srndh's comments

I too share your same view.

When I had this same discussion, the response I got was its not a matter of trust. But apparently in the terms & conditions (that consumers do not read anyways, including myself). There is a part of the data not being viewed by anyone not using it for diagnosis or treatment of the patient. Basically, only anyone with a medical degree and part of the team treating the patient can access the data & does not mention about the engineer using the data to build a better system to improve the system used for healthcare. So, ideally they want a candidate with a double degree in software and medicine. This term is applicable to other domains also.

I do not accept the reason, but that is what it is.

First off, I am not pro or anti USA or China. Just curious and hoping to have a constructive dialogue.

What moral high ground is USA on in the Snowden era? Why trust Cisco or Apple or Google or Facebook or Microsoft in USA's Prism? With the "Five Eyes", how to trust Nokia or Ericsson or Blackberry? What ethical high-ground are the tax evading tech giants on? Lets not forget how the pharma mobs are gaming the patent system to run an extortion ring on life saving medicines like insulin or the planned obsolescence when the world is rushing to reduce global warming.

Its sad to see a place of learning is getting into politics & business. How different is this from the patent battles between Oracle & Google or Apple, Microsoft & Samsung? Google is poaching chips guys from various sources to compete with Apple. Then all the poaching in AI & self driving & electric cars. Lets not forget the "borrowing" done my Jobs & Gates from Xerox PARC that founded the Silicon Valley.

As a consumer, due to Huawei & Mi. Samsung & other brands have started lowering the price. Hope Google poached the right team to make a better chip than what Apple has. Hopefully Apple also will start selling sensible priced devices. MIT should instead be working for growing an opensource culture in China. Which already seems to have something of that sort but limited due to all being in Chinese language.

There are a million ways to help. Giving money away to charity is just one way.

In the US, it is a tax write off & status symbol and you have the challenges of what percentage actually reached the poor.

In India, many huge groups do help in the society. Like the TATA group has employed members of the victims of 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, not just the victims that died in the Taj Hotel (Tata owned). Even the families of the cops kills also got something. These are on top of the financial aid given. Handicapped service members (soldiers who are hurt during duty) are extensively employed in the private sector. Basically in India, we believe in teaching a person to fish instead of supplying them free fish. Its actually a rule for Govt entities and most private firms, if a person who is employed dies during on-duty or off-duty. A member of the family will get a job. Basically they help another member of the family to be employed to replace the lost revenue. These efforts are never accounted.

Tata's are pioneers and a model company that all Indian companies aspire to follow. There are many examples of this involving other groups. Actors like Nana Patekar has adopted villages.

As per the Vedic culture, you actually have to help the needy yourself and not make someone else to do it. So, the concept of giving a charity cheque is not accepted to many.

In my village, we have a collective fund that I pay to monthly. The fund is used to serve dinner to all 365 days a year. We have about 300 people daily for dinner. Like a soup kitchen in the US.

A totally n00b question.

Isn't VC the person with the money, so they are more in control.

While an "investment advisor" is just advising or suggesting where the money can be put for maximum returns like an investment advisor in banks? So, presumably less in control.

I don't understand why a title change was needed. Any technical or legal reasons?

This is true. Google cannot be relied upon.

The axing of Google Talk & Reader is still fresh.

Even the other day, a friend mentioned that instead of waiting for Gmail to be killed, its better to move email to your own domain.

Even I moved off keep. I am confident that it is going to be axed soon.

The thing that bugs me the most of why Google doesn't just opensource the code. Open-sourcing Google reader was the decent thing to do. Like netscape open-sourcing its code to Mozilla before it sank. I still treasure the Netscape CD I got with from my ISP in the late 1990s.

Each time you update the OS or the app, it messes with the settings. So, since these things are designed to suck you in & the I am sure the developers deliberately overwrite the settings.

That is why I decided to have a separate device.

Just engaging with all the devices is a job in itself. Its very tough to focus.

I keep all social media & news apps in a tablet that I refer to as the "time-killer". Controlling the alerts is a losing game. So, I just put all in a separate device. Even with browser, I have a separate profile that I use for HN & reddit.

Even my phone is silent most of the times. I wish there was a answering machine app, so I can respond to calls at my convenience. In my circle, we actually just voice message via whatsapp, so no one is disturbed and can respond at a convenient time.