What is left of Vedic thoughts?

Are indivduals in any part of the world, Free

     The world celebrated an anniversary of the end of fight for freedom, which happened in one of the largest country, not valuing, you guessed it, Freedom. Has it got to be celebrated, Yes. Period. Is it alright to just celebrate it and then go ahead with our daily routine, no? So, what are we supposed to? Well, dont ask me. I am out of answer as much as you are. 

     The human race has reached a situation where some portion of the people fight for the majority portion of the freedom of people. This fight for freedom is not what was warranted when, humans developed their brains and formed societies. The problem started brewing once societies started being formed. Along the formation, of societies morals were being framed. Rights and wrongs were being hardwired. Some societies thought they were better than the others...Ah, what was I talking about... What am I talking about now? Are they related?

    The thing is should we remember only major ones. Should we not find out and celebrate smaller struggles by individuals across the globe. The news agencies and the entire societies have started to incorporate a very bad idea that one person talking anything about issues believed right by a majority is wrong. This is the most deemed to be free countries, which again is confused with democracies. Democracy is not freedom. Freedom is not the same as democracy. 

    Freedom is not given by anybody to anybody. It is just there. If it has to be given and it has to be taken, then both sides are flawed. So, if a democratic setup tells that you a free to do that and this and then that and then IFTTT.... it is not freedom. It is bondage. Wherein your are given a certain degrees of freedom. 

    There are democracies with varying number of degrees of freedom. So, the country with the highest degrees of freedom is the ultimate? No. Freedom is and should be a given. Isn't it wrong then, that a free(er) parts of the world are not doing anything to improve the degrees of freedom of countries with a lesser number of freedoms. Yes, it is. But, are you allowed to express the same and are you capable of doing something on this issue. Are you given this freedom. Can a theoretically free individual free the group of people who are not having the same? It is impossible.

    Let us take the next scenario. Let us assume that the entire world of people are really free. Now let us assume a certain group of people want to create a society with lesser degree of freedom. Now, the world can act against it and make sure that they are again free. Good. Now, do these people really want to be free. Many people dont know the meaning of freedom. 

    The rich countries have sowed seeds in the minds of the people that Democracy is freedom. So, instead of fighting for freedom, people are fighting for democracy. So, what is freedom? How do people feel freedom? Is the lack of knowledge of freedom, freedom? Isn't the same be applicable to people who are slaves upto their last cell? Is anarchy the best form of freedom. Does anarchy give the individual that theoretical freedom? But, then again, you are branding individuals to a set of rules and conditions which fist spells out anarchy and then the individual has to figure out freedom.

Are you, the individual, Free?

The same post on the federated web  https://qua.name/wrrfhlepep

Gluten cannot be digested by human stomach

Disclaimer: I am no doctor. This is not dietary advice. This is not a treatment schedule.

    Modern foods are made to appease and fool the human processing system. So, instead of using a tried and tested eating habits which has trickled down over humanities existence, the food shelves of these days are a far cry from the shelves of the yester years. The human digestive system is being fooled as the brain is being fooled. It is what the facebooks and googles are doing for the brain. Give more of what it wants. Every human brain is unique. 

     There will be preferences. But, then for the overall development of the human being there should be variety. Instead, these companies feed on the nature's most important rule, the rule of least resistance. Feed the least resistance path. So, what do you gain. Well, you get the attention of the brain. If you get the attention of the brain, you have the individual hook, line and sinker. The foods are going the same way. It is well understood that opioids are addicting more people than the addiction which the governments across the world are worried of. Just because opioids come in nice packages, with good printing and excellent colors, dont mean that they are doing any good. But designing food to do the same as these is criminal. Food is quintessential part of the life of a living being.

    It was shocking for me to know that we are not growing wheat as we used to in the good old days. ie, we have tampered with the "natural" variety of wheat which our previous generations have eaten. Instead we have edited out and added information in genome sequence which will yield wheat having more of the properties multinational business houses want. Not what humans want. It is very difficult to fathom the profit making prospects of these big businesses, or for that matter smaller businesses. By harming the health of the consumer, when profits are made, then it is a vicious cycle. The thing is these decisions are not made by one single business.

    The treatment business and the problem origination businesses are hand in hand. The treatment business can always come out against the food producing businesses highlighting the issues with such vociferous volume that the businesses will have to rethink their strategies. Alas, that is not happening. Both are running their own businesses. Both know they are feeding of each other and both in turn feed of the individuals. The most shocking truth about wheat is the gluten. The wheat originally grown by our past generations did not have this element in large quantities as of now. The genetic blue print of wheat is changed and edited by multinationals to include more gluten in the produce, in turn making "soft" "chewy" bread. Why did they do so? Why didnt the consumers worry about questioning this practice. Well, one answer is in the farmer producing it. He is now not worried about the storage of it. The multinationals have found huge markets for all his produce. They are resistant to insects. They can be stored for a longer time. 

    So, if there are any issues arising out of this gene editing, the treatment industry will take care of it and will survive. This methodology of doing business is the same as how cancer cells do business. These cells dont produce energy the "correct" and "efficient" way. They do it the wrong way. They suck in lot of inputs and produce very little amount of energy. This makes them sick in turn. As an extension many will die. But these dead cells stay there. They disrupt already wrongly made up blood cells. There it is you have the perfect example of a tumor. So, what does the present medical profession do about it? Well, they dont know. They keep trying all sorts of modern gimmickry. They try to go the way, the genetically modified food is produced. They think that they can start manipulating the cancer cells to start working like healthy cells by trying to edit the genetic material of cells which make up the cancer cells.

But, the human genome is not a joke. People dont know the repercussion of editing one portion of the gene and replacing it with a different chemical formula. The same applies to gene editing of wheat. Gene editing might have given us wheat which has more gluten. But, we dont know how this is going to affect in the "synergistic" point of view of the entire gene. Now, getting back to gluten, it is clear that the human stomach cannot digest gluten. So, it is passed on to the intestines. There starts the complications. If the complications are so clear, why should we continue eating it. I dont see any reason whatsoever. This should be a prime reason to reduce this protein. Let the chapatis crumble. Let the bread be a little hard. Let the bread by a different color than white. 

 

     The gluten free group is a bigger fad. They take up the same wheat produced with the maximum possible gluten in them and chemically try to remove the gluten in it. Now, nobody is telling exactly what all nutrients get removed by carrying out this process of removal of gluten. Like we exactly dont  know the total effects of editing the wheat gene to produce more gluton, we exactly dont know what this de-glutenising process results in. So, suit yourself

    What is this obsession of human beings with white. The obsession is that white is associated with purity. With this, you can pass the most impure substance on earth, until it is white. Why are we not eating food as we were eating just 20 - 30 years ago. It is not late. The human race has to make a decision. All farmers dont farm with good intentions in their mind. Majority of the farmers have gotten used to just putting the seeds and seeing them grow. They just want the yield. It is like earth is a machine. No, sir, it is not. So, how do we make the farmers understand this. Well, start supporting farmers who are doing the right thing. Farmers are very susceptible to success stories. Make a success story of one farmer with ethical practices, you will see that others will follow.

    I for one dont think that stopping eating wheat, is going to do any major issues with the human body. Consult your dietician and spell out your wish and definitely there will be a positive answer. What about ones who cannot afford a dietician. What about people who cannot afford anything other than wheat. This is a very tricky situation. The problem here is the person cannot afford the treatment for the issues in his food. He will consume what he can afford, not what is healthier for him. So, whom do you turn in these situations. God, or the government which does the job of God on its behalf. Ensure that the food is produced in the most traditional manner. Ensure that research happens to store food in its most pristine form instead of converting it to some non-nonsensical chemical formula. It is not that the human should be modified to eat this modified food. Ensure that the food is at its pristine level. Forget about making it look pleasing. Whoever wants to have such food, can create a demand and many producers will answer. Let us keep the poor people away from this since they dont have options. As for people with options, it is left to them to choose what is better for them.

Save democracy with "Participative democracy"

    Many models have been designed to ensure that the elected representatives of the people in democracy represent the complete mix of the people they represent. Yes, that sentence was a mouthful. But, so is the word democracy just, by itself. Of late I have been intrigue by how the residents of huge apartments are running their own country. The apartment is a perfect example of a democratic crowd. The crowd can be extended to include secular based on its geographic location. It has all the problems of a small country. In a country like India, few of the apartment can house approx 150 families. That is a definitely a small district in few other countries. These apartments are managed by a participative democratic system which existed in ancient Greece. Which was the point of contention between Socrates and the state of Greece. This case of Socrates v/s the state of Greece is one of the most interesting court cases. Oh, I am getting carried away. This is the result of not planning your writing. However, let us continue with apartments.

    A lottery system is utilized to select representatives to head activities related to the upkeep and maintaining the day to day activities of the apartment. Nobody can escape from this participative democratic system of governing the apartment. For once, everybody is equal. For once all the citizens are to participate and help the elected representative in carrying out its duties. So, though, you are not the elected leader for a specific task, if you are supposed to help, then you have to. You are participating as a leader as well as a supporter. You are always "in" the daily polity of the apartment. You are participating in one way or the other. For once, it is everybodys damn responsibility to ensure the smooth functioning of the apartment. I am not going to go through the nitty/gritty of running an apartment. It is no less than running a small country.

    What I am suggesting is the implementation of this methodology in grass root governing in a democratic system. In a democratic system, the non participants are huge. Nearly 99.99% of the population. This makes this major population, alien to the working of the governing mechanism. This makes the governing mechanism take total undue advantage of the major population. This is the other sharp edge of the democratic system. This makes the majority population not participate in the day to day running of the country. So we have three classes in this majority. One which likes the present governors, one which hates it, one which doesnt care. There is another group which is part of the corruption or tries to take advantage of this system, though they know that what they do is hurting the majority of the population. These are pretty complicated. These mostly end up in the governing seat. So, the vicious circle repeats.

    It is time to repair democracy, instead of looking at other models. There are no other forms of governance which have the word freedom mentioned as  much as in a democratic system. The majority rule is a recent development. In the ancient greek times when, democracy was at its peak, "participative"  was the buzzword and citizens not participating were labelled "useless". Everybody has to know how to govern. Everybody knows how to govern. Everybody governs themselves. The apartments are running this model, even without knowing they are doing so. The term of the representatives is the same, approx, an year. However, there is one problem. Poor people were not involved, However, now we can include everybody. The grass level can be divided into smaller divisions particularly based on the population. This ensures that the representatives are not overwhelmed. This will be the case for the first few. Once everybody understands the concept, it will become common place. The representatives must have lived in that environment for a certain number of years, so that they represent the population better and understand the job at hand.

    There will always be people who are waiting for their turn. Everybody believes they will better the previous fellow. The present fellow does things, which he believes nobody can better. The representative has to be careful in all his decisions, since he will land up as a commoner after his term is over.

    This should work. I am excited. Whenever we had discussions regarding alternate forms of democracy among friends, the discussions shifted to other forms, except democracy. People go back in time to compare the good old times. When it comes to governing, I dont know why the present crop forgot the fantastic "participative" democracy from ancient Greece. So, you are asking me to develop it further. I will tell you, this is not a theoretical concept that is being put forth. This is a time tested and an in execution methodology. It has just to be implemented. So, what are we waiting for?

    The most important of all in any governance system is the ownership of the responsibilities. This has been so rare in the present majority system, wherein the elected candidate does not consider the vast minority whom he believes have not voted for him. But, in this case, the ownership comes from within, without anybody coercing. Though somebody is not in that chair, all the others who are not in that chair know that one day or the other they will land up in that chair. They will be compassionate with the present representative, which they hope to receive when they sit in that chair. This synergy between the leader and the team being led is so strong and fantastic, you have to be a part of that system to understand it. In the present majority setup, there is a certain dis-connect between the elected individual and the electors, which happens once in 5 years. With the present advancement in technology, 5 years is a very long time. Leadership change should happen every year, at the least. This keeps the leadership above the grassroots on their toes. 

    Every change in the grassroots brings with it, an aura of the elected individual, who has been seeing all things happening around him. Since he is a part of the receipience of the older system, he knows what things were done right and what were done wrong. He will first attack and try to resolve what he believes are being done wrong. It is like, the system is in sync with the rapid changes happening in the technological, political and the economical setup. With the present connectivity, the grassroots are connected, in, real time. It is very easy to borrow the "best practices" in one area and try to implement it in full or modify it to meet the particular place.  and a sense of commitment. 

  One more important aspect is the information on the candidate. In these closed circles, the particular individual will be know because of his past deeds. Or a new person can go about familiarizing the electorate since the size of the group is not as large as it is today. This makes the electorate more knowledgeable about the candidate. They will remember his every move. The duration is short and the electorate can correct their mistake at the earliest. Consider the situation now. Majority of the voters dont know the candidate. They vote for the political party. Now, once the candidate wins, he might land up in the opposite party. Now, the majority voted for the party to which the individual belonged. Now, the candidate has defected. He will now have to act according to the whims of the new party. Now, the voters have to wait for the next election to correct their mistake. By that time, people would have forgotten the past and would associate the candidate with the latest party he has joined. This is horse shit.

    The concept of making a quick buck and running away dont work because his family is a part of the system and all wrong decisions are going to affect him all the same. The election system should borrow from Estonia, since the electoral territory is now very small. This is perfect for both villages and cities. In this inter-connected world, it is difficult for anybody to be aloof. In fact, the aim of the system is not leave anybody aloof. It is to try and make everybody responsible for themselves and their surrounding environment. This is unlike a system, wherein decisions are taken in huge buildings and taken by the majority wins, not one with the representatives who really represent the grassroots. 

    Enough of everybody talking politics and staying away from it, thinking that it is a dirty job and has to be done by dirty people. It is like, everybody is thinking that the other fellow will do it. This is to bring everybody on the execution roll. Everybody is responsible. If something is wrong, a person who stays quite should face as much problem as he is vociferous about it. Yes, we cant wait for "the" person who knows how to do the "job". There is nobody who is "the" person to do the job. And Yes, Socrates, you are wrong.
 

The revolution, can start.

Why are people obsessed or made to obsess about culture

Of all the chains around the present humans, no chain is stronger than the chain of culture. Culture has grown to such a level that it "is" the way of life. It is the "benchmark" with which you compare all your actions and thoughts. Benchmarking your actions is ... but benchmarking your thoughts which in turn would result in your actions is the dangerous thing. The narrowing of ones thoughts by culture is stifling. 

     The freedom from the chains of culture can be best expressed by a person who lives his country and settles in another country. The initial freedom experienced by the individual, cannot be expressed. He love it, he relishes it, he compares it. he sees that the culture in that country is so different. He is forced to compare it. If the foreign culture even give a little leeway to the existing tight cultural chains around the individual, the individual feels euphoria. What if there is a place with pure anarchy and the individual lands up in this planet. What would be the result on the individual is an interesting case study, and we have to wait until we accidentally step into such a planet. So until then ......... 

     Why should an individual and the society behave in set ways for any action from any constituent of the society? Why should all the actions and activities be so strictly established. Why does culture change across groups of people in one single society? Why is there no common culture among all the humans? Why do individuals who go from an older culture be "relieved" when he lands in a country with a recent culture or a country in which the culture has not been made "dogmatic"? The feeling when an individual transforms to a culture on the other way round, all that relief will reverse to stifling. We have seen the evolution of right and wrong over the years. We have seen human sacrifice justified and the entire society feeling that is right. We have seen that slavery was also justified and in certain cultures it was found to be right. Right and wrong have also evolved, but there is no right and wrong freely available for an individual. Should the individual not have his own morals, his ethics, his behaviors?

    Cultures are giving birth to robots. But the thing is there are certain individuals who have a feel that this is happening but somehow have a different explanation for following the culture. This group of individuals are more dangerous. Because these people have reasons for why the culture is so, and that reason is never upgraded. But continues to get more "dogmatic". If there are people who want to question, they will be termed impure and alienated. Once this is done the idea and the questions which arose in that individual dies with him. So, we have to wait several generations for another individual to come up with the same sets of questions and may be solutions. 

    The change in culture over the years have been brought about by bright individuals who had the grit and the knowledge of changing the perception of the entire race, while many more tried their best to hold on to the classic culture. However, the present days with un-paralleled information flow we have barriers which have not been seen over the entire human past, that is the number who want status quo has increased and have become vociferous because people can now read and write. This reading and writing ability has been turned on its heads by powerful people and have started to use this ability in controlling people. 

    Culture is the bottom line of all the changes over the history of a particular group. However, the changes, ideas have been weighted with the more weighty ones overruling the lessor weighed ideas, though they may be better. The same strategy is being used now. The more weighted idea is weighed by the reach it has. The more the reach the more the weight. So, do i suggest that all individuals with similar ideals be grouped together. I would say yes here, but we are talking about the most intelligent animal on the planet. 

    The individual is not the same tomorrow. Tomorrow his thought process might change something in his belief dictionary which does not warrant his stay with the present group. This does not stop any other individual with the thought process of this group join this as on date. However, ......... Well, you are spoiling the joy of anarchy. No, I am stressing anarchy in its purest form. You cannot tell that anarchy has to follow rules. If you follow that you will end up with another America. If we follow pure anarchy will we end up as our pre-historic society? Is that good? Is that the best? Will that save this planet from extinction? 

 

My rants on the sars-cov-2 pandemic

Disclaimer: The words below are "my" rants. I am not a Doctor, chemist or a  Biologist. I am an Engineer. So, there may be mistakes. Do your homework like I have done mine. I dont vouch for authenticity of the matter in the links provided.

     Plenty has been written about the birth and spread of Covid 19. Plenty more than any other pandemic the earth has ever seen. There are already books on the origins and the spread of the virus. They also speak of the spineless governments of the world. The pandemic has had its share of false news and conspiracy theories ranging from 

1. The virus was already existing 

2. It is the same as the normal cold virus 

3. Pharma companies along with the governments have blown it out of proportion

4. Pharma companies wanted to move the people away from usual way of administering medicines to RNA/DNA medicines 

5. Some other businessmen wanted to reduce the population of the world 

6. Pharma industry was not getting enough grants from the governments of the world to shift medicines to RNA/DNA based and ....... 

https://www.livescience.com/common-cold-coronaviruses-t-cells-covid-19-immunity.html 

    The above link tries to explain why the sars-cov-2 virus does not impact certain people. It also talks about our immune system and how it gets trained by one variant of a similar virus and can produce the necessary actions required to nullify the effects of the virus. So, what about a human who has not contacted any related virus. Well, as per the link, that particular person is at risk. If that is so, Americans normally had a vaccine every year for the influenza virus and yet they are one of the most affected countries in terms of percentage of death and infections. First thing is the influenza and the covid virus are of a different class. The antibodies developed for the influenza virus will not(may not) help in fighting the covid 19 variant. 

https://www.britannica.com/story/what-is-the-difference-between-influenza-and-covid-19u 

There, lets us stop the discussion regarding the similarities between them. What about the class of corona virus, were they already existing? Yes. As per the link below 

https://www.healthline.com/health/coronavirus-types

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2021/01/covid-19-will-likely-be-with-us-forever-heres-how-well-live-with-it/

     There have been two well known and documented class of "corona" virus. When we talk about corona virus, we are talking about a class of virus, with a spiked protein cover around the viral payload. These two instances have been contained by isolation and quarantine. These were not spread by asymptomatic humans. If we already know about the corona virus and we contained the previous two, how did we end up in a global pandemic. 

    This can be attributed to the carelessness of the governments of the world. The governments governed by the corporations decided that the aviation industry cannot be stopped. They decided that, the best way to cover this up is to remain silent. May be in many other cases, it might have worked. However, it did not work out in this case. When all the nationalist/jingoist mindsets have been satisfied, the news was allowed into the open. 

    By now SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes covid 19 was taken everywhere across the globe. The main attribute for this wide spread is that the asymptomatic people were the major spreaders. This aspect of this variant, is what makes it stand apart in the corona series. The damage by the viral load are very similar and attack the respiratory system, the most, with other aspects being discovered as we move ahead in time. If the virus spread was isolated at origin, like the previous two cases, we could have stopped the spread and this blog post wouldn't have existed. 

    Time is a *^%^h. This would be one more instance of a corona virus isolated in a particular geographic place and affect a few 100 people. It is very difficult to gauge the importance of an individual in this business minded planet. It is like this planet has been outsourced and business has to run at any cost, even if the last human is erased. It is like the next batch of humans are toiling somewhere else in a similar manner and all the business will shift to the next planet after the end of the last human on this planet. 

    The lockdowns, or worldwide isolation and quarantine appeared like an eye wash and half hearted, last resort plan. People were moving and the virus was already taken to all the countries across the globe. This isolation and quarantine works only if applied on a scale taken up on the previous known variants of the corona virus. Lockdowns are "face savers" for the politicians and the businessmen. There is no scientific/economical backing for a global lockdown except a political/business perspective. 

    Now, let us come to the treatment. I dont know why the medical companies gave up on treatment and focused only on a vaccine. I dont know the logic/economical aspect of this decision and we dont have a treatment as of date. But, vaccines have been cleared and have been administered to lakhs based on studies on thousands in a very short time. Majority of the vaccines are like proof of concept and highly advanced science of gene editing and precise chemistry of RNA. Reading about the RNA/DNA vaccines, is like reading a fantasy book. It reads like science fiction. If we can do this much for producing a vaccine, how difficult is to use the same technology to do something bad. Dont get me started by denying this. We are not far away, wherein, DNA/RNA jabs with blueprints of all the known viruses will be injected into the human body. It is like an attack dictionary on Missile warning systems. The approach for these vaccines is to generate antibodies for the spike protein. Now, this approach can fail once there is a change in this, in a drastic way. Yes the virus can mutate in many ways. What if, the spike mutates?

    The medical industry took this route by telling that the traditional way of making a vaccine by killing the virus and then injecting this into the human body is time consuming. This is totally %#^*^t. We already have vaccines made from this method and also cleared for use. The major advantage with this approach is we are giving a hint to our immune system about nearly all the properties of this virus. So, this would generate antibodies for many of the chemical combinations present in the virus. 

    The RNA/DNA methodology of making medicines is a great method for big pharma for getting a tight grip on the medicines. This will nearly kill the generics industry. Two recently cleared DNA/RNA vaccines make a statement that the DNA/RNA in the human cells are not touched. Can a normal human, know whether this is true? If DNA/RNA is the methodology of administering medicines, then, governments need to wakeup and ensure that enough competition is fostered and all the developments are available in public domain. It is not wrong, even if the governments start investing in state owned research facilities and upgrade them to the same capabilities as big pharma. In this way we can ensure that there is a lot of testing and availability of these advances are available to the common man. 

    The most interesting take from this pandemic is the polarization of people across the world. The main reason is that big pharma is not good at explaining the cause and the effect. It is like explaining light to the last animal in evolution which had not felt light around it. Our belief systems, our blind beliefs, our limited education, our limited brain usage, our limitation as a human being, has showcased beautifully. It is very interesting to listen to all the conclusions and the reason for these conclusions regarding the pandemic. No two individuals in the same home share the same idea about the pandemic. Many people are convinced that Europeans and Americans are dying of Covid 19 because their immune system is not as strong as their Asian counterpart. This class is forgetting that it originated in Asia and the highest number of deaths happened in Asia. This would have made Russel peters so angry that he would have to change the portion of his standup comedy where he talks about an instance of him landing at Mumbai Airport for the first time and welcomed with smell of shit. 

    We have politicians feeling for the dead, at the least. No corporation has stopped working or repented for any death of their workers. The politicians feel for the dead but are not ready to consider universal healthcare as an option. What is the use of feeling for the dead, when you did not feel for the living? This is the same in all businesses. The plentiful Human resource at its disposal make the business not at all concerned about the people dead with a known reason. People die every minute for a plenty of reasons, but when they die for a reason which the whole world knows may happen is what makes the death more sick. In fact majority of the work available in the world is broken to such an extent that you just have to plugin a new human to do that job. This is what is making the corporations not to take any serious thought towards the pandemic. 

    The medical profession is also at its most liberal best. Any complication can be labelled a "covid 19" case. Stop, dont draw your daggers, this statement was for medical practitioners who have done it or on planning to do it. How am I making this statement so confidently. Well, nobody is allowed to see or touch the patient. He is packed completely and burnt without any second opinion. So, what I am telling is it is very much possible, has been done and can be done. 

    There is one more issue regarding non believers. They are so pissed off by the care taken by the people who believe that there is a virus. Like the non believers who throw the caution to the wind, there is a population who believe that yes, we have a pandemic at hand. Of course there is another population which is exactly in between. They wear their mask below the chin. Never was their hands. These people will wear the mask when they hear some bad news regarding people whom they knew. It will be momentary, maybe for a few days. These people are not bothered about the complete believers or complete non-believers. The problem is with the non-believers. They will make fun of the middlemen and the complete believers alike. The believers will not make fun of the non-believers but are worried that this group will get them affected. They believers are angry on the other two groups. 

    The reason for the hue and cry created by the spread of sars-cov-2 is that, the human body might not detect it as a virus and fight it with enough fervor similar to a virus database it maintains. As time passed we got to know that a major portion of humanity had this virus in their immune database. However, one more issue which caused such widespread attention and lockdown is the fact that asymptomatic people were spreading it. And the virus once in the air, lived a very long time. All this information led to the situation we are today. 

    The good news is that, contrary to initial belief, the human body did fight the virus and many people did develop immunity. Now, the vaccines are here to help people with lesser immunity by adding the info of this virus into their database. This is the reason, I am of the opinion that recipients of the vaccine should be checked for antibodies and the situation of the immune system for this virus before vaccinating them. If they have already developed sufficient amount of immunity, it is of no use to vaccinate them. And we dont know what would be the result of such an action. But, nowhere this is being tested. In fact, every person to be vaccinated should be checked thoroughly for his medical history and compare it with the side effects of the vaccine. Based on satisfactory study and heuristics, the person should be suggested for vaccination. 

 

    Proteins are made of amino acids. And the "some" amino acids on the spike of sars-cov-2 virus are similar to the ones found on the placenta. In fact "some" of these amino acids can be found in other proteins in the human body. A vaccine based on this protein might induce antibodies against the protein with "some" similar amino acids. There is no proof for this. Hence there is no proof to stat that a similarly designed vaccine will induce antibodies attacking the placenta and in turn render woman infertile. There is no proof for this. 

    The human genome is made of DNA. The mRNA vaccine is not supposed to enter the nucleous of the cell. The DNA based vaccines which put the DNA of the spike protein into the cell are not supposed to interfere with the Human DNA. The chances of the vaccine altering the DNA is nearly nil. We dont know what will be the result of that small chance and we dont have any proof if it might happen at all. 

     Whatever be the truth, The wearing of re-usable masks have man advantages. During your commute you are going to filter out at least some of the dust. It will protect your face from the cold breeze. And of course, you are going to be protected from other viruses floating in the air. The other aspect we are practicing is what is difficult to maintain and that is physical distancing. But it is also has many advantages. This will avoid crowded meetings and only the required personnel will be called. This will require plenty of advance planning and to the point discussions. And please kindly use re-usable masks. The planet is already strained to the max with the plastic piling up. 

Privacy in the present world

Privacy: When people listen to this word they normally associate with privacy from their parents, siblings or their friends. So, when somebody tells they want some "privacy" they mean "me" time and thats it. This is the definition of many of the people. The big companies and the state are making use of this mentality of people to generalize privacy and to re-instate this definition of privacy. So what you get to maintain your privacy, Your phone unlocks only with your finger print, so none of your family can use it. If it was a code maybe your parents would ask for your code and you would be pressurized to give it when you are away. Now , you have the finger print scanner and when you are away the phone is a brick which nobody can access. You have got your privacy. Congratulations.

Now, while your phone is locked and seemingly a brick to your father and yourself is more live than you. It is sending out and receiving data continuously. it is after all a computer and computers as you know are not tired. The amount of horse power in the present devices is enormous and all this is put to use 24 hours a day. Not even a second is left. When you are not using your phone facebook is busy getting the text your entered into whatsapp before your shoot send. Because before you shoot send the text and all other information you want to share is UN-encrypted. So now facebook has that data which you wanted to send through your favorite encrypted free messaging system. Though the founders have departed, the juggernaut rolls on. Of course facebook knows to whom you sent the data. So, you are basically using facebook whole over again in the guise of encryption.

You will definitely ask me why take that example. Well that nearly covers majority of the users on the planet outside the apple ecosystem. Now let us come to the make believe elite system which use the apple ecosystem. I always believed that apple had strong business ethics, not moral ethics. Like their hardware and software is elite and unique to their Eco-system. They will sell their devices at a premium and what the user does with that is not their concern. This I think was happening with all their desktop and laptop offering before the iphone. With the iphone came the moral conundrum. Actually the iphone to start with did not create this issue. The issue was created by google with its android ecosystem. Here was a company which is going to make money by selling user data. By targeting users with ads related to their tastes. How do you do it? Get the user to accept a complicated user agreement before you can access the device. It did not stop at ads. It progressed to speech recognition, AI and so on.

Now the thing is data became important. The costliest commodity on the planet next to the rarest element on the planet. The same strategy which the printing companies did with their cartridges. Though the printers could be given free since the users had to buy a physical product, Here, the phones could not be given for free. They are complicated computers. In this case the users are f*&d all ways in all the holes. You buy a premium phone and you will be giving away more data. It is like having the cake and the icing too. Your phone is pinging data every mill-second. It is pinging data to all corners of the world.

You are now having an app ecosystem to bring you out of this mess. Well, these apps are all built out of user contributions. The phone makers can alter the operating system itself to bypass all these apps which try to stop these pingings. So, if your phone is connected to the public network with the present crop for smart phones, you are pinging data. Have you not been surprised to see a link or a post related to "masturbation" after watching porn on your phone. Your were asking what are they going to do with the data. Now, it has been answered. This is one of the simplest way intelligence is taken out of your data consumed an exported from your device. Just imaging the amount of data collected through out the world and then feed it to "Big data" to make it even bigger.

Privacy is the context  have been talking in the previous paragraphs. it is not what is described in the first para. The corporations have moved from text and binary data to voice and video. It is difficult to know whether the mic is activated through out the life of your phone or only switches on when you watch porn. And while doing so, it might the device might switch on the front facing camera also. Just see how embarrassing it might be. You might be talking about an ailment or your friends ailments or you might talk about buying something. You might do a search for a particular ailment a product. It is recorded against your id. the corporations can combine it with your data sets and come out with the perfect ad or will feed you more of what you talked. You watch a thriller in Netflix, you are offered an unknown number of the same genre. You will be shown links related to them, but your are their unsuspecting user and you will click through it. This relation is generated by the the data they have collected from the whole world. Though you feel UN-related this link will re-inforce whatever you were searching for.

All corporations now hire behavioral scientists, data researchers who help them with their strategies. So, how do we get out of it? Do we want to get out of it? Are we happy in our walled paradise? Do we value our private data? Do we thing we have nothing to hide? Do we think we dont have anything of value? Do we think commenting and up-voting of posts on social media yields nothing to anybody?Is convenience a better trade-off for individual privacy? Is an individual of no value? Is an individual only a data generator? Is an individual not a human? Will the individual stand up for his rights?

Individuals or collectives in business

          So it is that time of the human civilization wherein, the human race has to question the human like status given to the production conglomerates. It is that time again to prioritize individuals over the profit making collective. All the times when the going is good there are managerial strategies to maximize the collective for profit. That means that all the while the collective are working for maximum profits for the shareholders. Do not get me started on Non-profits. Should the government which does not or is not supposed to work on the principle of profit maximization bail out the individuals or the collective called companies.

       By bailing out the companies the government is telling that they are going to ensure the continuity of the jobs for the people working for the collective. Instead in times like these why should not the government turn to supporting the individuals and ask the collective to not worry about the individuals for the time being and instead ask for a detailed report of their finances. Check out the profits, turn over and the number of people being supported.

       I know, you tell me that the collectives pay their taxes. Would you consider the salaries paid to the employees also count as taxes? I don't know but that has been the cases for many of the biggest companies. The world's biggest collectives pay nearly zero in taxes. But they do declare profits. The fascinating thing is with these companies the PBT and the profits are sometimes the same. Even when the going is good. Now, when the going is good how can the collectives not pay taxes though the proprietor's worth goes on to attain the entire worth of countries.

        World has provided numerous examples where this mistake has been highlighted and every time in the past they have been bailed out. Instead of bailing them out, let the present proprietors become paupers if that is what they tell they will become and use the bail out money to support newer entrepreneurs to step up their game. This will be game changer strategy which will put all the traditional ideas that they will be bailed out though they have not paid any taxes. The demand for goods is always there. It is just a matter of satisfying it from a different collective.

       Why should the government bail out individuals? Well, because worldwide the majority of the taxes correctly paid comes from the individuals. Hence the individuals have the first right of being bailed out. So, this much of intervention is required from the government? This would not be required if all the agencies do their job of looking up the health of the collective based on the audits. But auditors themselves have escaped punishments for their intentional miscalculations. So, the government has to pay for wrong governance. But is the government actually paying for wrong governance. No, the individuals are paying. So is it not justifiable that the individuals have to be paid first, during bailout.

        It is pathetic to see that the collectives cant survive a couple of months, with all that number crunching, strategic plans and what not. Time and again there have been examples and none of the collectives have learnt because they have learnt that they will always be bailed out. The governments have set a wrong precedent. Isn't it time to change this now?. Yes it is. Lets do it. Let us change the strategy for a start. As Donald Trump declared "What can we loose". So much is lost and in the process of getting lost.

Franz kafka's "The trial" between the indivdual and the society

There was a sudden void in my reading habits. I had gobbled up all the hardy boys, the nancy drews, alistair mcleans, agatha christies, desmond bagleys, eric van lustbaders, Mulk raj anands, sherlock holmes, Dalgaleish, Asterixes, tintins, phantoms, spidermans and what not. There was a certain appetite. I just gobbled up books. Sometimes finishing them the same afternoon and taking them back to the library only to be informed that the books can be exchanged only the next day. So I have to wait out the whole night before I could bring a new book. Buying books was out of the question. So to ensure that the book i want is available the next day, I used to misplace the books to my favorite location, the most dusty part of the library. To this day I don't know the books which were kept there. This place was my insurance. I would walk up the next day to that specific location take the book which I had hid and exchange it.

The community library run by the government was my favorite place in the whole world. To this day I am shocked that the library knew the tastes of their audience so well. Newer books would be a cross between the popular demand, the critics collection and topics spelt out by the government as standard. With a paltry strength, the library was well maintained and the classification was consistent. If you had a doubt the staff were very supportive and they knew your tastes exactly when you are a regular. There were books which were returned that day and not yet stacked. I was allowed inside this chamber to chose whatever has just been returned. I still cherish those memories.

It was now time for my professional education. The books are different, they are to be read in a different manner. They are to be read with emphasis on application. Engineering is a different word for "applied" pure sciences. It was very difficult to carry out my hobby reading. This period put my reading habits on the back burner. Then while commuting to work by my car, I was spending nearly 3-4 hour for commute. This is the time now, I have recognized for bringing my reading habit back. I was never so happy. Over this non-reading period there have been plenty of books on my to-read list. So started without the top most. P G wodehouse. While buying them, my eyes fell on the Franz kafka section. I was always coming across the term "kafkesque". I associated with so many things. All things particularly dark. I thought my reading habits will re-start with one from Kafka. Without knowing anything about the stories they were telling I picked up a random kafka book. The one I picked up was "The trial". What follows below is my thoughts on this book. There may be spoilers. Your are warned.

The feeling of reading the first few pages gave me a feel of deja-vu. I remember an Alistair Mclean book where the first few pages are used to describe a gun with so much detail that it transcends the physical gun to something with its own life and then at the end of the chapter, the protagonist tells that "This gun is aimed at me". The first chapter of The trial gave me the same rush. It was a jolt. It hit me directly. The first page, the first para was as harsh on me as on the protagonist. The novel is a celebration of the complexity of our societal system. It mocks the system and shows how complex it is to understand the system. The division of labor is laborious in our societal system that nobody knows much beyond what he is born to. I remember I ridiculed the life of a mosquito, wherein it dies within a range of a few kilometers. The human life also has become the same. There is division of labor at work and there is a specific role you are to play in the societal setup. This is brought out ever so elegantly with all the characters. Every character thinks itself important in the large order of things. But nobody knows beyond a very specific limit about the broader prospect. The people in the higher echelons also know only what they are supposed to know. The highest in this bureaucratic setup also only knows only what he is supposed to know. This is a just a result of the complexity of keeping the human race in a bound setup. Does the author suggest anarchy then? No he does not suggest anything. He just holds a mirror to the complex societal setup we humans have developed. Nobody has a mind of his own. All the actions/thoughts are suggested by the people around above and below. The individual is dead, always. In fact, when anybody tries to be his own, he is dead. Until he fits in the larger scheme of things everything is fine. When you start looking out of your work, your friends, colleagues, peers you see a different world. When you try to see beyond what you are supposed to then you die on your own or the system will kill you by showing how out of place you are.

There have been reviews of the book which tell that the author visualizes a totalitarian regime. This is far from the truth. The author is talking about our societal setup whatever be the system you use. Be it socialism, communism, democracy and other theories. All work on a whim that few people know what is good for the human largess. And nothing can be far away from truth. Yes, it is dark. Yes, it is chilly, Yes, it talks about how complicate the human mind is, how dark it is and how it always tries to break free. Yes, it talks about how the societal system tries to imprison the human mind putting it into a conundrum. The author wanted all his works burnt. Was he afraid to that he may disturb the societal setup with this. Normally all authors talk about how the bureaucratic societal setup is so bad. Nobody has brought to the fore how every individual is in the same mental situation. How everybody do their part, in ignorance to complicate the setup. The trial is where the author puts the societal setup on trial and the individual loses and the society wins.

But the, would we be better off in an anarchist system. We don't know, yet. It is very difficult to visualize something so big, bigger than figuring out and imagining galaxies, while still living inside the system. Can you get out of the system. Now, what does that even mean...........

Is the society killing individualism

society is a collective of rules, laws, culture and what not which have been cultivated all along its existence. Yes they do differ in their rules, laws etc. But, they have a common thread of hosting a collection of human beings bonded by rules, laws and practises. So, all individuals who adhere to all these blah blah end up being an "integral" part of that society and he becomes "the" society taking them forward for the next generation.

Now, where does the individual stand here. Can an individual do whatever he wants? Can an individual comment on the rules, laws and culture? Can an individual have his own rules, laws and culture. Whatif an individual cant fit in the societal setup? How will the society treat them? Why doesnt the society be recognised by their individuals. Why doesnt the society tell stories of "every" individual. Why is the societal system so dogmatic in pulling all the individuals into following its rules? Is the societal setup afraid of it being destroyed and the makers afraid of losing their "individuality"?

Does the human race owe its loooooong existence to this hardwired societal setup formed by a few "individuals" who framed all those rules? Will the individual ever get his due? When will one size fits all concepts change? Is a tramp not important in the societal setup? Is a beggar not included in the societal setup. Why has money become the sole requirement to announce individuality. Why cant a musician be one just like that? Why should he learn the rules of the music set by predessors. Music being a continium, is also restricted and put behind the bars of rules, what of the individual? Why should a grownup be one always? Why is this burden on him to follow a set rules for a grownup. Why should the children act like what we like. Why shouldnt the children do what they want. If they want to play in the mud, then let it be so. Why is everybody here through generations affixed to a certain procedural life? Why should the doctor be at his clince only. Cant we have a doctor who creates music in the night and he learns only by living at the morgue? How will the society take him? I am not talking about the "best" doctors and musicians, I am talking about all the individuals wanting to do music or treat human beings in their own way beyond allopathy, homeopathy and other set rules?

This exactly is the problem plaguing every field of education in the society. Every education is given out in so much a planned way that nearly all are equaly good or bad. There is no creativity to create the same creativity. When will every individual feel the whole expanse of the universe not the space in the apartment or city or country or continent or planet or galaxy or .......Why arent individuals fighting this very limiting access to the freeing or losing your mind.? Why cant we just walk on and on without worrying of food, death, life, when will we know what is really around us, except air and light.

When will all the individuals freak out, when will everybody be mad, when will everybody be living beings, when will we know that we have one of the heaviest brains in this planet, when will we honor all individuals along with ourselves ..........................

When will we "Be"........................

Three(The only) pillars of life

Job, society and sex are the summations of the problems in life. Are they problems or they themselves signify life? Can life be reduced to those three words? I believe todays lives of people are the summation of their actions and interactions with those three pillars. Oh, you give a damn to what I think, ha, alright. I still have to proceed with my train of thoughts here. So, do we have the definition of life here? I think so. This definition will define the lives of the 99.99 percent of people. If you give a thought to your calender of events from your waking up today and waking up the next day, you will agree with me. In our childhood we see our parents to the same thing. We continue to do so and the same will be taken up by our offsprings. How many times has your child told that when I grow up I will buy "this" or I will do "that". The priorities regarding the three pillars are already set. As time goes by people who do match their "plans" or "wishes" do continue to lead a mundane life by framing incremental improvements to their existing "stable" setups. People who lose it down the line, become the scum by accepting defeat or try to take huge leaps with bizzare ideas joining the mundane lot or hang somewhere in between based on the success/failure of their ventures.

Let us take the job factor. What is a job? Is the point of job to make money only? Is it to get acceptance in the society? Is it to lead a succesful sexual intent? Why is it that everybody should do a job? Human mind cannot do the same job with the same interest even in the second time. Let it be an iteration of science experiment. Why do we do it? Is it because we know only that Job? Is it because we are not "interested" in the next one? Is it because the other job is hard? Is it because we have an inferiority or superior complex of doing a particular job? Why do we do it? How many people in the world can tell they love their jobs? How many people have the capability of doing other jobs than whatever they are doing now? How many people will be given an opportnity of doing their dream jobs which changes every day, every hour or every minute? Will the world sustain such?

Society, Wow, I have yet to find a more encompassing word leaving "dark energy" which can have a thuderous blow to any dictionary maker. The word society is complicated just because of the number of humans on this planet. When humans just ate what they grew and lived as small herds moving around for favorible habitats this was not much of a concern. Now a days the societal setups collapse for the most idiotic reasons. A wrong, leaky tax collection system can bring down one of the oldest societies, un-believable. How much do we know about societies? Do we have the time to change the thought cycle of the individual components of the society. Is the society really representing the collection of individuals and their thoughts? Is the society forcing the individuals to be so and so? Is it individuals making the society or society making individuals. Which process is correct. Is the society, a lab, for the filthy rich? Is the democrati societal the most nearest to the perfect society?


Does the act of sex in the human society means reproduction only? Is it a human psyche which is not researched in detail? This is one psyche available in all human beings, ofcourse, with varied degrees of importance given to it. But it is acommon trait available in all. Is it an act of releasing unwanted energy. Is it what humans are born to do and the other two pillars only facilitate it. Lot of researches have told that this particular trait is very important. But no study has told that changing this trait is possible or they have not explained the consequences of such an act, society wide.

What a remarkable cycle these three pillars represent. They form a totally self sustained cycle which just gobbles up any changes introduced into this system and make those changes vanish ever so smoothly leaving the researcher in an endless loop.

You knew all this, ......hmmm...., Ok,...So,...Go on with "life"......

Governments, Anyone?

The public network is full of posts, views and counter views. If we give a closer look at the various posts in general, covering nearly all the topics available to mankind and closely analyze the comments, views and counter views, we see that anybody is commenting on anything. That means that everybody knows about or wants to know or has framed his views without knowing anything. The latter's views are normally based on the generalization of the present subject with his specialization. This gives us the conclusion(?) that everybody knows about everything and everybody are capable of giving their own views about everything. Is it? Shall we generalize a little further and tell there is nothing any "body" can do to change the views, Inertia? Does this mean there is no need for any "body" to tell us what to do and what not to? Does this mean we know what is expected from every "body" without anybody explicitly stating it? Does this mean that we have ceased to be taught or we can "manage" ourselves? In other terms is there no need for us to be governed by an elite few? By extrapolating a little further shall we state it in more dangerous terms "We don't need governments"?

OMG, Blasphemy!!!!!!? or would it be a relief? Do governments govern the borders of their political control or borders were born out of the capabilities of the local governments? These governing bodies can be traced back.... previous post... Social adjustments gave way to profit motives in the guise of optimizations they reached a crescendo. After several iterations of societal setup we ended up with classifying the people based on the tasks they were doing and then gradually several tasks were made more important than others and in turn, we had classes increasing by importance. All of a sudden people doing few tasks were more equal than other equal people down the societal setup. As people were grouped based on tasks, the initial industries were also based on the same setup. The initial optimizations was from the artisans themselves by grouping themselves together. The higher groups/classes saw opportunity here also. They wanted to increase the size of the groups so that they could have the advantages of scale. There is the seed of today's large corporations.

Every "body" is attached and dependent on some corporations directly or indirectly. The corporations tell what is expected of every person attached to them. When these controls were not enough, corporations turned to a third party, the governing bodies to bind all the people to corporations. As though, people were born only for this, to work for corporations. There are very rare occasions wherein people have led their life without their umbilical cord not attached to the corporations. Such people will immediately be knighted and an image created wherein it will be told that all others cannot become him or think like him. Now, they have only one person with the "free" attitude while others stay enslaved thinking that they are too "norm" to reach that stature.

The governing bodies(governments henceforth), tell people they should work for corporations to fulfill their worth of being born. The other people whose mentality and attitudes don't suit this labyrinth of laws are labeled unstable or great whichever suits them better.

So, what is the problem now? Governments frame laws to help corporations and corporations employ people, what is wrong. The thing is this system is prepping artificial number ones. If any individual does have the real vision of the society, he will grow up and build better corporations with better hold on the governments. So, the society is being prepared in such a way that if there is anybody against it, he will be treated to the high in the society so that he will become one among the oppressors or else he will vanish into oblivion.

Thing is, the educational level has gone up. Information is available at the finger tips. Anybody wants to know about the rigveda they are welcome to do so. They want to understand Einstein's work they are free to do that also. People know what is expected of them. They know to maintain equilibrium in the world. They know that the number of java programmers have exceeded the requirement. They do suitable adjustments. They make true the basic law of nature, that of "equilibrium". Now it is the time to dictate the expectations from the corporations as well as the governments. Everybody wants to make a difference to the world. Though many of them don't show they have that latent feeling towards nature. Provided an opportunity, they would do miracles for the betterment of the whole world. They would do better than send some food packets to the under-developed countries which feed all the necessary raw materials required for the materialistic life of developed countries.

Of course there would definitely be ideals which would be beyond comprehension to the society and in the same vein society would be incapable of convincing that they are wrong(wrong, either might be). Anomalies do exist and exist they should. It is like the floating point math. Nothing in the world is discrete.

Now, what if, nobody is governing them, ie, there are no governments. just imagine. People move about freely, like minded people pool their ideas irrespective of the borders/languages/caste/color. The same applies to the anomaly group of the existing societal setup. If the anomaly groups argues and convinces the regular part of the society, they will grow, otherwise, there is no way they can come into their own. Why, because, they don't have an enemy now. There were people unhappy with governments/corporations. What are they unhappy about, high rise buildings, no. They are unhappy about "people" running these establishments. This minority is telling the majority how they should lead their life. The 1% of the people are defining the word "intelligence" for the remaining 99%.

You can now argue with me that the majority of the governments formed are democratic. But, we all know the pitfalls of democracy. The person elected by 51% of the people will decide their fate as well as the fate of the remaining 49% who did not vote for him. This is a most theoretical example in a democratic setup. There have been instances where people have won elections by getting only 10% to 20% of the votes. People voting in a democracy have one more constraint, that they have to chose the best of the worst. So we do elect somebody, because, that is the essence of democracy. Yo don't vote, you are missing the whole point. If at all, you give an option for none of the above, in the ballot paper, what are you going to do if the majority of the votes are for this option. what if it is a minority? Oh, my god, Democracy.

Why shouldn't people go about their business without any governing body? Will the huge corporations themselves run their local governments. The most important and deciding factor here is the military. For a situation, wherein, we don't have governments, the first step is to de-militarize the entire world. Now you will tell me the dark forces will take over. You also will definitely tell me that all this is going to happen only over a bloody revolution. That was easy to tell. That was an obvious answer from anybody since the beginning of this subject.

At this time, I would like to know how many people in the wold would like to take to arms when all that the world wants is an equilibrium state, wherein, everybody does his own thing. What about people who know to only handle arms? How will they make their living in this situation.

All the governing bodies in the world was not formed in a day. They were formed because a need was created for their forming and we were "convinced" of that need. Once we were convinced of that need we had to accept the result. Now with the information age upon us, wherein information is generated and assimilated by everybody, do we need to be governed? We know what we can and what we do best. Why should be try to fit ourselves. How would it be if the world expanded and adjusted to us? Awesome. How many Einsteins would we have? Cant tell, because, we have not tried it. We have always complained that the present society is a one size fits all scene.

We now talk about mass customization. When we can go that extra mile for non-living things to suit us, why are we neglecting the same for people. Come one. Cant we remodel the society to embed customization. Each his own. Was it too much an ask?

Eliminate the borders, eliminate the governing bodies, Bring in self help groups, bring in voluntary lead or led individuals and wait for the planet to reach an equilibrium. What, what did I hear? communism, socialism, No, No, I don't want to hear any of it. They are all based on governance. They are but different styles of governance withe varying amount of freedom for the individuals and society as a whole. Will the corporations die? No. The corporations needed will survive. The apt people capable of doing that particular job will position themselves. Everybody would rush to 5 star hotels/resorts? Yes, maybe. But it will not survive. Somebody has to work/pay for the upkeep. People now are smart enough and know they cannot be made sheep once again by pigs and wolves. They know everybody's contribution is of importance. Everybody's voluntary trivial and non-trivial contributions are the requirements for making a truly equilibrium/chaotic situation instead of a non-voluntary controlled situation.