The powers of the military

A recent article on DO, which towards the end states that

"...the military is ready to confront and solve any terrorism activities within the country, affirmed the Vice-Chief of MNDF"

Are they really ready to confront any terrorist activities. If so what kind of powers do the military have in combating such activities. Do we know what the capacities and limits of the military/police are when it comes to combating them?

Do they have broad powers to spy on citizens in the name of fighting the terrorists? Are they allowed to torture them? Maybe they are labeled 'enemy combatants' and denied due process. The activities of the military need to be put in the open and discussed at the Majlis level. There powers should be clearly defined and limited. Or are they just 'state secrets' to serve the greater good?

Talking of state secrets, it was not long ago that there was massive outrage about the discovery of the NSA's dragnet domestic surveillance program in USA. The Bush administration's use of the 'state secret' privilege to thwart the lawsuit against ATT caused much uproar seems to be forgotten. The current Obama admin is using the exact same methods to block the investigation of not only the illegal spying, but also torture and rendition too.

I am not sure whether it is even illegal to spy on citizens here in Maldives. For all we know, it might have been occurring for as long as we remember.

Talk about talent!

One of the best storytelling I have seen.

Freedom -- go to hell

Some people take it to the streets to protest against liberty and freedom. They apparently abhor the 'western' liberalism and democracy. Liberal I mean in the classical sense.

But I wonder, is it not the evil western liberal values of freedom of expression and freedom to peaceful protest that allows them to stand there holding the banner in the first place?

A global what?

It didn't come as a surprise to me to hear that corporations such as Microsoft are advocating for a global patent system, where one of their senior lawyers stated:

In today’s world of universal connectivity, global business and collaborative innovation, it is time for a world patent that is derived from a single patent application, examined and prosecuted by a single examining authority and litigated before a single judicial body.

...and controlled by a single party such as Microsoft!

By its very nature, patents are controversial, especially the software patents which is relevant to software developers such as Microsoft. Patents have become a means to control the small and individual player's innovation. Software patents are more like mathematics.

Is it because, Microsoft is facing possible fines related to a patent infringement in their Word product? Or is it because they are facing stiff competition from Free software, and feels the need to threaten them to get more market share.

Reasons aside, I think Microsoft should work on getting their (as in US patent system) house in order before they export it to the rest of the world via World Intellectual Property Organisation. But wait, that's not going to happen; the US system is beyond repair. With everything getting patented left and right, one cannot write a program that doesn't infringe on a patent. Just recently, Google received a patent on the design of their homepage. Google wasn't even close to being first in minimal clean homepage design. Even if they were first, why should they get a monopoly? Maybe Maldivian architects should patent their architectural designs now, and engineers follow suit with structural designs (claiming rightfully that design patents are granted in some countries).

Otherwise they won't innovate and produce nice efficient designs, would they?

Gotta go clean up my desktop and patent my innovative-super-clean-minimal-user-friendly desktop.

Breaking the monopolies 2

In an earlier post, I wrote in support of the government's decision to break the fish oligopoly in this country. The reason being that, such legislations are only in the interest of selected parties at the expense of the general public. Unfortunately, like everywhere in most of the world, Maldives fares no better at making sure that politicians are able to pick winners and losers.

Now its time to break the other duopolies in this country, ie the ISP and telecom providers. The two ISPs, namely Dhiraagu and ROL, provide poor and expensive packages (infact webhosting is 100 times more expensive as Dhivehi Observer noted). Everyone is well aware of the reduction in prices of Dhiraagu when Wataniya came into competition. We can still take a step further and allow complete competition in the marketplace for Internet and telecommunication service providers. Infact, this is how it should be in every industry. No artificial and restrictive barriers to entry should be placed (like some proposed in another industry). After all, we don't legislate how many construction companies, design firms, clothing shops, computer sellers, web development companies should be there. So why should it be any different for these services? Competition will enhance consumer choice and also reduce prices.

Upcoming startups does not necessarily have to provide universal coverage. Some might infact do. Others might specialise in niche markets or provide speciality services such as VoIP. The technological barrier to entry is quite low with dropping prices of server and network gear, and the abundance of numerous open-source software stacks which are available for free. Plus, the established providers may not innovate or explore the new emerging technologies in the areas of wireless communications, let alone the established technologies of webhosting.

On freedom of the mind

Couple of nights ago, I saw few minutes of talk on the 'Islaamee Dhiriulhun' program. There were three young guests on the show with the host asking them questions. One of the guests was talking about the Maldivian culture and its relation to Islam. He goes on to mention that all Maldivians were Muslim and that we should should try to minimize the cultural influences of the West. The other guest mentioned that Islamic golden era produced many great scientists and philosophers.

That got me thinking. Are we still in the days of make-believe where Maldives is a 100% Muslim country? Do they not know that there are many atheists, Christian and sects among Maldivians? Whose interest is it serving when politicians and public figures lie when they say Maldives is a 100% Muslim country?

Or is it because it is defined that all Maldivians are Muslims? This begs the question, are we Muslim by definition? Or are we Muslims by belief? I am a Muslim not because some constitution defines it. I am Muslim because of what I believe. As being a Muslim is all about belief and submission, how could one override the meaning of Muslim to say someone could be Muslim even if that person does not submit to God?

Everyone should have the right to believe what they want. The freedom of the mind is the most important freedom. Things such as freedom of speech and press, that our politicians fancily talk about, can only be realized with freedom of thought. Anyone who suppresses people's freedom of thought (be it for national, cultural or religious reasons etc), is a person who wants to control people's lives.

These freedoms are what we are born with, not what we obtain from the State. Each individual is sovereign over that individual's mind. No one, not even the State, has sovereignty over one's mind.

Will the real engineer please stand up!

As I mentioned in a prevoius post, various regulations are being proposed and enacted in relation to the building design sector.

One of these recent regulations that has come into effect is the National Building Professional Accreditation Regulation(NBPAR), which is available for download (direct pdf link).

Basically, the regulation proposes to 'accredit' professionals (architects, engineers, surveyors etc) who works in the design sector. The accreditation being that, certain selected professionals get special privileges, such as being allowed to undertake the design of larger projects, or special treatment during normal government approval process.

Normally, if a client wants to design his house or any building, he hires an architect or engineer. There are registered architects and engineers who are allowed to sign the relevant municipal documents, which is based on having a certain level of academic qualification. This regulation is fine and good. Having completed the design, the client (or on his behalf the designer) submits the drawings to the municipality, which then checks (for municipal, planning and structural compliance) and gives a building permit. This process usually takes about two months.

The currently active NBPAR regulation creates a category of engineers called 'Professional Engineers'. These PEs have magic stamps bearing their names. When these PEs stamp their drawings, the municipality do not check the drawings for structural compliance, and the approval is given after municipal and planning checks. Hence the process is very much expedited. The idea being that, these PEs are experienced enough that no further structural check is required by the authorities.

Which is fine and dandy, until one looks at the criteria for being eligible to become a PE. In Category A1 - Accredit Professional Engineer, the experience requirement given on page 23 states that:

The experience required for registration of an applicant shall be either one of the following requirements.
a) a minimum of 3 years of structural engineering design experience relevant to building work across an appropriate range of buildings out of which a minimum of 2 years of working experience as a structural checker in a relevant government authority OR

b) a minimum of 4 years of structural engineering design experience relevant to building work across an appropriate range of buildings out of which a minimum of 3 years of working experience under a certified professional engineer registered in this Regulation, subject to the Registrar’s approval OR

c) a minimum of 7 years of structural engineering design experience relevant to building work across an appropriate range of buildings subject to the Registrar’s approval.

Note: Under the Experience requirement for the registration of professional engineers, clause (c) is only applicable for the year 2009.

Item (a) is a clause put in to give PE status to existing civil/structural engineers who are working at municipality or construction ministry.

Item (b) is not applicapable as this enforcement of this regulation has just started this year. There is NO one who has 6 months (let alone 3 years) working under a PE.

Item (c) applies to most new engineers, but states 7 years, which is an overly long duration AND it applies to year 2009 only. This means any engineer whose experience reaches 7 years in 2010 or thereafter is not eligible! He has to go back to either (a) or (b).

And no, (b) just does not work in the real world. What it says is that one has to work under a PE for 3 years atleast. I know in developed countries charter-ship and the like are given after working under chartered engineers. But here in Maldives, there are very few opportunities, and the industry is very young. Fresh engineers will not get opportunities to work for existing PEs, and the PEs wont be able to hire that many new engineers as well. Most of the new engineers will have to freelance (as they currently do). Hence (b) cannot produce more PEs.

Hence, anyone who currently qualifies for PE (be it via a, b or c) gets the PE status and very few if any new PEs will be produced. And the PE are given special privilages during checks by authority, and hence they are able to grab more clients. The new graduates won't get the chance, as they don't have these privileges.

It is sad that these regulations are actually benefitting the ones who already have a competitive advantage due to experience and reputation. Some notable engineers have raised issue with using the world 'professional'. They say, it has a specific meaning in the world industry and what we are doing is diluting that name. This I agree. But we have a much bigger problem with the regulation, which unfortunately these prominent engineers are oblivious to, since they themselves qualify for PE. Currently about five or six engineers have taken the magic stamp.

More and more engineers are taking the magic stamp, and it will be even more difficult to revert this regulation. Some PEs now agree that the regulation is biased in their favour, though not enough to work to revert or atleast ammend the regulation.

--------------
Disclaimer:
I personally do qualify for PE status, but so far I have not taken the magic stamp. However, lot of people are asking me "Are you a PE?", and gives funny looks when I say I have not applied. I try to explain the reason why. Obviously, the clients prefer PEs as they can get drawings approved quicker. But if this continues for too long, I might have no choice but do as the saying says:

If you can't beat them, join them!