Bottom line: Absence of admission and stealthy damage-control is one of the surest ways to spot a low-standards organization and a clueless and shoddy "tech-journalist".