mere funde

Apparently Harvard University has mandated that all research publications made by its faculty members be made available for “free” (as in free beer??) online. It is a mighty push for a movement which recently started gaining a lot of momentum.

In a move to disseminate faculty research and scholarship more broadly, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) voted Tuesday (Feb. 12) to give the University a worldwide license to make each faculty member’s scholarly articles available and to exercise the copyright in the articles, provided that the articles are not sold for a profit.

However, if you read the discussion below the article, it is not very clear whether it would be available soon after publication, or there would be a time lag before it gets online for free.

Whatever the case may be, it is a step taken in the right spirit and right direction.

Link via: Mashable

First - this brilliant piece of Dilbert. It reflects what I have felt about IT security for a very long time. I am sorry guys, but you have a damn difficult job.

Next. An interesting piece by the right-winged Hindutva defender Arvind Lavakre. Read the article, and it does put up some good questions.

Finally. A place for all right-winged folks. Offstumped by Yossarian.

Disclaimer: I do not condone the acts of Narendra Modi in Gujrat or those of Buddhadeb Bhattacharya in Nandigram.

From Rediff:

Besides Rahul [Son of Late Rajiv Gandhi], the other young leaders who have found places in the AICC secretariat include Jyotiraditya Scindia [Son of Madhavrao Scindia], Ajay Maken, Priya Dutt [Daughter of Late Sunil Dutt], Milind Deora [Son of Murli Deora], Sachin Pilot [Son of Late Rajesh Pilot], Jitin Prasad [Son of veteran Congress leader Kunwar Jitendra Prasada] and Sandeep Dikshit [Son of Delhi's Chief Minister Mrs. Sheila Dixit].

Is it just me, or does everyone see a pattern here? [emphasis mine]

I am extremely sad and angry.

A thing that any father and mother should never have to do. A couple loses their young child and go to a ghat to bury his body. The ghat is in a very sorry state with dogs digging up remains of buried bodies. Someone picks up the story and files a PIL. The Government promises quick action.

So what has enraged me. The lines below from the PIL (emphasis mine).

That the Petitioner being a staunch Hindu from upper caste with status in life and good family background along with his above mentioned cousin and family prepared the body of master Raghav for being taken to a crematorium for dignified and honorable cremation.

Doesn’t a Hindu from lower class without status is life, whatever that means, have a right to diginified burial for his/her child?

The newspaper has finally lost it, going wayyyyy overboard in its criticism of the Indian cricket team. As everybody else, I too am deeply aggrieved over the early exit of India from the WC2007. However, sad as it is, it does not call for total beration of the stars we all worshipped at some point of time. From their website:

Reputations aflame: Fans burn a poster of the self-styled (emphasis added) god of Indian cricket, Sachin Tendulakr (sic!), following India’s loss to Bangladesh in the World Cup.

Does the reporter realise that more people in India love and till a certain extent even still worship this person, than those who know about Tehelka? And “self-styled”!! Please give him a break. He may not be the best in the world any more, but he is still good enough to be in the team. And for God’s sake, he never called himself the “god of Indian cricket”. It was us who gave him this status.

Joseph Barbera, of the Hanna-Barbera fame, passed away day before. He was in part responsible for few of the most memorable moments of my childhood life with all the cartoons he had helped produce. He was the co-creator for Tom & Jerry, The Flintstones, Yogi Bear and Scooby-Doo amongst others. So long, and thanks for all the fun. You will be missed.

Joseph Barbera (March 24, 1911 – December 18, 2006)

India has won the first test against South Africa by 123 runs, and has won back cricketing fans who had waned away after the one day performances in the past year.

On another happy note, Delhi HC has convicted Manu Sharma in the Jessica Lall murder case. Immense happiness comes.

Pfizer, world’s largest drug maker, got hammered badly in the NYSE on Monday following the disclosure that it had pulled the plug on its “to-be” blockbuster drug, torcetrapib. The stock lost 11% of its market value and wiped out USD 21 bn off its market cap.

Though some might consider this as excessive, this just goes to show what one drug can do to a company’s fortune. Pfizer banks on Lipitor for almost a quarter of its annual USD 51 bn sales and a higher percentage of its profits. With Lipitor patent coverage expiring in 2011 (thanks to Ranbaxy), torcetrapib was supposed to take its place and drive the company’s growth and profits. Pfizer had spent over a billion USD on the development of the drug and pulling it out at the last stage of development has prompted Moody to reconsider the downgrading of Pfizer’s rating from the present Aaa.

Also interesting is the increase in the share prices of its competitors, namely, Roche and Astra Zeneca. Many also expect that this failure might change the way big companies focus on blockbuster drugs to drive both topline and bottomline growth.

Darrell Hair seems to beat the current bad boy cricket (Sohaib Akhtar) when it comes to being the centre of a cricketing controversy. The apparently no nonsense umpire has been removed from the elite panel of umpires and will no longer be officiating in International matches.

While the media from Down Under and Britain are crying foul and terming it as strong arm tactics of the Asian bloc, Mr. Hair is not stranger to courting controversy. Lets take a look at his career which has never remained free from the limelight.

1992. Adelaide Test. India vs Australia. In this match eight Indians fell victim to LBW decisions but only two of their appeals were upheld. Australia won by a narrow margin of 38 runs. Wisden felt that the entire affair was “marred … by controversy over lbw decisions – eight times Indians were given out, while all but two of their own appeals were rejected”.

1994. Adelaide Test. South Africa vs Australia. Peter Kirsten had an animated talk with Mr. Hair after a series of Proteans were declared out LBW. Kirsten was promptly declared out LBW in the next innings, and South Africa lost the game. Many felt that the decision was flimsy at the best.

1995. Melbourne Test. Sri Lanka vs Australia. Mr. Hair infamously no-balled Murali (from the bowlers end) for chucking. Now though the Aussies agree that Mr. Hair is very fair in all his dealings, I am ready to bet that such instances are not very common in the cricketing arena where the leg umpire is generally the one to declare a ball as being “thrown”. Lot of water has flown under the bridge since then. ICC has cleared Murali of all charges. Mr. Hair was charged (note, not penalised) for bringing the game into disrepute by calling Murali’s action “diabolical” in his autobiography.

2005. Faisalabad Test. Pakistan vs England. Mr. Hair declares Inzamam run out for leaving his crease while taking evasive action. Cricketing gurus feel it is contradictory to cricketing laws that stipulate that batsman cannot be run out if he leaves his ground due to evasive action. [Side note: I was happy as the decision against Tendulkar at Eden Garden is avenged.]

2006. Oval Test. Pakistan vs England. Mr. Hair, in consultation with Mr. Doctrove, declare the ball as being tampered with penalise Pakistan 5 runs and change the ball. Now, we all now that Pakistan has long faced such charges and are often in trouble for tampering with the ball and getting “some” reverse swing. Anyways, Pakistan decide that they had done nothing wrong and decide to not take the field as a mark of protest. Mr. Hair declares the match as forfieted and awards it to England. An enquiry committee then finds the ball being not tampered with and clear Pakistan of ball tampering charges but penalise them for bringing the game into disrepute. This was done after hearing the views of former cricketer Geoff Boycott and TV analyst Simon Hughes.

On the receiving end of Mr. Hair’s decisions have been India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and South Africa while on the other end stand Australia and England. Now, only if someone could explain me why the so called Asian bloc (supported by South Africa, West Indies and Zimbabwe) was for, while Australia and England (supported by New Zealand) are against, the suspension of Mr. Hair?