Invaluable Zeroes!

Encryption is the art of scrambling information to make it unreadable to the public at large. Encryption has a rich history. The earliest historical record of it’s use is from Caesar's cipher. From then to the complex algorithms used today, the fundamental goal remains the same: protecting sensitive data. Modern cryptography relies heavily on public key infrastructure (PKI), a system that underpins much of our contemporoary secure online interactions.

PKI uses pairs of keys: a public key for encryption and a private key for decryption. Think of it like a mailbox. Anyone with the address can send a letter (encrypted message) into the mailbox (using the public key), but only the owner with the key (private key) can open it. PKI is ubiquitous, securing everything from online banking to secure websites (HTTPS). Its strength lies in the mathematical difficulty of deriving the private key from the public key.

However, even with robust systems like PKI, vulnerabilities can arise from seemingly minor implementation details. One such pitfall is the practice of "padding," especially when combined with weak key management. Padding is necessary when cryptographic operations require data to be in specific block sizes. It involves adding extra data to meet these requirements. While padding itself isn't inherently bad, improper padding, like using predictable patterns such as strings of zeros, can severely weaken encryption.

The problem with zero-padding, particularly with large keys (like 256-bit keys), is that it can drastically reduce the effective key space. A 256-bit key should offer an astronomically large number of possibilities, making brute-force attacks computationally infeasible. However, if a 256-bit key is padded with 252 zeros, the effective key strength is reduced to just 4 bits. Why? Because the 252 zeros are fixed and known. An attacker only needs to guess the remaining 4 bits, meaning only 16 possible key values need to be checked. This makes the encryption utterly trivial to break.

Imagine you have a combination lock with 256 dials, each with 10 digits (0-9). That’s a vast number of combinations. Now, imagine someone tells you 252 of those dials are already set to zero. Suddenly, you only need to figure out the remaining four dials. The problem isn't the lock itself (the 256-bit encryption), but how it's being used (the zero-padding).

It's important to understand that this vulnerability is hidden. A user examining a PKI certificate would not be able to directly recognize the zero-padding issue. PKI certificates contain information about the certificate holder, the issuer, the public key, and other metadata. They do not contain the private key, nor do they reveal how that private key was generated or padded. The padding (or lack thereof) happens during the key generation process, which is separate from certificate creation. The certificate simply holds the public key. The key generation process itself is usually opaque to the end-user.

So, how can an end-user protect themselves? Directly preventing zero-padding isn't something an average user can control. The responsibility lies with developers and system administrators. However, users can take precautions:

• Keep software updated: Updates often contain security patches that address vulnerabilities, including those related to padding.

• Use strong passwords: While not directly related to padding, strong passwords protect against other attack vectors.

• Be wary of unusual website behavior: If a secure website (HTTPS) exhibits strange behavior, it might be a sign of a compromised system.

• Educate yourself: Understanding the basics of online security empowers you to make informed decisions

  
  

While PKI provides a strong foundation for secure communication, it's crucial to implement it correctly. Zero-padding, especially with large keys, is a classic example of how a seemingly small oversight can have devastating consequences. By understanding these risks and taking appropriate precautions, we can all contribute to a more secure online environment.

Practical Programming: Governance rules from the world of computer programming!

In programming, patterns refer to reusable solutions to commonly occurring problems within a given context. These patterns are not specific pieces of code but rather general templates or blueprints that a programmer can follow to solve problems or design systems in a consistent and efficient way. 

Lately it occurred to me that legislation were framed in parts. E.g. Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 & subsequently  draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules (2025). So I tried a bit of legwork.... and here is what I came up with. 

It seems that patterns may be used to construct statues that are significantly adaptable. This would be akin to what the Constitution of India lists as "Directive Principles of State Policy"; high-level or even abstract guidelines that inform what the State would like to achieve. The State then drafts legislation that nudge the general population in a favourable direction.

Bridge Pattern in Legislative Frameworks

The Bridge pattern in legislation manifests when a law separates its high-level objectives (abstraction) from its operational details (implementation). This approach ensures flexibility and scalability, as both components can evolve independently to adapt to new challenges or advancements.

The Bridge Pattern

1. Acts as the Abstraction Layer
   Acts encapsulate the broad principles, objectives, and rights but refrain from delving into procedural specifics.

   • Example: The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union outlines high-level principles such as the "right to erasure" and "data minimization," leaving member states to implement these principles via their national laws or guidelines.

2. Rules as the Implementation Layer
   Rules, subordinate to the Act, operationalize these principles with detailed mechanisms, timelines, and standards.

   • Example: In India, the Environmental Protection Act, 1986, broadly defines pollution control objectives, while specific Rules like the Environment Protection Rules, 1986, detail emissions standards, waste management protocols, and penalties.

Characteristics of a Legislative Bridge Pattern

• Independence of Layers:
  Acts and Rules are distinct yet interdependent. Rules are crafted within the framework of the Act but do not modify its foundational principles.

• Adaptability:
  As technology or societal norms evolve, Rules can be updated to reflect current needs without requiring amendments to the Act.

  • Example: The U.S. Clean Air Act (CAA), 1963 serves as a foundational abstraction, while the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updates emission standards and procedural rules as implementation.

• Alignment Through Interfaces:
  The interaction between Acts and Rules ensures that Rules align with the goals of the Act, much like the implementation of a Bridge pattern interface aligns with its abstraction.

---

Illustrative Example: Environmental Legislation in the United States

• Abstraction:
  The Clean Air Act (CAA), 1963, sets high-level goals for air quality improvement and pollution reduction.

• Implementation:
  The EPA regulations, derived from the Act, specify detailed standards, such as permissible limits for carbon emissions, methodologies for measuring air quality, and compliance mechanisms.

• Bridge Analogy:
  The CAA defines "what needs to be achieved" (clean air and reduced pollution), while EPA regulations detail "how it should be achieved" (specific technologies, emission caps, and compliance checks).

---

Other Legislative Examples of the Bridge Pattern

1. European Union GDPR:

   • Abstraction: GDPR provides broad rights like data portability and privacy by design.
   • Implementation: Member states develop national data protection authorities (DPAs) to enforce GDPR with localized guidelines.

2. UK’s Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974:

   • Abstraction: Ensures workplace safety for all employees.
   • Implementation: The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, 1999, details risk assessments, training, and emergency planning.

3. India’s Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019:
   

   • Abstraction: The CAA, enacted in December 2019, aims to provide Indian citizenship to persecuted minorities from neighbouring countries—who entered India.
   • Implementation: The Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024, notified in March 2024, outline the procedures and criteria for eligible individuals to apply for citizenship under the CAA. This includes details on the application process, required documentation, and other formalities necessary to acquire Indian citizenshiip.
     
    
   

---

Advantages of the Bridge Pattern in Legislation

• Easier Updates: Updating Rules to reflect new realities (e.g., technological advancements or social changes) does not require amending the Act, which is a more complex and time-consuming process.
• Clear Separation: Maintains a distinction between what needs to be achieved (Acts) and how it is achieved (Rules), ensuring clarity.
• Contextual Flexibility: Rules can address specific sectoral or regional needs while adhering to the broader framework set by the Act.

---

Potential for Abuse in the Bridge Pattern in Legislation

While the Bridge pattern is an effective analogy for the separation of principles (Acts) and implementation (Rules), it also introduces vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities stem from the potential for independent evolution of Acts and Rules, leading to misalignment, overreach, or misuse. Below are the key risks and how they could be exploited:

---

1. Divergence Between Acts and Rules

Risk: Misalignment of Intent and Implementation

Rules may evolve in ways that deviate from the principles or intent of the Act, either through poor drafting, misinterpretation, or deliberate manipulation.

• Potential for Abuse: Authorities could craft Rules that technically adhere to the Act but introduce disproportionate or restrictive measures, effectively undermining the Act's spirit.
• Example: An Act promoting “affordable healthcare for all” might have Rules that impose excessive compliance costs on small clinics, making healthcare less accessible.

---

2. Overreach in Rulemaking Authority

Risk: Unchecked Delegation of Power

The flexibility to draft or amend Rules often lies with the executive branch or regulatory bodies, which may exceed their mandate.

• Potential for Abuse: Regulators could create burdensome Rules benefiting specific interest groups (e.g., large corporations) at the expense of smaller stakeholders.
• Example: Environmental Rules could set emission caps that are achievable only by large industries with advanced technologies, sidelining smaller competitors.

---

3. Frequent and Opaque Amendments

Risk: Instability and Lack of Oversight

Rules can often be amended more easily than Acts, sometimes without legislative debate or public consultation.

• Potential for Abuse: Frequent amendments could destabilize the legal framework or be used to favor specific entities without broad accountability.
• Example: Taxation Rules might redefine eligible businesses for tax exemptions, benefiting only a select few while others lose intended benefits.

---

4. Legal Grey Areas and Loopholes

Risk: Ambiguity in Scope and Application

Acts often leave operational details to Rules, but gaps or ambiguities in either layer can create legal grey areas.

• Potential for Abuse: Ambiguity allows selective enforcement or exploitation by individuals or organizations to evade compliance.
• Example: A data protection Act might require "timely breach notifications," but if Rules don’t define "timely," organizations could delay disclosures indefinitely.

---

5. Miscommunication to Stakeholders

Risk: Stakeholder Confusion and Misdirection

The separation between Acts and Rules can lead to confusion among stakeholders, especially when Rules appear to contradict or overcomplicate the Act.

• Potential for Abuse: Authorities may highlight the Act’s principles to the public while enforcing restrictive Rules, misleading stakeholders about their rights.
• Example: An Act promoting "freedom of information" might have Rules requiring lengthy, expensive procedures to access records, effectively undermining transparency.

---

6. Selective Enforcement of Rules

Risk: Unequal Application of Law

The modularity of the Bridge pattern can result in unequal enforcement when Rules are inconsistently applied.

• Potential for Abuse: Authorities might selectively enforce Rules to benefit certain groups while penalizing others.
• Example: Environmental Rules may be rigorously enforced against small industries but relaxed for larger players with political connections.

---

7. Insufficient Public Consultation

Risk: Exclusion of Key Stakeholders

Rules may be drafted without adequate input from affected parties, leading to policies that are impractical or unfair.

• Potential for Abuse: Regulators could prioritize the interests of influential groups while neglecting those of smaller or marginalized stakeholders.
• Example: Labor Rules might set unreasonably low minimum wage thresholds, benefiting businesses but harming workers.

---

Safeguards Against Abuse

To mitigate these risks, certain safeguards can be incorporated:

1. Defined Boundaries: Clearly delineate the scope of Rulemaking authority in the Act to prevent overreach.
2. Mandatory Public Consultation: Require stakeholder input before finalizing or amending Rules.
3. Legislative Oversight: Mandate parliamentary or judicial review of major Rules to ensure alignment with the Act.
4. Transparency: Publish draft Rules for public feedback and provide justifications for their provisions.
5. Periodic Review: Regularly audit Rules for consistency with the Act and adapt them to changing circumstances without violating original principles.
6. Judicial Recourse: Allow courts to strike down Rules that contradict or exceed the mandate of the Act.

---

 

The Bridge pattern in legislation enables adaptability and scalability, ensuring laws remain relevant in a dynamic environment. However, it introduces the risks of misalignment, overreach, or selective enforcement. These underline the need for robust safeguards. By fostering transparency, accountability, and stakeholder engagement, these risks can be mitigated, ensuring that Acts and Rules work cohesively to achieve their intended goals without exploitation or misuse.

Random thought - Antenna Impedance

 I've been attempting (since the 2020 lockdown in fact) to get back on the radio-waves. Somehow something always keeps me from making the last mile. At this point of time, it is the Antenna. Living out of a suitcase from one room in the ground floor - I can not put up a suitable antenna. 

The paragraph above makes it appear that an antenna is a complicated affair; it isn't. At the same time it is important to specify that 'antenna' really means 'antenna system'. This means there are multiple participants in an antenna system. Ensuring these participants perform in lock-step makes the difference between hearing a radio station, and not. One of these things is something called antenna impedance. Traditionally, radio transmitters have an impedance of 50 ohms. For a signal to be transmitted effectively & efficiently, the antenna system too must exhibi the same impedance. 

A good example would be ,marrying a hose-pipe with a well-pump. If the hose-pipe is not of adequate diameter, the joint may not survive the pumping operation. If the hose-pipe is too broad, the water it transports may not reach the destination. So it is important the antenna system impedance match the impedance of the transmitter. This matching action is done by devices such as Transmission Line Transformer, Antenna Tuner so on...

But here's the bit, the antenna impedance is measured between the centre-point, and ground. Now since the impedance is akin to resistance (but more complex as it includes reactance), it may be worked the same way as resistance. Impedance may be put in series, and parallel to arrive at differing values. So it comes about that instead of a TLT, can an antenna be matched by placing a resistor of suitable value in parallel at the feed-point of the radiating element? Think.... Think ...

Climate Change: Plant less trees!!

Two things in life are unavoidable – death, and taxes. Well, now there is this third – Climate Change, or Global Warming as it is popularly depicted in media. This globe, what we call ‘Earth’, is older than all of us; at 4.5 Billion years of age it is also, apparently, suffering on account of human activities. Its grown warmer since the Industrial Revolution – and accelerated since after the second world war. Everyone knows it – Climate change is even on the lips of babes & sucklings. The cause, if you follow popular media, is us – humans. There are detractors. Heretics who put forth a counter-current that climate change is natural rather than anthropogenic. That greenhouse gases (yes, it isn’t only Carbon Dioxide) are not affected by human activities to the extent presented. Water vapour is a culprit just as much as are Methane, Nitrous Oxide, and Ozone. That human species came into existence on Earth at a time when climate on Earth was ramped up to change. Anthropogenic influence can’t be denied though. CFC, PFC are well recognised greenhouse gases.

Like a guilt trip, the anthropogenic argument of climate change, receives more media coverage than detractor arguments from more rational minds. On a daily basis, there will be any number of articles with headlines such as ...

1. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58883234

   (Climate change: 'Adapt or die' warning from Environment Agency)

2. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/oil-gas-environment-climate-change-goals-why-now-16532566.php

   (Oil companies begin setting environmental goals amid scrutiny over climate change)

3. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/mass-fruit-tree-plantation-drive-begins-in-west-bengal/articleshow/86683823.cms

   (Mass fruit tree plantation drive begins in West Bengal)

4. https://theconversation.com/mass-tree-planting-how-to-do-it-right-168583

   (Mass tree planting: how to do it right)

The bottom line is that it is impossible to escape the frenzy around environment. The impression one gets from such articles is of the proverbial doe caught in the headlights of a speeding train. The difference here is that the human species apparently invented the vehicle in whose headlights it is the proverbial doe. The jury is yet out upon whether or not Climate Change is anthropogenic. Regardless of the cause, the fact of the matter is that Climate Change is quite real. The ocean levels are changing, glaciers melting, wind and rainfall patterns changing ... Every single being on Earth is affected. It follows therefore that every single being – capable of it – must take necessary actions to mitigate the effects thereof.

It isn’t as though there haven’t been concerted effects to deal with changing climate on a relatively large scale successfully in the past. London was famous for it’s ‘Pea Soup’ smog as recently as the 1960s. It also dealt with the problem effectively using a multi-pronged approach – regulating vehicle exhaust, factories, household chemicals, and so on. It wasn’t just London that was affected; large cities around the world were part of a study conducted by Manchester University. The results were apalling. From Bangkok, to London, to Mexico, and to Tokyo – poor quality of air plagued the cities.

How does a person, such a tiny entity compared to the gigantic volume of this Earth, attempt to mitigate the effects of Climate Change? To no small extent, the way to do it is to enlist support against the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. There are any number of techniques available legislative, technological, direct action. Here are just a few

1. Unplug electrically powered devices when you are not using them.

2. Address the insulation of your home to prevent heat/cold from escaping.

3. Don’t waste food; if possible purchase from the nearest producers.

4. Use public transport whenever you can .

The simplest perhaps way you can contribute in battling climate change lies in the tumultuous refrain – plant a tree!

Every tree is an entire ecosystem in itself. From nitrogen fixing bacteria, to providing nectar to bees & fruits thereafter, shelter/succour for residents of the forests – a tree is easily ignored without realising what fantastic service is provided by it in return. Botanists wax eloquently on the properties of varieties of trees. Planting a tree is perhaps the chosen way most contribute towards tackling climate change if only because well, one can put a sapling in the soil, and forget about it for days on end. Water the sapling once in a while, and all will be well. Why trees, though? Because trees are adept at capturing CO2 from the environment, and sequestering it – all the while converting it into wood! The thumb rule is to choose fast growing species ... which is more easily said than done.

Botany is a well established science with an enormous repertoire of literature. At the same time, it goes without saying that growth of any organism – tree or otherwise is not monocausal. Any number of factors are involved; in case of trees some of these factors may be type of soil, nutrients in soil, availability of water, intranecine competition so on. Availability of open spaces, and sunlight are obvious local climate factors that affect growth. This makes it necessary to thin plantations out by trimming, or cutting trees at regular intervals. Plantation must also attempt adequate bio-diversity is maintained. On the one hand this is to prevent the development of an invasive species that affects local flora, and fauna. On the other hand it is to protect the plantation from becoming easy prey to a pest that may decimate the entire plantation.

All this makes it obvious that planting trees is easier said than done. The situation may appear hopeless. Yet all is not lost. It is a matter of record that the vegetables on our dining plates are significantly different from their cousins in the wild. The carrot was pale and yellowish and unpalatable too – now it is orange, white, or even red and delicious to boot! The modern banana is far removed from it’s wild cousin – full of seeds, and a dwarf compared to the banana we know. Pineapples, peaches and many others are almost unrecognisable compared against their wild predecessors. The journey of these modern foods from their wild predecessors was achieved by simple natural selection of the properties that were most desirable ... and took generations to get fixed indelibly in the plants.

It is the quality/quantity argument. A cluster of a few trees of different species could provide the same climate-control effect as a forest. No less important is biovariance. An orchard of a single species is akin to a sponge whereas a jungle of multiple species also serves as a natural obstacle course for pests.

Modern Science, and Technology have made it possible to achieve in short order what took many generations to achieve by means of natural selection. By editing the genes of a species, it is possible to imbue a tree with properties that would appear miraculous. Perhaps then, it should be possible to genetically modify plant species to combat global warming with greater efficiency. Perhaps the transpiration / photosynthesis cycles may be edited to last longer. Perhaps the genes may be edited to also accept gases other than CO2 or even a greater quantity of CO2. The possibilities are limited only by technology itself, and human imagination!

Genetically modified plants (and plant products) are not a novelty. Any number of plant-sourced foods are modified genetically over and above natural selection through the ages. Soyabean, Eggplant, Papaya to name just a few. Applying similar science/es to combat skyrocketing greenhouse gases is a necessity that must be placed on the table.

From a bleeding heart ...

"Chief Justice of India breaks down before PM - asks for appointment of more judges" This headline almost made me cry.

When a highly disciplined, cultured, qualified individual involved in a brain-intensive profession sheds tears at a public forum - it is a sign things may be at maximum stretch. But imagine all those who choose to carry the burden of the nation for decade after decade without so much as a sign of such pressure they have to endure. For decades now, since the Republic of India came into existence they have stoically borne the burden of responsibility - and yet all the polity has offered are brickbats ... and worse!!

You may, by now, have guessed who I have in mind. I speak, of course, of our poor overburdened legislators.

In 1948 - the draft constitution envisaged 525 seats in the Lok Sabha - with an upper limit of 552 seats. Article 81(1)(b) provided that the States shall be divided, grouped or formed into territorial constituencies and the number of members to be allotted to each such constituency shall be so determined as to ensure that there shall be not less than one member for every 750,000 of the population and not more than one member for every 500,000 of the population.

So ... Minimum of 500,000 (5 Lakh) to be represented by an MP - and maximum of 750000 (7.5 Lakh) But then in 1952, for good & valid reason, the second amendment to the Indian constitution increased the stress on our legislators by removing the upper limit of 750000.

Instead of appreciating the sacrifices legislators make for the general public by accepting the responsibility for so many lakhs of people - the Indian population has chosen to increase the stress our legislators suffer by reproducing in an irresponsible fashion! An action that can only be deemed as ungrateful and apathetic!! To make things worse - the electorate at large have (or appear to have) limited their participation in governance of the nation to exercising their franchise in elections. After the elections the poor legislators are placed under the undue stress of having to *guess* what their constituents opinion/s are - this when constituents could/should have participated actively in voicing their opinion to their legislator/s. Surely we the electorate are irresponsible in placing our legislators in such stressful situations?

Consider that they (our legislators) get an office allowance of Rs 45,000 per month. This includes Rs. 28,000 for staff costs, and the balance to cover costs associated with running their office. This, combined with some support from the Parliament library, are the only resources they have to scrutinise the work and proposals of ministers who have the entire bureaucratic machinery of the government at their disposal.

Rs. 45000 per month as office-expenditure sounds like an enormous amount of money - but is it really such a large amount? Here is a simple discussion

As per the 2011 census, there are 545 Constituencies representing 1210193422 people. Approximately 2220538 (22 Lakh)  citizens are represented by 1 MP!

To put this figure into perspective - here is a very very rough calculation

There are 525600 (365*24*60) minutes in 1 year.

Let us put aside weekends - so reduce the count by (52*24*60) 74880.

Now there are only 450720 minutes available to the MP. Further we would like our MP to have some sleep - so, say, 5 hours of sleep daily + 2 hours of personal time on weekdays ... the count is further reduced by (365-52 *7*60) 131460

Now an MP has 319260 minutes available in 1 year. But the MP must spend some time in parliament - when he is probably away from his constituency. Say we make this count 60 days in a year - 232860 minutes available to his constituents.

The count is actually much less than this because there may be times when the MP is travelling, or out of the constituency for any other reason, or at a party meeting ... so on.

In other words, according to the 2011 census, it is impossible for an MP to meet ALL his constituents if they need his time! Delegation, and quality-support staff are absolutely necessary. Our legislators may not be unjustified in seeking a larger expense/office allowance!

Contrast this with our Indian Army which comprise approximately 20 Lakh people. One soldier stands for 579 citizens!

Compare this with the Police where 1 policeman stands for 761 citizens!

Whilst the good work done by Police, and Army are appreciated - the work done by our legislators goes unappreciated! Our legislators are shamed, dragged to courts ... and worse! One needs only take a look at one of the many newspapers/TV channel to see how poorly our legislators are treated!

Our poor legislators give up their personal lives, they choose to ignore the abuses heaped upon them & their near-and-dear ones by the public-at-large... They choose to construct houses, and roads, and dams, and canals, and airports, and railroads, and police-stations, and hospitals, they choose to step out from their office - and instruct the ignorant electorate on the duty it must fulfil towards the nation, when necessary they choose to stay far away from their loved ones family, friends, and well-wishers - even stay away from India for days on end ... the list is endless. Instead of appreciating the work they do - the electorate at large choose to further add to legislator's stress by continuing to procreate & then blame the lawmakers for "inadequate facilities", "poor quality government", "unresponsive government".

Fellow Citizens, before you contribute your Genes to the growth of the Nation, before you whine about poor governance - hold your peace (pun intended!!) ... spare a moment for all our legislators (Do not be partisan - cut across all party lines) since Independence who have had to bear borne (pardon the pun!) stoically the pain of your pleasures!

Be nice to your legislator - use a condom! 

... and a time to make a stand

Newspapers, perhaps across the world, carried the news of the carnage carried out at a school in Peshawar. This was punctuated by photographs of grieving families of the deceased.

 

(Above: An image from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/taliban-attack-live-at-least-84-children-believed-dead-in-peshawar-massacre-9927475.html)

Nobody can imagine a school may be target to an armed assault. Yet, in hindsight, a school serves multiple purposes for that militant mind-set.

 

First - a school is, relatively, an unguarded installation.

Second - children are hardly prepared mentally to recognize the mortal danger.

Third - the large casualties/fatalities would & probably did result in copius attention from the Fourth Estate.

Fourth - most parents, after such an incident, would choose to keep their little ones home rather than risk their lives.

 

The parents who have lost their children have my sympathy. Yet my attention is more with the parents who would attempt to protect their children by keeping them from school.

 

A youngling, as most parents experience, instinctively reacts when his possession is taken away from him. A new-born baby may cry, a slightly older one may throw a tantrum, a school-going child may take a more violent stand - erupt into fisticuffs, throw stones/sticks ... or stronger

 

In the long run a school would teach young minds to stand firm against injustice. It would teach that the law of the land may act slowly but eventually prevails. It would teach impressionable minds that a wrong is righted not by striking back immediately, but by approaching higher authority. A school environment offers a youngling opportunities to develop healthy social interactions, skills (including conflict resolution) in a moderated environment. In the long run social skills developed at school would be more useful in helping end the cycle of violent behaviours. Withdrawing a child from school may make it more likely that child would sooner be on the side of those perpetrators of this incident - therefore more at risk of avoidable injury & life!

To all parents in/around Peshawar (and all such potentially dangerous locations in the world) Children are the future. Education, and knowledge of the world around them is the one thing that can improve their lot in the future. For the sake of your children, do not stop the education of your children because of incidents like this! Stand firm!

Wanderlust: Making the War-Lord see red!

One issue with habitation of Mars is that it has a thin atmosphere. To paraphrase what this article  states - the thin atmosphere causes problems. These problems vary from an inability to contain water, breathe, and so on. Ergo it is necessary for Mars to have an atmosphere before humans may attempt to habit there.

Earth retains it's atmosphere, in no small part, because of it's magnetic field. In turn the magnetic field is generated by the liquid core deep beneath this planet we call Earth. A magnetic field is necessary for Mars to maintain an atmosphere.

So we were having these thoughts on how to kick-start Mars' magnetic field.

It just struck me (pun intended!) that a rock may be the start of an answer. Our Earth collects anywhere from 5 to 300 tons of space-dust daily to 300 tons of space-dust daily. So why restrict ourselves to a big enough rock? Make it lots & lots of littler (pardon my English!) rocks. So many that the cumulative mass of the planet increases the pressure to the extent the core liquifies again.

Another alternative could be to have an external/artificial magnetic field. Earthlings have already proven themselves capable of sending craft as emissary to meet the War-Lord. Make it several craft instead! Each in an areostationary orbit (emulating the GPS satellites here on Earth), each transmitting over a broad-spectrum omnidirectionally. Voila!

Of course both solutions are easier said than done ... and mutually exclusive. The first, of course, is the issue of motive, and electro-motive power required. But they are available options that may be placed upon the table before they may be discarded (if so!).