The Unending Journey

 

Those trekking in the Himalayas might know this syndrome. I would call it Fold mountain syndrome. The Himalayas are Fold Mountains. Each force generated by the tectonic plate presses the land and elevates it. It creates folds resulting innermost peak being the tallest while those just outside are shorter and so on. So for a trekker climbing from plains to reach the upper destinations you always face this Fold mountain syndrome. As you climb lower folds you can see the sky and nothing beyond due to the gradient.  You have anticipation that you will reach somewhere at least you will see your destination. You take immense efforts to climb that fold. Oxygen concentration also decreases as you climb up. The task gets more difficult. You reach the top of the fold to see a small plateau and another fold that you need to climb. For a moment it is despairing. But then you make your resolve to climb that fold so you could reach the destination. But then you feel the same despair as seeing another fold after climbing this fold.  A trek in the Himalayas at least has a destination. But humanity has not seen its destination for the last two years. It's an unending journey to return to normalcy in life after a tumultuous COVID 19 journey.

As every time we see a semblance of normalcy there is a new threat of a new variant.  This year around Jan-Feb we in India were complacent. Then we were struck by delta.  Now worldwide as Businesses were planning to open up and the travel was on up on the back of Vaccination. But now this new omicron variant has created panic disrupting these plans.  Dr. Angelique Coetzee, a South African doctor who was one of the first to suspect a different coronavirus strain among patients said that symptoms of the Omicron variant were so far mild and could be treated at home. But the world panicked. The news of the new variant emerging from South Africa prompted a swift reaction from several countries, including Britain, which on Friday imposed a travel ban on several southern African countries with immediate effect, a decision South Africa has strongly contested. Many countries have also banned air travel to and from South Africa, including the United States, other European countries, and some Asian nations. Yes, it is prudent to be concerned, take cognizance and improve testing processing across entry points with effective clarified guidelines and have work processes in place to ensure that. Blanket Bans and Knee-jerk announcements without clarity at ground level and lack of machinery to implement the measures will result in panic, chaos, and profiteering as well.

We have to take a cue from the events of the last century. Around the 1920s the influenza pandemic lasted for more than two-three years for the world to raise herd immunity. The world learned to live with influenza. Even today the susceptible people lose their lives to the normal flue. We have influenza running around a year peaking in the Winter Seasons. With advances in genomics, Pharma processes we expected to conquer Corona much quicker than we sort of adjusted to Influenza last century. One important difference between then and now is the role of social media and the internet to create panic and divisive opinion-making.   This epidemic can be fought only and only by science. There is no other tool. External factors like religion or politics should have no role in decision-making. But economics and local/international politics have been added to the mix in the decision-making. It is required by Pharma and healthcare businesses to adapt to the humanitarian angle supported by well-meaning administrations worldwide to facilitate effective prevention and care and still make these businesses viable. Transparency is of utmost importance. It may sound utopian given the international politics and role of big Pharma and big tech which have been always suspicious to those inclined on conspiracy theories and panic mongering.

The resulting economic devastation from a new variant of omicron can hit affluent countries nearly as hard as those in the developing world. One academic study estimated trillions of dollars in economic loss to wealthy countries when residents of poorer countries remain largely unvaccinated. Lack of vaccines then further increases the chance for the virus to mutate and to be more lethal. It’s imperative for the world to get its act together and ensure vaccination across the globe. India as a country suffered due to the Delta variant earlier this year but got its act together through record vaccinations and now is one of the better places to be during the pandemic while Rich countries suffer. India definitely has a role to ensure vaccination. India should also remain vigilant about new variants through testing and feasible regulations.  We should focus on the vaccination of children and the young population especially if we plan to reopen schools and colleges.  Education is the most impacted segment and our future depends on our next generation being skilled and qualified.  Surveys show daily wage earners, housewives are much impacted by pandemic as compared to salaried people and people in the farming sector. These are the most underrepresented segments in society. We really need to conquer the epidemic to avoid a social meltdown.

By now regimes across the world should realize that extended lockdowns are impractical and they impact livelihoods. It is understood that economics matters to people only if people stay alive. But with the impact on their means of livelihood people may not survive as well.  There will be travel so locking borders also is impractical. Vaccination, Testing, and isolation, Social Distancing, Masks, better treatment facilities, and methodologies are the only medicines to help humanity recover from the pandemic. Travel bans and lockdowns are no longer feasible. It’s high time we start living with Corona and its variants to end this unending fold mountain journey. It was around this time two years back. It seems a different world we lived in back then.

Winds of Change

 

Match-fixing scandal in 2000, 50 overs World Cup early exit in 2007, and 20 over World cup exit in 2021 are the three events that have changed the course of Indian Cricket History in this Millennium. These three moments have resulted in Winds of change blowing out regimes and marking a total reset in the cricketing fortunes of the Indian team. And these changes are more important than regime changes in 2004 and 2014 in the politics of this cricket-crazy nation of 1.3 billion Also, I would rate the change of captaincy from Ganguly to Dravid or some last years of Kumble captainship till Dhoni took over after his retirement or for that matter phased out change from Dhoni to Kohli as logical continuations which did not result in reset kind of circumstances.

The match-fixing scandal changed Indian Cricket from its worst nightmare of the 90s. India won at home thanks to custom-made pitches before. Overseas it was a sorry tale with a lone person carrying a billion dreams.  The captainship was given to Behala Boy: Ganguly who then was crowned as the price of Calcutta. The winds of change resulted in the Ganguly Wright regime. He created a fighting spirit that brought us rare foreign victory in tests and led us to our first WC Final after 83 Win.  He was spot on with his eye for the talent. He backed Bhajji, Yuvraj, Sehwag, Zaheer, Nehra, Irfan. He gave space to seniors like Sachin, Dravid, Kumble, and VVS. He met eye to eye to Aussies, waved off his shirt on the Lord's Balcony. Apart from his off-field tactics and leadership, his innings in Brisbane was instrumental in belief for overseas wins in Adelaide and later Johannesburg. Before that, we had won at Headingly, Port of Spain, Kandy. All was well except his batting form later.

This winning regime of Ganguly-Wright was disrupted by end of the term for Wright.  The entry of Greg Chappell created a lot of cultural gaps affecting the mind space of seniors as well juniors in the team. Dravid manned team with the same personnel minus Dada plus new stars like MS Dhoni, Raina, Gambhir, Munaf. Dravid continued the winning streak till the WC 07 in WI disaster. We were strong favorites for 2007. But it all changed after that game versus Bangladesh. Dravid took all blame though he continued till the successful England test series. But the winds of change were already blowing.

Enter Dhoni-Kirsten regime. When Sharad Pawar led BCCI decided to make Dhoni Captain for the inaugural  ICC T20 WC many were surprised.  But later it was revealed that Sachin himself had suggested this. Dhoni was junior to Yuvraj, Sehwag, Zaheer, Bhajji, and a few others. But he had that Midas touch to make the key decisions at some key moments to make a winning impact. He kept things simple and did not create mind issues out of pressure situations. The lack of these skills was later responsible for India’s exit in knockout during the Kohli regime.  Kumble led the team in tests successfully in England and admirably during the Monkey gate series in Australia.  Later after a few years of Kumble's captainship till his retirement, Dhoni took over naturally in all the formats.  He initially led Indian to top test rankings, won many bilateral and triangular trophies in white ball. Though Dhoni won us WC 11 and CT13, apart from these two monumental wins he had a really average captainship. His overseas whitewash series in Eng and Aus were forgotten. The poor show in T20 WCs in 09, 10, and 12 was swept under the carpet. In hindsight what makes Dhoni one of the greatest captains and Kirsten as a great coach was a 50 overs world cup win. Indian Cricket fans still treat 50 over WC as the biggest sovereign trophy. Despite IPL, T20 is India’s weakest format. This is something similar to English soccer despite EPL. People also forget the abrupt mid-series retirement of Dhoni during the Australia test series which paved way for the Virat Shastri regime.

This regime bungled in key selections during ICC WC19 which was really India’s Cup to win after topping the league stage. Indian team won many bilateral series but failed in knockouts in T20WC16, CT 17, and WC19. This regime cannot be blamed for harsh scheduling resulting in the Word Test championship final loss to NZ. Some on-field decisions were also questionable. Despite these failures, Indian Cricket Fans especially die-hard cricket lovers should really respect Virat-Shastri's regime. This team did something extraordinary to win the test series in Australia twice and led an ongoing series in England (which will be completed in 22).   They brought a process-driven approach with a strong fitness focus. Credit should also go to the vision of BCCI to have Dravid coach the A and Under 19 teams. That created a great bench strength that mattered in both these test series wins. For me, the Gabba Victory in 2021 was the second-best moment for Indian Cricket after the 83WC win.

But then things went south with behind the scene issues.  BCCI declared the end of Virat’s captainship along with the end of the term for Shastri. BCCI also did the wrong thing by announcing this before the T20 World Cup.  The Indian team was led by a captain who had no future role. This was the most blatant mistake apart from losses of key tosses. It was a farcical ICC Toss World Cup which was won by Finch by winning two knockout tosses.  Winds of Change made Rohit Captain of the white ball and Rahane will lead in tests versus New Zealand. Dravid as a coach has a task in hand to manage the smooth transition of captainship and manage the right selection for the next challenges: T20 WC in 22, WC in 23, and WTC in two years cycle. Dravid has invested his time with youngsters who have a task cut out to fulfill a billion dreams.

Weathering the Climate

 

Weather refers to short-term atmospheric conditions while climate is the weather of a specific region averaged over a long period of time. This is the definition we have learned in our school geography. There is a phrase in the English dictionary:  to weather through something. This means to pass or go safely through a storm, peril, difficulty, etc. P L Deshpande in one of his many hilarious storytelling episodes mentions that one official in Government's Meteorological departments was so inaccurate in his predictions of weather that he mentions in his resignation letter that the Climate of that city doesn’t suit him. The person in the joke here cannot weather the climate which he predicts as means of his livelihood. In the US, it is very common to have climate as a reason to change the geography. But soon the vagaries of climate as we are seeing in Chennai or smog in Delhi, flooding in Mumbai will   be a major factor of relocations in India as well. The impact of climate change will be a more compelling reason for migration in this interconnected world. As winter is setting in this Northeast part of the US, we see a push in migration towards warmer climes in the west or south.

People have lots of reasons to move, whether they want to stay near the family or avoid the high price and maddening traffic of big cities. And then, there’s the weather. Even before the pandemic, 11 percent of Americans reported having moved at least once in their lives to find better weather. Sun and warmth can indeed boost your mood as per research. But actually, moving for the sake of better weather probably isn’t worth the money, time, and personal disruption. There are better strategies to manage happiness, even if you live in a place with dreadful weather.

Sunshine and happiness are undeniably related. Researchers have long noted what they call the “seasonal worsening of psychiatric symptoms”: Mood is worse and anxiety is higher when the weather turns colder and grayer. Some people have an especially strong negative reaction to a lack of sunshine in the form of seasonal affective disorder (SAD) especially at higher latitudes and during the winter months. In addition to experiencing serotonin deficits from a lack of sunshine, people with SAD appear to be especially vulnerable to the ways that darkness disturbs their circadian rhythms, interrupting their sleep cycles in ways that lower well-being. Temperature matters for happiness too. One study measured participants’ mood at various temperatures and found that a cool 57 degrees Fahrenheit (14 degC) outdoors is optimal for a positive mood. Temperatures colder and hotter than that were associated with a lower sense of well-being.

But unless you suffer from SAD, moving to get it probably isn’t worth the effort. You’ll miss the seasons if you’re coming from somewhere more temperate, the gains to your well-being will be smaller than you imagine, and that small happiness bump will evaporate all too quickly. Meanwhile, depending on where you choose to go, you could be stuck with chronic happiness drains such as high taxes and house prices.

You’ll be happier if you can find a way to get sun and warmth temporarily, especially during the bleakness of the winter months. Research shows that frequent, short vacations—if you have them—are a good strategy for raising overall well-being because they circumvent the adaptation problem. We already know that people who live in cold places get a mood boost as spring arrives; you can simulate that changeover and over with short vacations to sunny spots.

If all else fails, you can simply give up and decide to stop complaining. On the contrary, a full life is one that has its sun and rain, all of it offering itself to be experienced. So weathering everything is more fulfilling than taking weather equations out of our lives. The idea is to see it off: whatever it is.

Now there is another perspective. Those who complain about bad weather should really be cognizant of reality around them. Migrations done voluntarily toward better climes may sound frivolous and maybe as a problem arising out of plenty of choices of livelihood. But there is another human tragedy unfolding due to climate changes.  

The impacts of climate change are numerous and may both trigger displacement and worsen living conditions or hamper return for those who have already been displaced. Limited natural resources, such as drinking water, are becoming even scarcer in many parts of the world that host refugee. Crops and livestock struggle to survive where conditions become too hot and dry, or too cold and wet, threatening livelihoods. In such conditions, climate change can act as a threat multiplier, exacerbating existing tensions and adding to the potential for conflicts.

Hazards resulting from the increasing intensity and frequency of extreme weather events, such as abnormally heavy rainfall, prolonged droughts, desertification, environmental degradation, or sea-level rise and cyclones are already causing an average of more than 20 million people to leave their homes and move to other areas in their countries each year.

Some people are forced to cross borders in the context of climate change and disasters and may in some circumstances be in need of international protection. Refugee and human rights laws, therefore, have an important role to play in this area.

The Global Compact on Refugees, affirmed by an overwhelming majority in the UN General Assembly, directly addresses this growing concern. It recognizes that “climate, environmental degradation, and disasters increasingly interact with the drivers of refugee movements”.

There is a war going on to minimize the impact of climate change. And all countries have joined it through COP26 and its effectiveness will be tested in the next five years and thereafter. If we weather the climate change and meet the targets we will have our next generations thanking us for that else we won’t inherit a safe place to them and they won’t even have a choice to complain about the weather.

 

 

Natural Laws for Artificial Intelligence

 

I like reading Sci-fi written by Asimov.  He coined the word Robotics and he envisioned a world where robots walked amongst us humans. They possessed greater abilities than humans such as strength and speed. Every robot had "The Three Laws" entrenched into their "positronic brains". 

The following three Laws were there to protect humans: 

First Law: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm 

Second Law: A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law 

Third Law: A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws 

Asimov later in another book defined a "Zeroth" Law: A robot may not injure humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm. 

If we extend the definition of "harm" to include "upset or bring distress" then we really need guidelines for AI and Ethics?    

No one right now manufactures "positronic brain" in our world. But any individual, organization, or government can create AI and put it to use or misuse. If only we could embed the Zeroth Law into our algorithms, so no matter what we did to train our AI algorithm, the Zeroth Law would always override our actions. 

Currently, most types of AI that we encounter on a daily basis are quantified as “narrow-AI”. This is a type of AI that is very specific and narrow in its utility function.  Artificial General (AGI) is an AI that similar to humans can quickly learn, adapt, pivot, and function in the real-world 

In Asimov's Sci-Fi, there were instances where robots were accidentally or deliberately created without the Three Laws embedded but the robots had to work out their ethics and their place in the world and society for themselves. 

Our narrow AI can't do what Asimov’s Robots did. But if we apply the Zeroth Law of AI to our work: AI may not harm, upset or distress humanity, or, by inaction, allows humanity to come to harm, upset, or distress? The focus today is on AI action, not inaction - that raises a whole discussion point of ethics.

Leave aside sci-fi for a moment.  Progress in AI will happen over a period of time.  But Currently, AI is becoming an unavoidable part of our society. Machines now recommend online videos to watch, perform surgery and send people to jail. The science of AI is a human activity that needs to be regulated by society.  There are enormous risks. There are two approaches to AI. The first is to view it in engineering terms, where algorithms are trained on specific tasks. The second presents deeper philosophical questions about the nature of human knowledge. The algorithms are much pushed by Silicon Valley, where AI is deployed to get products quickly to market and ethical problems dealt with later. This has made AI as a success even when the goals aren’t socially acceptable and there is hardly any accountability. The unscrupulous aspect of this approach is exemplified by the role YouTube’s algorithm plays in radicalizing people, given that there is no public understanding of how it works. That requires a system of checks and balances where machines can pause and “ask” for human intervention, and for regulations to deal with anomalies. 

Few AI professionals back the global adoption of EU legislation that would ban the impersonation of humans by machines. Computers are getting closer to passing the Turing test (though barely) – where machines attempt to trick people into believing they are communicating with other humans. Yet human knowledge is collective: to truly fool humans a computer would have to be able to grasp mutual understandings. 

Some argue that AI can already produce new insights that humans have missed. But human intelligence is much more than an algorithm. Inspiration strikes when a brilliant thought arises. And This can’t be explained as a logical consequence of preceding steps. As an Example: Einstein’s theory of general relativity cannot be derived from observations of that age – it was experimentally proven only decades later. Human beings can also learn a new task by being shown how to do it only a few times.  Currently, AI can be prompted – but not prompt itself – into action. 

Some people have predicted that a computer that could match the human brain might arrive by 2052 (costing $1tn). We need to find better ways to build it. Humans have reached an era when the more powerful the AI system, the harder it is to explain its actions. How can we tell if a machine is acting on our behalf and not acting contrary to our interests?  Are all the AI-backed decisions are ethical?

Thus we need to ponder on the biggest question of how to regulate AI algorithms as Asimov tried to imply and how to implement AI systems that are based on the key principles underlying the proposed regulatory frameworks.

AI systems that produce biased results have been making headlines. One well-known example is Apple’s credit card algorithm, which has been accused of discriminating against women. But there are other problems as for example in online advertisement algorithms, which may target viewers by race, religion, or gender, and in Amazon’s automated résumé screener, which filtered out female candidates. A recent study published showed that risk prediction tools used in health care, which affect millions of people in the United States every year, exhibit significant racial bias.   

 To follow the more stringent AI regulations that are on the cards, companies will need new processes and tools: system audits, documentation and data protocols (for traceability), AI monitoring, and diversity awareness training. A number of companies already test each new AI algorithm across a variety of stakeholders to assess whether its output is aligned with company values and is unlikely to raise regulatory concerns. You have seen companies have CXO roles, now you will definitely see a Chief AI Ethical officer (CAEO).