Piracy: is it really bad?

Piracy is highly condemned everywhere. It is the terrorism of software. It eats away the profit of all the developers and makes their efforts useless. The fact that piracy is wicked is even supported by the people who share stuff on torrent, who write that “If you like this game/movie, please buy it. Support the devs man”. It is really disheartening to see that after all the effort one has put into a product, someone just copies it and sells it for free.

Piracy is more of an ethical issue rather than a technological one. For every mind that protects the products from getting copied, there are ten others who have much sharper mind [probably their own co-workers] who want to get the product out for free. According to me, half of the pirated products are the efforts of the employees working on it who can do a little ding-dong and screw their company’s profits. It wouldn’t come as a surprise to me if I’d see a Microsoft employee selling pirated Windows to his neighbor.

In short, its bad. But after giving it much thought [as per what limited knowledge I have], I have found that piracy can help - if tackled like a necessary evil. In a market like India or China, I think piracy has helped Microsoft in the long term. [I’ll use Microsoft Windows to discuss the case because “its obvious”]

In a market like India, when computers were considered magical artifacts and when a Pentium I would cost you nearly Rs. 50,000, a free OS helped a lot. And at that time (the 90s era), Microsoft was slowly gaining popularity as the best OS around, because it had kicked in the concept of GUI. As a result, computer revolution began in India with a PC having Windows. At that time, India had no laws to tackle piracy. [Well, even if it had, I don’t think it would have made much difference].

The result was the rapid expansion of the market with just Windows as the concept of an OS. Pirated versions of Windows 95, 98, 2000, NT and XP [the decade of 1995-2005] did the miraculous work of making Indian people believe that Windows is part of a computer and that a PC and Windows are one and the same. Schools, colleges, universities, cyber cafes - everywhere and everyone - used pirated Windows. No one knew what Unix was. [what if it was like, 100 times better and was developed 20 years prior to Windows].

The result - today with the advent of laptops, the price of Windows is bundled with the laptop. There are many laptops with Unix as the OS, but those are rare. 95% of the laptops sold in India are shipped with the Windows OS. And in the coming years, as long as laptops and branded PCs are to stay, Microsoft has its audience, and they will pay for it. [And believe me, PCs and laptopos are staying, no pesky tablet or smartphone can play Crysis, Call of Duty or World of Warcraft].

Two words that would help me over here are - market penetration and brand building - and piracy helped Microsoft do that, at least in India. And I don’t think it suffered losses in the decade. Now imagine the utopian concept, that Windows had no pirated versions. I don’t think anyone in India would have coughed up anything between Rs 3000-7000 for something they can get for free. The result would have been the emergence of Unix as the OS of choice, Microsoft getting beaten up as “something that charges money for what we get for free”. Because here in India, the concept of good is the concept of free.

Let us take the discussion to a more general perspective of piracy. Piracy helps companies by letting the audience adapt to their products. Once you see people clinging to your products like a pole in a storm, it is time to introduce the money concept, but even that should be done incrementally. For example, music piracy helps people get the song in their head, and when there is a concert of their favorite singer, they are going to cough up money for something that they already know.

In the gaming industry, (PC specifically), the companies shouldn’t battle their pirated version getting around if they want to build a brand in terms of the game. Personally, I would buy the next Call of Duty or Battlefield game if I cannot it pirated. The thing is - for urging people to buy your products, you should arouse their interests. People will pay only if they like it, and no one can like by seeing only the demo or the trailer of the game.

Companies should get one thing straight into their mind - no one will pay for a new thing. Instead of battling against piracy, which is inevitable, the strategy should be - getting people used to your products and charge when they have not alternate definition of the product you’re selling. And then, you are dominating. And I think Microsoft has been successful in many markets by following this endeavor. [Although what we need ponder upon is whether this market strategy was intentional or accidental, and that, is what we’ll never come to know].

Bottom line - even if piracy [or shall we say, free product] hurts you in the short term, cling to it, it may reap you profits in the long term. But as people get adapted to your free product, its the responsibility of the company to manage the brand in such a way that you know how to leverage your customers into paying what they consider best. A little thinking and market research - and piracy is the industry standard for launching their first product. [Now we’re talking about utopia].

P.S: We would never know if companies have already realized this, and that is the reason why pirated products are still floating in the market.

Klout - your Online Fame

There has been a new development on the net - klout.com. Klout is San Francisco based company that provides social media analytics that measures a user’s “influence” across their social networks. The analysis is done by collecting data from the person’s Twitter and Facebook account and measuring the size of person’s network, the content created, the interaction of other people with the content.

The influence is measured on a scale of 1 to 100 with higher scores representing higher influence. It uses four parameters to arrive to a final score, what is known as Klout Score. The parameters are:

• True Reach: Number of people influenced. It is the actual engaged audience of the user and is based on number of followers on twitter and facebook friends who actually interact with the user
• Amplification: It is how much people are influenced by the user. It measures the retweets, @messages, comments and likes on twitter and facebook.
• Network Score: Influence of people on true reach. It measures how influential is the audience based on the true reach.

These parameters generate a single combined score from 1 to 100. The actual implementation of how the scoring mechanism works is kept secret (obviously) but in my opinion they have got some excellent algorithms to find out how the user is influential in his social network. It also gives a list of topics user influences most people about. This has the potential to generate lots of money. But more on that later.

This is one step ahead of social networking. Facebook has 750 million+ users and Twitter has 200 million+ users. People know what social networking is. This is the new tool to measure how you actually influence people on your social network.

It was co-founded in 2008 by two geniuses - Joe Fernandez and Binh Tran. Joe is currently the CEO and Binh is the CTO (Chief Technological Officer) of Klout. According to the data on Klout, Binh started programming at the early age of 13 and was a game programmer and then turned into a big data cruncher and then joined Klout. Joe has worked on Education and Real Estate platforms and is now currently experimenting on Social platform. Currently, Klout has scored 80 million people and is spreading slowly by word of mouth and promotions. Personally, I feel it doesn’t need advertising. It is a new thing and everybody would want to try it.

One thing that came to my mind is - how does klout earn money? Klout earns by knowing what actually people are influenced by. It is one step ahead than advertising. Social Networking only counts the number of followers or friend count - but Klout considers the actual thing that is happening. It measures what people are talking about, and what message they are spreading. According to the data on klout.com, it is being used by more than 3000 brands and applications. It lists brands like Nike, Audi, Universal, Turner, HP, Disney, Spotify, Virgin America, P&G, Subway, Fox and Paramount on its website as its clients and also has various PDFs on how some brands are actually leveraging the Klout perks (url: http://klout.com/corp/perks).

Klout has recently added LinkedIn, Tumblr, YouTube and Blogger accounts to measure the influence in a better way. klout.com is a great start. In 3 years it has rated 80 million individuals and many brands are now taking advantage of this service. In my opinion, we have just added another way to advertise. There is always something new happening in this world, and this shows that facebook and twitter are definitely not the end to it.

P.S. : My klout score is 54. And readers, you can increase it.

Pakistan and Terrorism

On the 10th anniversary of 9/11 - the day that changed the future of this world - the Pakistan government did what was unthinkable - to advertise its support for the fight against terrorism. This incident is humorous for two reasons - the first reason being that no country has ever (in my knowledge) advertised its efforts for a holy cause, and the second and the most obvious reason is that it is the country which is the breeding site of most of the terrorist activities that are taking place today.

I would not blame today’s Pakistan government wholly for the situation there. Much what is there today is the result of the policies and practices of previous governments. The chief cause of the presence of terrorists on the soil of Pakistan is that it has been through many wars. The war of East Pakistan that lead to the formation of Bangladesh, three wars with India, and the Soviet-Afghan war. All these wars have led to the nurturing of so-called independent fighting groups by the government for achieving strategic goals. These groups are used for proxy wars and they are ideology driven self-sustained groups.

Pakistan has been long since obsessed with Kashmir. It occupies much of it illegally and considers it as its own part. No leader of Pakistan has considered Kashmir part of Indian territory. There have been numerous terrorist groups trained for the sole purpose of liberating Kashmir from India. General Pervez Musharraf had confessed that Pakistan Army used to train militant groups for fighting Indian fighters in Kashmir. The benefit of having such militant groups instead of the the Army is the deniability. If these militants are caught or killed, they cannot be associated with either with the government or the Army. Thus Pakistan gets a clean chit and the fight can continue.

The war of Afghanistan in 1991 also brought many religious extremists from all over the world to South Asia. Many of them have settled in Pakistan and have been operating since then. This has led to a mixture of terrorist groups, some home grown, some imported from Taliban in Afghanistan. And after 9/11, al-Qaeda leaders have also settled in Pakistan after US started war with Afghanistan.  

Another reason for the violence in Pakistan is the sectarian and religious conflict, mainly between Shia and Sunni supporters. Few Islamist policies enacted by the previous governments have added fuel to the fire of religious conflicts. The result is the birth of highly influential religious leaders who can bend the crowd to their willing.

The violence in Pakistan today is the mixture of the home grown terrorist groups and religious leaders. There are instances when these two merge and give rise to a single terrorist group. The Pakistan intelligence group Inter Services Intelligence, or famously known as the ISI, still gives intelligence and arms support to terrorists who share a common ideology. The Pakistani government still recognizes some terrorist groups as religious bodies. And the idea of tackling terrorism is limited to having talks with these groups.

The lesson which the Pakistani government should now learn is that terrorism and violence have no demarcations. You cannot recognize one terrorist group and hope to dismantle the other. Terrorism has to be viewed from a single agenda. It has lost much in achieving its national goals via the road of terrorism. It is true that Pakistan has lost more people in terrorist attacks than any country ever. It is true that numerous political figures have become victim of this terrorism. It is true that Pakistan is fighting Al Qaeda terrorists since US has put pressure on it. But what is also true is that substantial amount of US aid for fighting terrorists has gone in nurturing those terrorist groups which it recognizes for fighting personal wars. No amount of justification can justify the use of training militants and using violence to achieve what they consider national goals.

The advertisement in Wall Street Journal dates 9/11 has drawn much flak in the US. The people have ridiculed Pakistan’s efforts of fighting terrorism. Any common man would ask only one question - how can a country that is sponsoring terrorism, fight terrorism? The answer is not so simple. The problem that Pakistan faces today is not easy to tackle. Even if Pakistan government stops sponsoring terrorist groups today, it has a long way in fighting terrorists.

If Pakistan stops giving support to the terrorist groups and starts fighting these militants, there is hope after all. It can not only save its own Security Forces and civilians, but it can send a blow to these terrorists and save many people of the world. Pakistan is currently not fighting for the safety of 7 billion people, but it can bring peace to these people if it wants. Yes, its true, only Pakistan can do it.

A Decade After

A decade has passed by since 9/11 – an event that changed the face of this world. 9/11 was one attempt to shake the world leader position US had assumed for half a century. It was the reply of Afghan War in 1991 that hurt the sentiments of fundamentalists, who wanted to free themselves from the shackles of being under the US. 9/11 was not only a terrorist act; it was an act of liberation for millions of jihadis and fundamentalists who said that “We are still free”. Osama-bin Laden was their Pope and jihad was their Christianity.

The incident opened the eyes of US to a problem it had long since chosen to ignore – fundamentalist terrorism. It chose to ignore the snow boulder that had steadily grown since the 1991 Gulf War: al-Qaeda. And when it hurt, it hurt so much that it left such a deep scar that is probably never going to heal.

The reaction was almost immediate and expected from a world leader. It chose to strike back (something which is impossible – strategically and practically for India to do). Invasion of Iraq began barely a month later in 9/11 with war in Afghanistan. One and a half year later Saddam Hussein was toppled in 21 days into what US thought was “War on Terrorism”. Thousands of American troops fought along with British, French and German soldiers. Small amounts of contribution were even given by New Zealand, Austria and Poland. Everyone did what the leader told. They thought it was better to nip in the bud. Saddam was ousted; Iraq was restored to be a democracy, story over.

Had this been the end of the story, and US had pulled its troops out of Afghanistan, the scenario would have been different from what it is today. It would have put fear into the mind of terrorists about the brutality of American troops. But US chose to carry on the war in Afghanistan with the Taliban. That was the first mistake made by the US. Taliban was a threat, and Taliban’s support to al-Qaeda was the reason that brought at least NATO troops to the Afghan soil, majority of whom were American troops (90,000). Pakistan was strategically important to the US – and this is what fostered a long term partnership between US and Pakistan. Pakistan had US on its leverage, and Pakistan played to its weakness. This was the second mistake of the US.

Taliban fought a brave war in the US, while key elements of al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban found safe havens in a country which had its pocket money coming from US – Pakistan. US funded Pakistan government, the government funded the ISI, and the ISI with the strategic advantage of Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders – possibly Osama Bin Laden himself, strengthened the Laskar-e-Toiba and went along to fulfil its dream to terrorize India.

Thus, what happened in India can be thought as a consequence of US’s ‘three mistakes’, the third one being the decision to come out of the Afghan war by 2014 with what they suppose is their victory over the Taliban. Of course the third mistake was bound to happen, as it was a direct consequence of the first one.

One good thing that happened between all this was the killing of Osama bin Laden and that too from Pakistan. US got the much needed tangible proof that Pakistan had been playing to its interests. The finding of number 1 international terrorist near a heavily protected Military base makes any deniability impossible. Pakistan knew he was there, and Pakistan had always wanted to protect him. It was a symbiotic relationship, protection of Osama against its strategic advantage and long experience in terrorism. Although Pakistan did suffer a lot from its own home grown terrorism due to some steps it had to take to keep the money flowing, but it was much less price to pay compared to what it had in its basket.

But US has to understand one thing – terrorism a modern Raavan, it cannot be be-headed and killed. Whether it is Osama bin Laden, Illyas Kashmiri or Fazul Abdullah Muhammad, killing of leaders won’t kill the ideology. The NATO troops are losing its ground in Afghanistan, Pakistan continues to offer safe havens to terrorists, and US, though it may appear it is winning, is losing the war. The US knows it and the terrorists know it too. There is no way Afghanistan government can stop the country from becoming a terror ground once again.

For me, the primary concern is to see where the scenario is headed for India. HuJI, LeT, JuD remain active in India primarily from Kashmir and PoK. India continues to be terrorized. The terrorists are now home grown. It is high time the leaders sit together, and bring a solution to terrorism that will put a check on its powers to conduct attacks. Terrorism cannot be eradicated, at least not in our generation. The best we can do is tackling it using intelligence and strategy and not just force.

One day remains to the 10th anniversary of the event that changed the course of this world. The US has readied itself for an imminent “unconfirmed but credible” threat. Let’s hope it does not come to that. “Let us all pledge to resolve to end terrorism so that our future generations would not have to experience the bloodshed and brutality that has horrified us and shook our lives. God bless the souls who have become the target to this madness. Amen.

Assange doesn't need a mental asylum

Mayawati’s reaction to WikiLeaks revelations has been more than humorous and hilarious - personally, it invites pity. Pity to the world she lives and thinks in. In fact, her reaction has been worse than the exposure itself.

First - the credibility of facts. I don’t doubt the credibility of the facts presented by Julian Assange. And I have no reason to doubt so. WikiLeaks does nothing except revealing those secrets that government and big people want to protect. It is neither inclined to any government nor cares about elections in the state. Mayawati needs to understand that state elections in UP are of no interest to Assange. And he has got no plot here. His endeavors to publish truth have always been met with displeasure from the government. But no government or individual has given such a reaction to the facts exposed. If Mayawati thinks that people like Mulayam, Advani, Rahul Gandhi has got something to leverage in WikiLeaks, she is so mistaken. Assange has got no allies.

Mayawati has betrayed her own dalits by showing off ostentatious amount of money. Her love for money goes beyond saying. Money garlands, branded-sandals, and a private jet planes to bring them all show her ‘penchant for corruption’ and 'an authoritarian streak’.

These cables do more than just expose Mayawati’s secrets. They expose the true image of a politician in India. Every politician, MP, MLA in India have the habit of using the money, which is obtained through 100% illegal means either to show off or hoard the money away. Mayawati’s own cabinet secretary revealing that she has a love for corruption is a little unnerving expose. Mayawati’s efforts to be a public figure for Dalit should be met with the strength and resolve to live like present day Dalits. There is no say in corruption, we have Anna Hazare and billion other people fighting that.

Assange has revealed nothing new by exposing the corruption and show off part, in fact he, in no way, deserves a mental asylum but the it is the people who 'fly jets for buying sandals’ who need an asylum. What new comes out of this episode is the way leaders think their reactions and false allegations can convince people and the media. It does nothing but invites humor and contempt towards them. I have only one message for Mayawati that my mom always tells me - Grow Up.