Tata's fall :: China's rise?

Late last year Tata motors unveiled production plans for the Nano, what was to be the world's most affordable car with a retail price tag of $2,300. Their plans were derailed today by farmers protesting land acquisitions in the special economic zone of Singur, home to one of three Nano factories in India. The debate has been brewing since the government "bought" the land under a 2005 economic expansion policy. It is certainly reflective of the tense nature of labor relations in India but more tellingly, the outdated nature of the Indian bureaucracy and government.

From my own experience in India (and this can be confirmed by anyone who has worked or lived there), anything the government runs is insanely slow. Employing three people to sell someone a stamp and five people to check your train ticket (not to mention the 4 porters relying only on tips) reflects the far reach of the government and its' woeful inefficiency.

Not only is this frustrating but, as Arvind Subramanian explains, it also spells danger for India's growth and development (especially when compared to China). India is certainly ahead of China in education achievements and political freedoms, but unless the government can be streamlined by selfless reformers (about as likely as it sounds), the country's growth will slow in the coming years. The bureaucratic institutions are a legacy of the British and provided many jobs in the early years of Independence but unless the government can discard this colonial legacy the institutional stagnation will lead to economic stagnation. As Subramanian says, it is easier to create markets than improve a state's capacity. That's good news for China and bad news for India. 

The Internet Can Can

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) ruled today in Paris that any organization, company, or entity can now apply for an individual domain ending.  

The decision, while creating room for hackers and other internet improprieties, provides a unique laboratory to monitor how organizations value their internet property. How this move will affect internet culture remains to be seen. The expected explosion of requests will be monitored by the ICANN while an unnamed third party arbiter will handle objections and disputes. Unfortunately ICANN's power to regulate remains woefully inadequate for such a task. Nor can governments be trusted to ensure transparency and cooperation in global electronic commerce. Internet freedom remains a fringe political issue but one of great importance. 

What exactly does this spell for the average surfer? More streamlined advertising is a foregone conclusion. With monitoring techniques growing more sophisticated and advertisers targeting users, ads tailored to personal surfing habits do not seem far off. To facilitate this search engines must refine their business plans and technological capabilities. In their quest to open up and personalize the internet the ICANN may have boxed in users to a new generation of surveillance.

The possibility of restricted web names and generic copyrighting will undoubtedly spew legal challenges and corporate interference. But one thing is certain. The internet will continue to spur innovation and cooperation. In the end it will be the user who defines how new domain names will be received. Just as difficult as it would have been twenty years ago to imagine Google as a verb, perhaps .com will soon be a quaint relic of the 00s in an era of unsurpassed ubiquity.