Skip to main content

Ban Orkut::Thats what shivsena wants

What do Right-wing political party, Shiv Sena and Internet giant, Google, have in common? It's Google's social networking site Orkut, which the Shiv Sena wants banned because Shiv Sena Supremo Bal Thackeray and Maratha idol, Shivaji, has been insulted on some communities on Orkut.

Since demanding a ban for the past one week, Shiv Sainiks have broken a glass door at a cyber café in Maland, demanded that Orkut be 'blocked' in cybercafes, proceeded to beat up cybercafe owners who didn't comply with the ban and even roughed up users who were seen logging on to the site.

However, now Shiv Sena has contacted the Mumbai Police saying that it does not want Orkut banned completely but only wants the offensive communities pulled down.

The Mumbai Police meanwhile, say it has contacted the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT, a Delhi-based regulatory body under the Ministry of Information and Technology) for banning Orkut and in the interim, has requested for the two communities to be taken off.

For those new to the workings of a social networking site, a 'community' or a 'group' does not (necessarily) have religious or political affiliations and is (usually) a common interest group where people come together and interact, discuss and share their views on issues, trends, fashion, films, politics, George Bush, Himesh Reshammiya and the works.

The entire concept behind social networking is (apparently) to literally expand your social network – through a network of common friends, work place affiliations and common interests.

These sites are also places where people freely, without censorship, discuss what's on their minds in various forums. With the demand for a ban on Orkut, the whole idea of interacting 'freely' takes a backseat and the entire question of freedom of speech and expression takes forefront.

And yet, social networking site is not just about extending your friends' list.

Murders, harassment, sexual intimidation, false identities, fraud, misuse of pictures, stalking… there is a much darker side that makes a social network look like a Tarantula's web.

Common interest groups include communities like, 'I like having sex with pregnant women', 'I like raping women', 'Mother Teresa is a fraud', 'Peep at your neighbour's daughter', 'Randi No. 1' and of course the 'I hate Pakistan' communities.

You could have your pictures posted on any one of these communities, you could have someone posing as you and posting comments and you could have someone track your activities and harass you too.

So, that brings up the question: Does freedom of speech and expression mean hate sites, hate communities and generally vilifying groups? And does a social networking site – which promotes itself as a 'safe' platform for idea exchange – have any responsibility towards the content that is put up on it?

The recent Virginia Tech massacre had everyone questioning the role of the Internet in promoting violence amongst the youth. However, is it the Internet that promotes deviant behaviour or is it people who use the Internet to assuage their perverted needs?

After the Virgina Tech massacre, we had asked networking site Fropper.com 's business head, Navin Mittal, if he thought the Internet and its various options – networking sites being one of them – be blamed for the content that is put up.

Mittal said, "The Internet cannot be blamed. The Internet provides access and connectivity and has both positive and negative effects. The medium cannot be blamed, it's how people use it. Your education, family background and the way you have been taught to handle things often governs what you do on the Internet. Then again, terrorists use mobile phones for a lot of use other than making calls. Would you say people stop using phones as well?"

Popular posts from this blog

Why India Hasn’t Built Its GPT Moment (Yet)

India has the world’s third-largest startup ecosystem, a thriving developer base, and a mobile-first population larger than the US and Europe combined. Yet, no GPT-4. No DeepMind. No Amazon-style platform. Why? Innovation Isn’t Accidental—It’s Engineered The Zerodha Daily Brief recently asked why India hasn’t built a global product company like Apple. The key argument: India isn’t building for the world. It’s solving for local constraints, scale, and affordability—but global scale requires deep IP, design, and tech differentiation. It’s not just about software, it’s about systems thinking. More importantly, it answers the question: Why do countries innovate? The answer isn’t just genius or ambition—it’s incentives and ecosystems. The U.S. Defense Department, for example, accounted for nearly 70% of federal R&D funding during the Cold War. China has pumped billions into semiconductors and AI with long-term national alignment. These aren’t short-term bets—they are strategic, delibe...

From Stubborn to Smart: How I Learned to Use AI as a PM

Listen to the article in podcast format on PM-AI Diaries channel on Spotify! Ever since I published "The Death of the Stubborn PM" back in February, my inbox has been buzzing with one big question: “Okay, I get that AI is the future for product managers—but how do I actually use it?” It’s a fair ask. In that piece, I argued that PMs who resist AI are doomed to fade away, like dinosaurs refusing to evolve. As I wrote, “The stubborn PM who clings to old ways will die out, replaced by those who harness AI’s power while leaning into what makes us human.” Now, people want the playbook. So, let’s walk through it with a story—my own journey of figuring this out, backed by some sharp insights from MIT Sloan’s "When Humans and AI Work Best Together—and When Each Is Better Alone" . The Wake-Up Call Picture me a few months back: a PM buried in work, juggling a dozen tasks, and feeling like there weren’t enough hours in the day. Writing user stories, sketching ideas, track...

The Death of the Stubborn PM

Product Management is undergoing a seismic shift, much like programming did when compilers replaced assembly language or when Agile dismantled waterfall dogma. Stubborn PMs who cling to outdated rituals—like treating PRDs as sacred texts—will fade into irrelevance. The future belongs to those who embrace AI as a collaborator, not a threat.   AI Will Disrupt the Tactics, Not the Thinking   Historically, tools abstracted manual work: compilers automated code translation, A/B testing replaced gut-driven debates. Similarly, AI will automate tactical PM tasks—data aggregation, routine prioritization, even drafting specs. But this is liberating, not limiting.   The stubborn PM obsesses over *how* to write a PRD; the adaptive PM focuses on *why* a product should exist. AI can’t replicate judgment calls that demand intuition: interpreting unmet customer needs, balancing ethics with growth, or navigating ambiguity when data is sparse. As AI handles execution, the PM...