The global interest in India's unique identification project continues to grow.
After the Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) and Yahoo Chiefs, the World Bank President, Mr Robert B. Zoellick, is now scheduled to meet the Chairman of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), Mr Nandan Nilekani, during his four-day visit to the county starting December 2.
While talks are likely to centre around improvement of the public delivery system and governance, industry watchers say the possibility of future World Bank assistance could not be ruled out at this stage.
Sources told Business Line that the meeting would discuss the modalities of the UID project under which India is gearing up to hand out a unique identification number to each of its 1.2 billion residents in the coming years.
Between meeting the Prime Minister, the Finance Minister, the Urban Development Minister, the Road Transport Minister and the Environment Minister during his visit, Mr Zoellick will also interact with select CEOs. He is slated to meet the UIDAI Chairman on December 4.
Already, the UID project has generated global interest. Earlier this month, the CEO of Yahoo! Inc (NASDAQ:YHOO) , Ms Carol Bartz, offered to help India with the UID programme. Yahoo made it clear that it was not looking at any commercial interest but that its expertise in dealing with large databases could be of relevance to the project.
Earlier this year, the Microsoft Co-founder, Mr Bill Gates, had stated that his company is interested in partnering India in the project. He had also met Mr Nilekani during his visit to the country in July.
The scale of the UID project can be gauged from the fact that the Indian IT industry, including leading players such as TCS, Infosys and Wipro, are hoping that the project will galvanise the domestic software market, which has historically trailed software exports.
This is because the project will require a full technology backbone, massive computing power, database, storage, and biometrics.
The US has a social security number in place, but it does not offer biometric and online authentication. Similar projects elsewhere that embed biometric capabilities have, at best, touched 100-150 million users. In that sense, the UID project — that will incorporate identity fields such as fingerprints and, perhaps, an iris scan — will test the boundaries of technology.
Art's Commentary......The world seems to be gearing up to facilitate the world wide application of the mark of the beast.
WASHINGTON, D.C., November 27, 2009 - President Obama's brief proclamation of Thanksgiving Day on November 26 was unique among all recorded Thanksgiving proclamations by his predecessors: it is the first one that fails to directly acknowledge the existence of God.
The beneficence shown by God to America is a theme that traditionally defines the Thanksgiving holiday, and this theme is strongly emphasized in the original Thanksgiving Day proclamations and consistently acknowledged even by modern presidents.
Obama's unprecedented proclamation, however, only makes indirect mention of God by quoting George Washington, stating: "Today, we recall President George Washington, who proclaimed our first national day of public thanksgiving to be observed 'by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God.'"
The proclamation goes on to call Thanksgiving Day "a unique national tradition we all share" that unites people as "thankful for our common blessings."
"This is a time for us to renew our bonds with one another, and we can fulfill that commitment by serving our communities and our Nation throughout the year," it continues.
All other presidential Thanksgiving proclamations directly refer to "God," "Providence," or another appellation for the divine being.
But Obama's historic decision to avoid directly mentioning God in the Thanksgiving proclamation doesn't necessarily come as a surprise. Earlier this year Obama similarly made history on Inaguration Day by explicitly referencing "non-believers" in his speech, which, according to USA Today, was the first time in history that a President had done so. Obama has also said on more than one occasion that the United States is "not a Christian nation."
Less than a week after implementing a partial freeze on Jewish construction to entice the Palestinians to return to the negotiating table, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday lamented that apparently his so-called peace partners are not interested in talking.
"Are we entering a process, or are we not entering a process? We are willing to enter into a process. So far it remains unclear whether the Palestinian Authority and its leaders are willing to enter into a process," Netanyahu said at an event in Eilat marking the November 29, 1947 UN decision to recognize the Jewish state.
Netanyahu went on to warn the Palestinians of turning to alternative means of wresting control of Judea and Samaria.
"It is impossible to solve the conflict if you do not sit around the negotiating table. There is no other way to do it," he said.
The Palestinians, for their part, accuse Netanyahu of not wanting peace because he refuses to meet their precondition of halting Jewish construction in all the areas they claim, including much of Jerusalem.
But Netanyahu dismissed the Palestinian position, and noted that many in the international community are starting to realize who is the real obstacle to peace.
"I think it is clear to anyone observing objectively, anyone who looks at the facts, that Israel wants peace. I do not see the same willingness or determination yet on the Palestinian side. I see other signs. I see all kinds of preconditions not to carry out negotiations," the prime minister stated.
Israel on Sunday revealed that it will set free 980 jailed Palestinian terrorists in exchange for abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who has been held in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip since June 25, 2006.
If the deal for Shalit goes through it will happen in two stages. First, Shalit will be moved to Egypt and Israel will set free 450 terrorists specifically demanded by Hamas. In the second stage, Shalit will be returned to Israel and an additional 530 Palestinian terrorists of Israel's choosing will be released as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians.
The number of prisoners involved in the swap was revealed during a Supreme Court hearing on a petition by bereaved Israelis who have lost loved ones in Palestinian terror attacks. The victims of past terror attacks insist that the state disclose the names of the terrorists it plans to release, but so far have met a brick wall.
State prosecutors say that publicizing the names of those to be traded for Shalit poses a security risk and could undermine the deal. Lawyers representing the bereaved family members noted that if Israel can give the names to Hamas, then publicizing them is clearly not a security risk. Furthermore, if there are objectionable names on the list, then scuttling the exchange could save lives.
According to organizations representing the victims of Palestinian terror, prisoners released by Israel in past exchanges or gestures of goodwill have gone on to kill 180 Israelis.
Announcement comes days after the U.N. nuclear watchdog rebuked Tehran
TEHRAN - Ian approved plans Sunday to build 10 industrial-scale uranium enrichment facilities, a dramatic expansion of the program in defiance of U.N. demands it halt enrichment and a move that is likely to significantly heighten tensions with the West.
The decision comes only two days after the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency censured Iran over its program and demanded it halt construction of a newly revealed enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom. The West has signaled it is running out of patience with Iran's continuing enrichment and its balking at a U.N. deal aimed at ensuring Tehran cannot build a nuclear weapon in the near-term future. The U.S. and its allies have hinted at new U.N. sanctions if Iran does not respond.
The White House said the move "would be yet another serious violation of Iran's clear obligations under multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions and another example of Iran choosing to isolate itself."
"Time is running out for Iran to address the international community's growing concerns about its nuclear program," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband described Iran's move as a provocation.
"This epitomizes the fundamental problem that we face with Iran," he said. "We have stated over and again that we recognize Iran's right to a civilian nuclear program, but they must restore international confidence in their intentions. Instead of engaging with us Iran chooses to provoke and dissemble."
'Firm message'
On Friday, the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency issued a strong rebuke of Iran over enrichment, infuriating Tehran. Parliament speaker Ali Larijani threatened on Sunday to reduce cooperation with the IAEA.
"Should the West continue to pressure us, the legislature can reconsider the level of Iran's cooperation with the IAEA," Larijani told parliament in a speech carried live on state radio.
Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi, who is also Iran's nuclear chief, said Sunday's decision was "a firm message" in response to the IAEA. He told state TV that the agency's censure was a challenge aimed at "measuring the resistance of the Iranian nation."
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.
The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.
The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”
The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.
Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.
Jones was not in charge of the CRU when the data were thrown away in the 1980s, a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue. The lost material was used to build the databases that have been his life’s work, showing how the world has warmed by 0.8C over the past 157 years.
He and his colleagues say this temperature rise is “unequivocally” linked to greenhouse gas emissions generated by humans. Their findings are one of the main pieces of evidence used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which says global warming is a threat to humanity.
We won the cold war and weathered 9/11. But now economic weakness is endangering our global power.
Call it the fractal geometry of fiscal crisis. If you fly across the Atlantic on a clear day, you can look down and see the same phenomenon but on four entirely different scales. At one extreme there is tiny Iceland. Then there is little Ireland, followed by medium-size Britain. They're all a good deal smaller than the mighty United States. But in each case the economic crisis has taken the same form: a massive banking crisis, followed by an equally massive fiscal crisis as the government stepped in to bail out the private financial system.
Size matters, of course. For the smaller countries, the financial losses arising from this crisis are a great deal larger in relation to their gross domestic product than they are for the United States. Yet the stakes are higher in the American case. In the great scheme of things—let's be frank—it does not matter much if Iceland teeters on the brink of fiscal collapse, or Ireland, for that matter. The locals suffer, but the world goes on much as usual.
But if the United States succumbs to a fiscal crisis, as an increasing number of economic experts fear it may, then the entire balance of global economic power could shift.