That depends on how complex and interactive the UI is and how much lifting the server is doing. If most of the business logic is in the server and the UI is simple data presentation with some basic interactions, then a web app is what I would go with.
> Yes except Muslims. Thats the problematic part. Religion is used as a defining position for 'repatriation'
How is that problematic? Many religions originated in India. Don't these people have the right to come back and get accelerated citizenship for their homeland if they are persecuted in other countries?
Also very importantly, the CAA does not prohibit Muslim immigrants from seeking citizenship [1]. Which is what you are suggesting here. And it is patently false [1]. So please desist from spreading lies here.
A gentle reminder that Israel also does the same. So why are you holding Israel and India to different standards?
> They have effectively captured all media houses and they telecast blatant anti Muslim propaganda 24/7
The biggest media houses (by viewership count) in India are NDTV, AajTak, Times Now. I view them daily and I don't see any anti-muslim propaganda 24/7. Perhaps you can give examples from these three houses that is anti-muslim propaganda?
I have read that before. It talks about a deadly cocktail of 3 laws, CAA, NPC, NRC. Out of these, the nation-wide NPC and NRC laws don't exist, even in very rough drafts. So I am really not sure from where the author of this piece is drawing all his conjecture from. It also re-repeats some same half-facts about CAA that I dismissed above. Maybe the author is time-travelling mind-reader who knows more about some future laws that even the law-writers don't know about?
> >Perhaps you can give examples from these three houses that is anti-muslim propaganda?
1. I mentioned the three big media houses by viewership (NDTV, AajTak, Times Now.) Two of them are not mentioned in this piece, so the "all media houses are controlled" statement falls flat right here.
2. This is not an well researched journalism piece. It not even a journalism piece at all. It's an explicitly stated opinion piece that is presented as such. No one in the world considers an opinion piece as a fact. This is what an actual, well researched fact filled piece looks like[1], with all specific facts and details. If you can produce a detailed piece of journalism like this proving your point, then I will believe you.
3. Even if we consider this opinion piece as not opinion, it is very light on facts. It does not mention any specific big government produced propaganda pieces that are being pushed. It talks about some media (not all) houses talking about some issues to gain ratings. But that is not 24/7 government controlled propaganda. Not even close to the old Triumph of Will standards, never mind all the modern spectacle that is possible today with technology.
It's interesting and disappointing that the CAA is bought up all the time on India related threads in HN for being something that is anti-minority, but explicitly helps persecuted minorities in neighborhood countries, like these Sikhs that faced terror attacks in Afghanistan [1].
Isn't supporting persecuted minorities with no other homeland than India something that the government of India should do? Israel does it by giving citizenship to all persecuted incoming Jews and there seem to be no complains about that so not sure why India is demonized for doing the same.
Also, most of the mentions of CAA never explain exactly what is discriminatory in the law[2]. It only accelerates the citizenship process for religions that originate in India. Not sure what is discriminatory about that?
Your question contains your answer - "It only accelerates the citizenship process for religions that originate in India. Not sure what is discriminatory about that?"
You pick and choose which religions get an "accelerated" citizenship process (whatever that means). Also India has millions of muslims (or christians) whom you can deny citizenship because it is a "foreign" religion :)
The CAA and NRC are designed to work together to strip citizenship from Indian muslims who do not have documents to comprehensively prove citizenship.
The NRC is terrible but not overtly discriminatory on religious grounds. The CAA essentially protects people from the NRC, but does so in a blatantly discriminatory manner.
How it works: You might have a passport or driving license or Aadhaar, but none of these prove you are a citizen; you need a document issued before the 1970 wave of immigration from Bangladesh, and if you are younger than that you need to prove an ancestor's citizenship using such a document and then prove your descent from that person using birth certificates.
Needles to say, many people (of all religions) would not be able to do that.
This is where the CAA comes in, saying people in the country illegally have a fast-track to citizenship if they happen to be from a list of 'persecuted minorities' in neighboring countries. The list excludes persecuted muslim groups, most conspicuously the Rohingya of Myanmar who face the most horrifying persecution.
Sidenote: while I said the NRC isn't discriminatory in it's framing, it was in practice in Assam, the only state where it has been enforced. Officers have broad discretion over choosing whom to challenge (to prove citizenship), and some were caught admitting they challenged people based on how hey dressed and in what neighborhood they lived.
Personal observation, but then you would say that's an anecdote. However if you are familiar with how governance works in India this will not be surprising to you at all.
The moment it is required that an official needs to sign off on something, that power will be used to extract money first and political favors next.
The recent love jihad laws that require a sign off from the administration attesting that no harm has been done in s case of mixed faith marriage, is not the first of its kind. A couple of months ago a marriage registrar and local police asked for a hefty bribe from two of my acquaintances who were getting married to each other - all because they are from different religion and that requires a sign off from local admin. This is a known practice and the corruption money finds it way up to high places. It is a politically sanctioned corruption.
Speculating now --
The recent spate of cow slaughter lynching is less about protecting cows ft slaughter houses but note about using the political system to grab protection money from Muslims - give me money and continue as usual or get lynched even if its buff meat that you are selling/transporting
I would recommend you to read this FAQ[1]. It answers all you points.
> Also India has millions of muslims (or christians) whom you can deny citizenship because it is a "foreign" religion :)
This is blatantly false. The CAA only applies to new immigrants that apply for citizenship. No where in the CAA law it is mentioned that existing citizens can be stripped of their citizenship due to their religion or any other reason.
This is not twitter or reddit. Please stop spreading lies, FUD and conjecture here.
where did you get the "deny citizenship to muslims" from ? they are still part of the process and will take the same time they do today .. nothing changes for them.. which is the cases for hindus/sikh/jains/muslims/chrstn from any other country apart from these 3 bordering india ..
It's not that the elite media institutions are Luddite. It's that a lot of tech people don't give elite media the proper respect it thinks it demands. And that turns into a cycle where media then lashes out with hurt egos, further flaming it, like with this article.
It's clear from reading the article that the real issue in the article is not Mars or Earth or Carl Sagan, it's Elon Musk. Or more specifically, the complete lack of respect Elon publicly gives to elite media.
The outrage is due to Facebook being involved. No one (very rightfully) trusts Facebook with their data. I doubt there would have been any outrage at this level if an independent WhatsApp was doing this.
How is Facebook having more of my data in this scenario?
Only if I'm talking a business on WhatsApp (which is optional and will hopefully stay that way), and only if the business I'm talking to uses Facebook as a service provider (instead of, say, Twilio or a self-hosted solution) does something change for me.
Facebook has indicated that businesses processing chats through Facebook will be clearly indicated as doing so, which hopefully puts enough pressure on businesses respecting their customers' privacy to not do so.
Businesses not respecting people's privacy can already choose to share arbitrary data with Facebook for advertisement purposes, so what changes?
Now if Facebook was to discontinue the existing E2E-encrypted business chat integration, that would be something to get upset about.
I'm really afraid that the only lesson that Facebook (and others) have learned in all of this is that TOS changes are best hidden in the fine print of opting into some user-visible new feature via some dark UX pattern, like e.g. Google commonly does.
Does it say there is some sort of opt in to a business conversation, not only now but in the future? No.
So, you are giving Facebook the right to sell your private conversations to third parties in the future, but you think it’s not an issue because you trust ... checks notes... Facebook?
The more that I read about what the social media giants are doing everywhere, including the recent drama around wsb discord ban and the Facebook-Australia thing, I feel that what's happening in China is chillingly close to happening to the rest of the world. Or maybe it is already happening slowly and we don't realise it yet.
Recommend Zoho as well. Their web client is insanely fast and filled with all sorts of power user features. The gmail client doesn't even compare with how slow it is.
That's exactly what I think. I shouldn't have to be configuring stuff to not be disturbed. That should be the default. Then let me configure under what circumstances I want to waken up, like this person is calling, the server went down, etc.
Maybe that's what designers/developers should consider when working on notifications: this notification will potentially wake up someone, let's not do it unless they explicitly asked us to wake them up if this happened.
Yep, someone designed my phone to vibrate if it runs out of battery and needs to shut down. Wonderful in the middle of the night. No way to disable it.
>You can't even compare Biden Support to modi Supporters. Biden won fair & square
So did Modi. His victory in elections was accepted by all his rivals as fair and square.
> But Modi's rule is dictatorship.
How is it a dictatorship? Modi won fair and square in an election conceded by all his rivals. If you don't like him, then vote him out. If you cannot vote him out, then you can claim to it being a dictatorship.
But you can go and vote him out. And sorry, the majority of the country not accepting your views to vote him out is democracy, not dictatorship.
You are correct that Modi won popular vote. But this one chancellor who is rather a poster child of being a bad boy won his election too. Note also the fact that only about 50% of the people exercised their vote so there is a large fraction who aren't that enthused about Modi
So you are claiming that the video in the comment above is fake? That the sword was photoshopped in as part of a misinformation exercise? If you are claiming this, then it sounds something straight out of an Indian QAnon conspiracy theory.
> I have family there so I can confirm.
I happen to live there myself. So I can confirm that these sword wielding protesters were attacking policemen armed with sticks (Indian policemen are not armed with lethal weapons). I saw this happening from my own window with my own eyes.
