Every session arranged is critical, and so i literally lost my opportunity to speak with P.Sainath, who did inspired my life in some way. But interestingly, i attended Smart governance handled by Srikanth Lakshmanan. We had good discussion about :

• E-governance
• FAT in e-governance & its projects
• Open-Data, gov. Open source policies
• Aadhaar/UIDAI & UPI/India Stack based services
• Open-government projects hosted in Open Forge

I personally have handed him a research query, which i am still waiting the answers for. I hope i would soon get his replies back. After so much pressure and almost 5 years of disobedience against Aadhar's "Voluntarily Mandatory" strategy, i had to enroll Aadhar for want of PDS - Food cornered by my present Independent Research situation. I am still happy to know that people like Srikanth are still do say NO or NOT necessary to Aadhaar. I hope that he does not fall into situations that mandates him to the gravity of enrolling of draconian Aadhaar scheme.

This is the more interesting experience i have ever had in the conference. This is the kind of experience i was searching for. The session is about introducing IndiaStacks to communities like us. At first me and my peer.. was a bit skeptical in attending the session, but then we decided to learn Sharad Sharma's point of view. During his presentation many of the points he pointed out as "public reasons" were contradictory to us. His interpretation seems to be founted & stemmed from the Silicon Valley, and rooted in pushing disruption and was felt it was never really about enabling and embracing local scenario. Even though his flamboyant presentation slides contain inclusion of "common man" scenario, the reasoning are completely out of scope. His interpretations of current scenario are in alignment with commodification of privacy using Aadhaar + UPI + IndiaStack for the sake of better facilitation.

Sharad Sharma's point is : before any other MNC or conglomerate would commodify your privacy legally, why not people let the government - private partnership within the nation do it ???. After all, government functionality nowadays are focussed more towards profit orientation rather than directive principles of state policy. So its either them or the big corporations. And as long as Aadhaar, UPI, and layers like IndiaStack are present, they will not let the potential market slip out of our hands. So people have no choice after demonitization, let everyone have a smartphone (even people who are BPL), even by pushing majority of the population to buy one, without worrying about the proverty, so that we can unitedly prove Aadhaar, UPI, IndiaStack are the fore front in governance technology.... that aspires to solve the problems in economy, governance, bureaucracy in one go. But to safegaurd the technology against attacks they will not be transparent to people, not even transparent about the locations of Aadhar data centres properly, open-source development method will not be adopted and people are there to just shut their critical thinking, cripple their civic rights, fill their mouths with burgers, to just accept what these systems are pushing in the name of disruption which will lead to a better society.

Inference : So.... Congratulations, on confirming that we are no more data-based subjects, but even reduced to toy objects living just to enable Aadhaar, UPI, IndiaStack services, & to transact digital currencies.... that would further accelerate consumerism, synthetic internet product purchase addictions, loss of critical understanding of what is privacy & what is not privacy, reducing democracy to plutocracy and even to monarchy to make "kings" decision without the need to consult anybody and execute the self made decisions within a day. :D But still, those "kings decision" have never thought about implementing free & free of cost education, removing electoral corruptions, participatory governance... ?

Out of nowehere, he interestingly pulled whistle blower: Edward Snowden and made personal attacks on him without any proper proof. We both confronted this and then onwards he was completely ignoring our impetus and request to raise queries regarding architecture of IndiaStack and even i have had questions to him from a developmental economics point of view. Fortunately some of the other peers, who were still sane, asked him really proper questions in association with open-source policy of India Stack. Now the discussion so hot, that he too emotional, and started comparing hollywood movie industry policies with the governance here. He futher erupted emotionally and refuted the query with unnecessarily stench words, that would have hurt any person who have expected politeness and proper reasoning for a humble question. The guy who queried Sharad Sharma literally never expected such word flames....

Interesting eh ??? All these time, me and my peer do not know that Usha Ramanathan was sitting beside us and was listening to all these commotions happening in the hall. After recognizing that she is in the hall, i decided to go speak about law research, aadhaar, wages of impunity, stuff as we are moving towards the panel discussion in the auditorium which i was eagerly waiting for it till morning. As of then i was expecting a really good rational discussion in the panel maintaining they coool.

(but deep down ... i was expecting something different)

The panel discussion started after me having little talks with Usha Ramanathan and Franco Thomas. Panel was set and initiated by Thomas Franco about demonitization & digital infrastructure. Again all speakers were rationally explaining their views while Sharad Sharma took emotion as his strategy, and resembled the Charlie Chaplin's climax speech profile in "The Great dictator", expect that this views sound subjugative atleast for few of us. Do not assume that he made a great speech just because i have compared his speech profile with Charlie Chaplin's.... Beware :D

With good points made by all, the session ended peacefully in a progressive way - while everyone not accepting specific views of Sharad Sharma - and made it clear to the public attending the session through their gestures, which unfortunately Sharad Sharma would not have possibly seen. Those who have understood little bit of liberty, democracy, constituion, and the present state of the system, gave standing ovation to Usha Ramanathan and Thomas Franco. We are neither driven by emotion, nor by overhonorary but the ovation emerged out of us, spontaneously, that helped made the situation clear on how the dots are connected with opportunistic mindset. I believe that those who appreciated it, has certain degree of criticality to it.

Panel concluded with that the Financial institutions, Governance, Bureaucracy can function in a much better way with empathy and not by robbing/alienating people by pushing them to a new infrastructure that has many problems and most of the part was infused in practice in unconstitutional way ! (aadhaar as money bill and first implemented before even passing the bill... moreover a republic government must look forward to create act if there is need for written privacy law in constitution - instead the governments we chose, are using it as a business pot to churn out profits and control mechanisms...).

If u are interested in learning Citizenship, & Identity, please check this out... if u have any queries, u can comment below or contact me. Feel free to criticize. I am ready to listen and learn. The following is the sum up of 2nd day newscast.

I never thought, that volunteers would arrange Thappattam (தப்பாட்டம்) from my home district. I love two folk arts very deeply. One is Devarattam (தேவராட்டம்) that uses Thunthubi (துந்துபி), and the other is thappattam, that almost mesmerizes anybody in TamilNadu. And this time, it has proved that it has proved its artistic influx into almost everyone who came to the auditorium (which is a diverse mix of people with diverse cultures & languages). I didn't danced, instead i was crying altogether, as a form of expression and was keenly observing the dance, their leg, hand, instrument movements, graceness, etc,..... I was crying for a long time (basically i do not know why i cried). I hope everybody would have enjoyed celebration of life from the music and flamboyant performance of the artists.

Aftern reaching hoste, me and prasanna decided to engage new volunteers, and all others in the surrounding to help them learn about the necessity of alternative thinking in social, techno-social, techno-political domains, that gave prasanna to start the discussion with querying about the each ones understanding on centralized, decnetralized, grassroots based systems - atleast in social networking point of view. We both along with others in the room seemed to attact towards a critical discussion about the architectural influence of networking technology in communication, social reflection, etc.. The discussion went so long and interesting at some point we simulated situations of centralized social networking and people seem to kindle their thought process and thought really about the advantages and limitations of the system.

We then replicated similar simulation strategy for other structural/architectural modes of networking namely, decentralized/ federated and grass-roots networking. People tend to clearly understand where architecure comes in, where structure emerges, how they both influences information flow, what founted data commodification, etc... from unbiased view as much as we capable of handling. It is like my brain took a trip in Psilocybin by just taking part in the disucssion alone. We have not only deliberated about the advantages and limitations of each systems and ideas, but tend to come to certain conclusions of where to use what.... in other words... location based implementation + scenario (anti-ignorance) based implementation.

We felt that such deliberation is necessary because, these are the technology which are going to emerge as alternatives to present communication infrastructure which has to be shaped towards a progressive functionality rather than a profit yielding functionality alone. It happened in a democratic way apart from sporadic heated arguments over unproved claims.