Commentary
Find our newspaper columns, blogs, and other commentary pieces in this section. Our research focuses on Advanced Biology, High-Tech Geopolitics, Strategic Studies, Indo-Pacific Studies & Economic Policy
Finance Commission's New Problem: A Separate Defence Fund
The original terms of references for the FFC themselves were contentious. Based on the wrong assumption that the last Finance Commission was overly generous towards the states, the terms were designed to nudge the FFC towards reducing the tax devolution to the states in order to meet the requirements of central schemes of the Union government. If that wasn’t enough, an additional term of reference has now been recommended by the Union cabinet tasking the FFC “to ensure an assured allocation of resources towards defence and internal security imperatives.”Allocating adequate, secure, and non-lapsable funds for the security of India is indeed an urgent priority. There can be no quarrel about that objective. But the move to provide for these funds through the FFC is problematic for several important reasons.Read the full article on Deccan Herald here.
Where will big data take platforms like Netflix?
Streaming services are cataloguing the entire world’s audiovisual content onto their platforms. If you had told someone ten years ago that most of the world’s movies and TV shows would be available on-demand in their pocket they would have given you a patronising look of disbelief. If at present of the streaming industry is pathbreaking, the future promises to build even further on it.Streaming is funded by subscriptions and guided by big data analytics. Knowledge of how consumers behave on platforms such as Netflix and Prime Video lets the services gauge what else they might be willing to pay for. It is hard to say which way streaming is likely to go over the next decade. However, it is possible to make an educated guess based on the frameworks of information economics.Three main areas are likely to be affected by the continued usage of big data to improve streaming, user experience, security, and pricing.When the news broke that Netflix customises individual thumbnails for each user, it was another endorsement of how the platform was using big data to keep customers hooked. Netflix doesn’t just use a film or show’s original art; it employs an algorithm to source high-quality images from the content. Then it does more testing to determine what individual subscribers are most likely to click on. Based on that, each user’s Netflix homepage looks different, even if they have similar tastes. The idea is to have users spend as much time on Netflix as possible, and personalised thumbnails are a small cog in the working of this big machine. Data on who binge-watches which shows and how long each visit on the website lasts is also crucial when it comes to deciding what to invest in. This is not a new phenomenon. The TV show House of Cards is a case study to understand this.Big data tells Netflix (and Prime Video and Hulu and Hotstar) what users want even before they themselves know it. The data-based knowledge that David Fincher’s movies were in high demand — this insight was based on the number of times people played and paused them and how long they watched for — was a powerful resource for the TV decision-makers. Combining Fincher with a star-studded cast was not a shot in the dark. Netflix bet $100 million on two seasons (26 episodes) of the show at first, without watching a single episode. They even went as far as to make different trailers and filtered their distribution according to user preferences. This just shows that the information about our tastes and tendencies, as exhibited by big data, is empirically reliable.Going forward, big data analytics will continue to tell companies what the users want. This will have a significant impact on how funds are distributed across genres. For instance, the success of Narcos and Stranger Things will drive investments in more original content in their particular genres. This also means evolving content markets all over the world to keep users hooked and get new users to subscribe (think about the success of Sacred Games in India).
No free-loading
The increasing use of big data analytics will also mean tighter security for accounts. So, no chance of four people pooling their money together to get one streaming account. Also, no mooching off your friend’s account. The free-rider problem means streaming giants lose money on every individual that watches content without paying for it. Because Netflix has data on usage patterns — laptop model, user location over time — it can identify when someone other than the paying customer is watching. So, it is no wonder that the company is now planning on using AI to keep off account-moochers. Though such algorithms have not taken mass effect, there is reason to believe that this might change soon.Lastly, big data will be transformative when it comes to pricing streaming services. As companies compete for a higher share of users’ e-wallets, data on how much the consumers are willing to pay will be transformative in determining how the service is priced. The marginal cost of adding an additional user to a streaming service is negligible, which means that the price they can be charged is relatively flexible as compared to traditional industries such as cars. This is exactly what Netflix has been trying to leverage in India. In July, the company unveiled a mobile-only plan for the price-sensitive market. It is a novel move that might help Netflix compete with Prime Video, Jio TV, and Hotstar in India, all of which are cheaper options. The same could hold true for markets where the consumer is willing to pay more for premium services. Data will decide.User experience, security, and pricing are three key areas where big data analytics could be transformational for the streaming industry. This is by no means an exhaustive list. It would have taken a mental leap ten years ago to conceive of the current streaming scenario, and we might find the same a decade from now. New applications of insights from big data will continue to come to light. And the interesting thing is that, for us who are now aware of the speed at which data engineering and digital ecosystems can evolve, none of these developments are situated too far off in the future to be imagined. In big data analytics, the enabler of the present is also the driver of the future.This article was first published in The Hindu. Views are personal.
Article 370 and the rough ride ahead
The analogy of a hornet’s nest fits here. A nest in our backyard is a nuisance and an occasional sting is a minor inconvenience compared to what could be in store now that we have stirred the proverbial nest. Should we batten down the hatches in anticipation of the worst or is there another way?Read more
China's syndromes in India's ocean
Bertil Lintner’s book The Costliest Pearl is perhaps the most comprehensive account of the contemporary geopolitics of the maritime Eastern Hemisphere. It covers the ground from Djibouti to Vanuatu and the water from the South China Sea to the Southern Indian Ocean.And although it covers the actions and reactions of the powers from within and without the region, it is China that lies at the heart of the plot.Read more
India needs to urgently address its investment problem
Explaining the Takshashila National Security Doctrine
Download the doctrine here.In the 21st century, India faces challenges of unprecedented scale and complexity that necessitate new ways of thinking about national security. We propose that yogakshema, an idea pioneered in the Arthashastra , should be the guiding light of India’s national security doctrine. Simply put, the State must provide security, kshema, and economic opportunities, yoga, to all its citizens. In June 2019, we proposed a doctrine to achieve this.1. To create and defend a conducive environment for yogakshema (well-being, prosperity, and happiness) of all Indians. At this stage of India’s development, national security is primarily focused on protecting and promoting India’s economic development.2. National security also includes protecting the constitutional order, individual liberty, territory, social cohesion, and national resources.3. Amass and project power across all domains.4. Reimagine national security capacity.This document aims to elaborate on these points and elucidate the strategic reasoning behind them. In the first section of this document, we address the question of how a national security doctrine can provide opportunities for prosperity. India has a special place in the global order thanks to its large, young population and its critical geopolitical position. Its status as a swing power should be leveraged to shape global debates in ways that benefit its citizens. This is a matter of critical national interest: India’s economy is deeply connected to the world, and citizens’ prosperity depends on them being able to import and export goods and services on favourable terms.The rest of the document addresses questions of kshema. Within India’s borders, the State must ensure that the rule of law is implemented within the bounds laid out by the Constitution. The Republic of India’s institutions must be kept effective and efficient. And citizens’ rights - no matter their caste, class, gender, or creed - must be defended.Beyond India’s borders, in an anarchic, multipolar world, we argue that India must amass and project power across all domains, so it can defend its citizens’ interests in all domains. This means thinking about India’s “territory” in new ways - it’s no longer just about land, but about maritime domains, air, space, and cyberspace. It also means that India needs to think about power as something the State can leverage in many ways in the global order. India needs to use all the means at its disposal to shape the world’s diplomatic, economic, and technological order. In summary, the overriding imperative of a national security doctrine is to provide yogakshema.
Privacy is dead. So, it’s time to turn data into a bargaining chip.
Tech firms offer services in exchange, but the government will argue it needs your data for national security. Why not trade it then.
This year, Google bought Nest. Why was the world’s biggest search engine acquiring a thermostat company? Because through Nest, Google will get to know what temperature you prefer in your home, or when you come in and go out during weekdays and weekends.Everyone wants data. It is why The Economist claimed that “(t)he world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data”.In today’s digital world, fighting for privacy is fighting a losing battle. What we can instead fight for is making privacy a bargaining chip. Giving up your data to different people only makes sense if you know what you get in return.Earlier last year, when US Senator Orrin Hatch asked Mark Zuckerberg how Facebook remained free, a mildly amused Zuckerberg replied, “Senator, we run ads”. The clip went viral and highlighted the need for regulators to get up to speed with technology.People who understand how Facebook and Google work may know how they get their revenue by selling ads. They monitor your clicks; how much time you spend on a website; and what webpages you visit to target what they should be showing/selling to you. So, if you spend some time viewing videos of cats or say, an iPad, Facebook and Google will make sure that the content targeted to you is based on cats or iPads. However, the workings behind targeted advertising mean that it makes sense to think about privacy as a bargaining chip rather than an absolute right.Debates in technology change fast. Over the past year, different aspects of tech policy have been highlighted. There was an argument on intermediary liability on whether platforms should be considered the same as information publishers. We also have the ongoing debate on data localisation and where they should be physically located. Facebook’s launch of Libra shifted conversations to cryptocurrency and whether Facebook needed to be broken up. In the middle of all this chaos, the argument for user privacy seems to have died down. The news attention cycle is partly to blame.An equally big, if not bigger, part of the blame should be put on how big tech (Facebook, Google, and Amazon) operates. The business models for a lot of platforms (including Facebook, Google, Reddit, and Twitter) are responsible for it. Let’s look at Google. The idea is to offer services in exchange for your data. You don’t pay when signing up, but instead, give money to the platform’s clients after the application has used your own habits against you. Remember searching for that specific shoe wishfully, only to desert it midway, but the ads popping up for several weeks?The bottom line you need to understand in case of big tech making claim to your data is that they will provide you services in return (think Google Drive, Google Photos, or Google Search).It is not just big tech that wants your data. The government wants it too. While big tech might offer you services in exchange for that data, the government is not obliged to make any such promises. Instead, the government’s argument is that it needs access to data to maintain law enforcement, ensure national security and have supervisory access. This is a global trend that spans across contexts.For instance, the Reserve Bank of India wants unfettered supervisory access to financial data. India’s updated Information Technology Intermediaries Guidelines (Amendment) Rules want data on the originator of content on platforms. The Australian government has exclusive access to its citizens’ healthcare data, which cannot be shared outside its borders. There is also a big sentiment for states, especially developing economies such as India and China, to view data as a form of national wealth that can be used for development. This, in addition to the argument for law enforcement, makes the state naturally take an opposing stance to Facebook and Google when it comes to data access.These conversations are bound to become more complex as technology advances and the state plays catch-up. We are already looking at years of discussion on Facebook’s Libra project, which will also be a defining battle for the short-term future of cryptocurrencies. There is also Japanese PM Shinzo Abe’s proposal for a multilateral data-sharing framework, called the Osaka Track, which was proposed at the recent G20 summit. Over time, emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence and the internet of things are bound to raise the stakes as well, as both are closely linked to data.With so much happening in and around data and technology, it can be dizzying to keep up. The privacy debate gets left behind. The only big company making any noise about privacy seems to be Apple.So, it’s time for us to get the bargaining chip. I know how this is a controversial opinion, especially for people who consider privacy to be an absolute right, and rightly so. I am not implying that the battle on privacy is lost. I am implying that it is a losing battle. Quoting Shoshana Zuboff, the nature of the internet and ‘surveillance capitalism’ leaves us with little choice.In such times, thinking of privacy as a bargaining chip only seems to be a bi-product of a pragmatic assessment of the situation. You can use your privacy in a transaction to get goods and services. You pay with your privacy when you sign up for Google or Facebook and opt in to their services. Similarly, you lose your privacy when the government has sensitive data on you (which may or may not be optional). Giving up data about yourself only makes sense when you know what you get in return. ‘Privacy is a bargaining chip’ is one of the few phrases that are always central to the debates in tech policy and helps us make sense of the world around us.The article was first published in The Print. Views are personal.
What does China’s new defence strategy mean?
China on Wednesday published its first defence white paper in four years, outlining the strategic military guideline for what it terms as a new era. The document offers an insight into Beijing’s view of the changes in the international security situation. It discusses China’s defence policy objectives, along with the reform, missions and tasks that its armed forces are undertaking. Further, it elaborates on the role of the armed forces in the broader Chinese geopolitical objective of establishing a community with a shared future for mankind. Here are five key takeaways from the white paper. The line taken by the document indicates a generally positive outlook towards India. Nevertheless, there are certain potential points of impact to be noted from the perspective of Indian interests.Shifting Balance of PowerThe white paper begins with an assessment of the changes in the international security environment. It argues that the world is increasingly heading towards multipolarity. But, it isn't yet a “tranquil place,” with strategic competition on the rise. Beijing’s diagnosis is that “the configuration of strategic power is becoming more balanced,” with the strength of emerging markets and developing countries growing. The big threat to this is the change in American policy, i.e., “growing hegemonism, power politics, unilateralism”.This necessitates a reinforcement of the UN’s role in global security, strengthening new regional security arrangements, establishing security partnerships (with Russia, for instance), investments in better weapons and technological upgrades and bolstering arms control and non-proliferation regimes. For New Delhi, which has been working on getting Beijing to yield on its admission to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the white paper’s assessment of the international non-proliferation regime as “compromised by pragmatism and double standards” is likely to be troubling.The Asia-Pacific ContestThe document observes that while the Asia-Pacific region is “generally stable”, there is increased “major country competition”. Essentially, it perceives the dynamics in the region within the framework of U.S.-China. frictions. The U.S., it argues, “is strengthening its Asia-Pacific military alliances and reinforcing military deployment and intervention”. The key partners for Washington that it identifies are South Korea, Japan and Australia. Despite that, the document largely assesses Chinese neighbourhood policy as having been successful.“Asia-Pacific countries are increasingly aware that they are members of a community with shared destiny”, it reads, hinting at the rapid emergence of a China-led security architecture. The constituents of this Sinosphere are structures like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, CICA, China’s expanding dominance in the South China Sea, dialogues with ASEAN members, regional counter-terror action and increasing bilateral military-to-military diplomacy. Interestingly, China views South Asia also as “generally stable,” although “conflicts between India and Pakistan flare up from time to time.” This suggests that Beijing is rather confident about its ability to manage tensions between New Delhi and Islamabad.BRI's Military ComponentEver since Xi Jinping launched, in 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), there has been much debate about the security implications of Chinese investments around the world. The white paper tells us that protecting China’s overseas interests is a strategic objective for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). It states that “one of the missions of China’s armed forces is to effectively protect the security and legitimate rights and interests of overseas Chinese people, organisations and institutions”. In order to do so, the document says that the PLA is building “far seas forces”, “overseas logistical facilities”, and capabilities for “diversified military tasks”. That’s followed by a glowing evaluation of the PLA’s Logistics Support Base in Djibouti, which was set up in 2017. This is perhaps the clearest admission of the emerging military component of the BRI. But that’s not all. Beijing is also likely to continue to invest in and focus on participation in Humanitarian and Disaster Relief operations internationally. This is couched within the rhetoric of providing international public goods. But such activities allow for the enhancement of Chinese forces’ operational skills and experience and normalises their presence in far-flung regions of the world.Resilient ChinaThe 2015 Chinese defence white paper had argued that “China faces a formidable task to maintain political security and social stability” while discussing Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet. In 2019, there’s a mention of “external separatist forces” with regard to Tibet and Xinjiang. But the forces seeking Taiwan’s “independence” are identified as the “gravest immediate threat”, with the use of force not being ruled out. Despite that, generally, the domestic security environment is assessed to have improved considerably. “China continues to enjoy political stability, ethnic unity and social stability. There has been a notable increase in China’s overall national strength, global influence, and resilience to risks,” the white paper says. However, it is also worth noting that “safeguarding national political security” and political work in the armed forces to uphold Xi Jinping’s status as the core of the Party-state system remain priorities.Quality and Efficiency
Does the arrival of AI mean the end of data privacy?
In recent years, there has been a great buzz around the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and what that might mean for the Indian economy. On the government’s side, Niti Aayog has come up with a national strategy on AI; the Ministry of Commerce has set up an AI task force. A ‘National Centre of AI’ is also planned. All of these initiatives have a scope to define where AI can contribute to the Indian industry and how to best achieve adoption at scale. But there’s a flip side to AI and that impacts data privacy.
Why India needs to leverage and not localise data
If one were to chart the arc of geopolitical competition over the past 100 years, one can identify four primary sources of contention – land, people, natural resources, and now, the commanding heights of new technologies. At the heart of the current competition lies data – the fuel that will power future innovation.
GMO: let's take a balanced view
At least 12 farmers have been booked in Maharashtra for planting banned genetically modified (GM) cotton and brinjal seeds. Undeterred by this, farmers have been protesting the blockade of new technologies that could aid farming. This movement has elicited mixed responses from farmer groups — some support the idea; others oppose the introduction of GM technologies in Indian agriculture.The anti-GMO argument rests on three pillars: first, that GMOs are controlled by large companies and are essentially anti-farmer; second, they are harmful to biological diversity and third, they are harmful to human health. They also argue that the Maharashtra farmers have been paid by large companies to pressure the government into accepting the technology.On the other hand, pro-GMO groups such as the Shetkari Sanghtana backing the Maharashtra protest argue that farmers need to adopt more GMOs to get better yields and more income. This is by no means a new argument. In 2001, farmers were accused of illegally planting GM cotton, much prior to India permitting the commercialisation of Monsanto’s Bt cotton. So, as these two groups tussle it out, who will blink first? Read more
Indian govt can make taxes look good – by taxing bad behaviour, like honking
An overall look at the second Modi government’s first budget reveals an underlying commitment to raise revenues, mainly in the form of new taxes. In the face of a slowing economy, higher taxes can exacerbate matters. Money in the hands of citizens and investors does a lot more for India than the money that passes through the hands of governments. Given the narrowness of the tax base, it is unfair to levy more taxes on those who are already paying taxes without making greater attempts to bring more people and firms into the tax net. If raising taxes on goods, income, profits and beneficial economic are bad, what option does the government have? Can there be “good taxes”? Yes. They are taxes on the bads.Read more
Approaches to Indo-Pacific: India and US
The US Department of Defence (DOD) released its first-ever Indo-Pacific Strategy Report (IPSR) in the first week of June. The report outlines Washington’s approach in dealing with various stakeholders in the Indo-Pacific region. It identifies China as one of the most important challenges to the US, noting that great-power competition has returned and threatens the stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The report emphasises the need for alliances and partnerships to maintain peace and security in this region.The IPSR identifies India as an important partner of the US. It takes a cue from a speech in 2017 by Rex Tillerson, then the US secretary of state, in which he identified India’s role in the United States’ vision of a “free and open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP). India too believes in the principles of FOIP. There are a few parallels between the two countries’ visions for the Indo-Pacific region.The article was originally published in Asia Times
Reading into India’s draft e-commerce policy
Bottom line is that it would now be misleading to say that the Indian government does not have a vision in tech policy. It is one step forward from our late 2017 vision.
Up until 2018, one would have been hard-pressed to identify whether India had any coherent intent regarding its technology policy. There were question marks on where the government stood with respect to a range of issues — data protection, cross-border data flows, AI, encryption, fintech, and e-commerce. With the coming of the draft e-commerce policy, the good news halfway through 2019 is that India does seem to have a definite plan for all of these pillars of technology. The broader question is: what does this mean for stakeholders across the ecosystem and for India’s digital aspirations?The draft policy has a lot to say about consumer/citizen data. A lot of which has been mentioned in policies before this one. Data is a national asset, but does that mean it has to be controlled by the state? This question is more relevant now than ever. India does not currently have a data protection law in place. There also isn't a due process of law for data disclosure. The policy says that data should be stored locally. This is in line with the personal data protection bill and RBI’s directive.
Maybe the plan is that localisation will help transform our digital infrastructure. Across the three policies, there is no roadmap to suggest how localisation will be achieved or why it’s needed (apart from unfettered supervisory access, as stated in the RBI notification). Let’s say that the directive does help build digital infrastructure in India. It will not make India a data centre hub, because of our electricity, bandwidth, and water deficiencies. If the plan is to overcome these deficiencies, there is no course of action attached to it. Storage is not the same as access. People own data. Fiduciaries get access to it by consent. Just because a data centre is located in India may not mean the data belongs to the state. So, the rights to insights generated will stay with fiduciaries as well. If the policy’s plan is to take us to a Digital India, it is unclear how these directives shape the road to it.Another condition from previous policies is the requirement that operating e-commerce platforms must have a registered business entity in India. The amendments to the intermediary liability guidelines followed the same tone. There are two broad concerns stemming from this. Firstly, implementation. How do you track that every e-commerce vendor has a business entity in India? The policy suggests nothing in terms of implementation. Second, how do you punish platforms violating the rule? Do you have them removed from the app/play store? What if Google and Apple don’t comply? In which place, why do it in the first place?Secondly, who are the winners and losers of this measure? The broad answer to this is foreign e-commerce platforms — specifically, medium to small e-commerce platforms that might not be able to afford to set up registered business entities. At the same time, it is a win for small and medium enterprises at home. They now have lesser competition. They are also enabled through the simplification of export regulation and the raised ceiling on export goods. This makes it relatively easier to look for markets abroad by reducing costs. At the same time, it closes the gifting route for foreign companies to export to India. Bigger foreign companies have the means to comply with the directive, even though it might take a while to adjust organisational structure. This likely means lack of competition for domestic Indian firms. Making it harder for foreign e-commerce firms to compete is somewhat of a theme here.Ultimately, the draft e-commerce policy leaves us with more questions than answers. Firstly, is there a direct link between localisation and the quest for access to data? Why localise in the first place? If there are objectives behind it, how is localisation part of the roadmap to getting there? Also, how does the government plan to crack down on platforms that do not have the financial resources to have an office in India? Will the administration identify and penalise every foreign player on the app/play stores? While answers to these questions remain unclear, one thing that the draft e-commerce policy does resolve is the perceived absence of cohesive intent. The list of questions and regulations discussed above is by no means exhaustive. There are other components — marketplace models, anti-counterfeiting measures, source code for advertisements, and so on. The bottom line, however, is that it would now be misleading to say that the Indian government does not have a vision in tech policy. It is one step forward from our late 2017 vision.This article was first published in The Hindu. Views are personal.
India must make Intelligence Bureau responsible for countering terrorism, not RAW
India’s counter-terrorism efforts have improved significantly since 2008, but the dynamic nature of the threat requires streamlining of intelligence and law enforcement operations. As the lead internal intelligence agency, the IB should be the nodal agency for counter-terrorism initiatives and intelligence sharing.Read more
Need to Protect Soldiers from False FIRs
At the heart of the matter is the urgent necessity of protecting the soldiers from harassment to which they are subjected from the prolonged investigative procedures that ensue. The investigative process itself, for a soldier acting in good faith and in accordance with the orders of his superiors, is a form of punishment that could also entail financial costs through legal fees, disruption of normal life, and deep psychological strain of the proverbial legal sword hanging over their heads.Read more
How Can India Combine Data and Regional Power?
The stakes concerning jurisdiction over data have never been higher. There is a global discourse today on the future of data that was recently brought into the news cycle by the U.S. government. The Trump administration was mulling over capping H-1B visas to deter India’s rules on data centers. There is a sense perhaps that data has become a variable in regional and global geopolitics today. Owing to its immense population, India unsurprisingly generates a lot of data. The question for New Delhi is how to translate this into a geopolitical advantage.China has a robust approach to its data — one that has been conducive to its digital goals. It needs countries to store their data locally. Companies might store their data in China but can resist sharing user information with the government. Apple has a data center in China but refuses to share encryption keys with the government. By closing off its data from the world, China lies on an extreme end of the data geopolitical spectrum.Other countries, such as the United States, Canada, and Australia differentiate their data, some of which is deemed fit to be shared with the world. Critical data, however, is not allowed to cross borders. In cases with a middle ground, data can be shared, but a working copy of it must be maintained at home.This brings us to India. As data regulation changes from bills to laws, Indian data policy is still officially in flux. Looking at current global trends, India could broadly either go the American or the Chinese way. Maybe New Delhi could pursue the best of both approaches. What these broad approaches might be missing, however, is a geopolitical opportunity. Here India could use its data and that of its neighbors’ (BIMSTEC) to their collective advantage.BIMSTEC is a group comprised of Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal, and Bhutan. The group made headlines recently when India invited its members to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s swearing-in ceremony. This is a good indicator for the relevance of regional groupings, as the SAARC leaders were invited for the same event last time around, in 2014. Combining BIMSTEC with data is a huge opportunity for India. Taking the lead in this regard has a set of technological and geopolitical advantages. This could mean having a common set of data processing laws, common security standards, a common market for data, and a larger region and resources to build data centres in.Doing all or any one of the above could add importance to BIMSTEC in the region and the world too. The only similar project to exist in the data space is that of the European Union and the Council of Europe. Having a standard of data processing laws and shared space for localisation for seven countries would add significant bargaining power against warnings like caps on H-1B visas. Convention 108+ in the EU does something similar. By having common adequacy standards, data can only flow across borders for processing when the receiver/processor meets the standards set for it.So not only can a combined BIMSTEC approach to data can increase the region’s bargaining power globally, but it can also help better security standards. It is also likely to bring down the costs of storing and maintaining data. Data centers are resource-intensive in terms of electricity, water, and bandwidth. Pooling resources to build and maintain them is likely to bring down costs. Should the BIMSTEC area become a cheap option for data centers, it would give the region an increased say in the global technological debate.Pooling national data can also help the faster development of AI in the region. More importantly, any advancements in AI-based on regional data would help develop the technology in the context of developing countries and not just Silicon Valley. It can become hard to relate to AI that can open garage doors for Teslas in South Asia. It would be more useful to have self-driving cars that can deal with potholes, for instance. This would also be good for BIMSTEC enterprises as they use data to solve local problems.BIMSTEC pooling of data would be tailor-made for AI to solve regional problems across borders. Also developing new standards for data processing presents a new opportunity. It would bring the privacy debate back into the discourse in these countries. Having a multinational approach to data jurisdictions is not something the world is familiar with—certainly not South Asia. Developing laws that address these issues would be a remarkable achievement considering the unique challenges each country faces.The bottom line is that in a world of high-tech geopolitics, BIMSTEC might be a better approach than India alone. It would undoubtedly provide more power to India and the region. The icing on the cake is that it presents wonderful possibilities for the future of big data and AI in the region. Having a regional approach to local problems, splitting costs of data centers, and the possibility of better processing laws is wonderful. All that remains for India to do is take the lead and add data as a component of foreign policy.This article was first published in The Diplomat. Views are personal.
Budgetary allocations reveal real priorities of NDA 3
The Union budget speech invites a lot of attention in India. However, it is far more useful to look at the budget statements that get released on the day the speech is read out in Parliament. Comparing the vision articulated in the budget speech with the promised allocations in these statements separate the wheat from the chaff.Read more on Deccan Herald Online
Need to Update Competition Law
There are other major deficiencies in the competition law when it comes to understanding internet companies, Manur said. “Without establishing that a company is dominant, the CCI cannot take any action. But we haven’t clearly defined what the relevant markets are for internet companies. Are Ola and Uber the two largest cab companies? Or are they small players in a very large transportation market that included cabs, metros, trains, etc?" This is one of the defences used by internet companies—that their relevant market isn’t restricted to the internet space. For instance, Google and Facebook argue that they are small players in the larger advertising market, online and offline.As it stands, the competition law is not even equipped to detect some of the antitrust issues in the internet space, added Manur, an antitrust regulation researcher.Manur said it was imperative to add the data footprint of an internet firm as one of the metrics in considering the impact on competition. “The consumer data owned by an internet company is one of the most important indicators of its dominance and impact. In gauging M&As in the internet space this factor needs to be added to the list of considerations."Read more
India’s Chandrayaan-2 matters, but don’t dream about moon picnics with friends just as yet
The prospect of permanent stations on the moon makes the Chandrayaan-2 mission of strategic interest. Although its launch has been postponed for now, when it eventually lands on the moon, India will have taken a substantial step towards extra-terrestrial settlement. “Settlement” might appear to be too strong a word to use for the initial stations that humans will set up on the moon, but they will put us on that path.Read more