Profiteering from vaccines funded by tax payers money

    Majority of the governments funded the research and development of the vaccines which have yielded positive results. The first thing to talk here is that the governments money is the tax payers money. Whatif the investments made by the government did not yield results? Well, the funding from for the various companies would have evaporated. All the infrastructure developed as a consequence would have been wasted. However, majority of the vaccines funded have been succesful. Lucky taxpayers, Ha. Let us now see what is happening after this success. Now, the corporations want to make profit out of it. 

    Either the governments are naive or are in bed with these corporations. When the government agreed to bear all the risks of failure, cant the government add another clause for success? The clause for success would be to produce and sell the vaccines on cost of production and distribution only. The distribution, can again be taken up by the government, if the corporations feel that it is not strong point. So, the cost of production of the vaccine should be the selling price of the vaccine.

    However, the corporations and governments have different ideas. The corporations, particularly pharmaceuticals are seeing a cash cow. Majority of the vaccines are based on some information of the crown of the virus. As the virus updates the constituents of the crown, the information provided by the vaccine into the body becomes outdated. So, for every major mutation wherein the chemical formula of the crown changes in a major way, the human body cannot identify it as a virus, so the corporations are free to now produce an updated vaccine with this updated chemical structure. This can be an ifinite loop. This money source will become something like water, which is abundantly available and available whenever you are thirsty. 

    Why am I now talking corporations and governments, Well, that is the correct way. In fact you can combine both these terms and you will not find any difference at all. Let me give you an example. One vaccine vendor states the cost of vaccine in a particular country. When there is a backlash from the public, what does the government do? Well it decided to absorb certain portion of the price stated by the corporation. This decision was taken in split second. Why, elections are under way and it can have an adverse effect on the results. No communication happened between the government and the corporation. No discussions held. Well, is the public happy. Yes, why not? But, this is not as easy as it appears. You see, the government does not receive money from the gods. Whatever, the government has decided to absorb is the money from the tax payers. It is as good as paying what the corporation was asking.

Now, what is the point of investing and supporting the entire excersize of design and development of the vaccine with public money and the same is sold to the public on profit. It is not wrong, if you have developed a comfort product. In this case you have produced a vaccine. This particular vaccine should be out of the profit strategy. You first ensure that you have enough people on the planet. Corporations and goverments dont exist in vaccum. They are agian people. But as the famous phrase goes "..Some people are more equal..". 

    The reason for profit has been touted as the inputs for increasing the outputs further. Instead of the profit margin, the government can decide whether this increase in production is justifiable. Instead, the government can support other manufacturers who already have the majority of the capabilities for producing such a vaccine by giving them just enough support to produce the vaccine. This will result in investment in that corporation and bring it upto a standard wherein it can be competitive. And, competition is always better.

Profiteering from a vaccine funded by the taxpayers money for the survival of the taxpayer is murder and nothing else.

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?

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.