Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Md. Anikuzzaman

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Facebook, WhatsApp, বা Instagram বার বার Scrolling করবেন না। এগুলো ব্যবহারের জন্য কিছুটা সময় আলাদা করে রাখুন এবং খুব বেশী দরকার না হলে এগুলো ব্যবহার করবেন না।

প্রতিদিন বই পড়ার অভ্যাস গড়ে তুলুন। যদি কিছু নাও হয় তবে কমপক্ষে আপনার Vocabulary এক মাসে অনেক উন্নত হবে।

অপ্রয়োজনীয় YouTube ভিডিও গুলি এড়িয়ে চলুন। আমরা জানি যে এই ভিডিও গুলো খুব ছোট ও বিনোদনমূলক, কিন্তু তবুও এগুলো আপনার যথেষ্ট সময় অপচয় করে।

নিয়মিত Exercise করুন। বেশি করে পানি পান করুন। Fast Food এড়িয়ে চলুন। স্বাস্থ্যকর খাবার খান।

খাওয়ার সময় কেবল খাবার খান ও টিভি দেখার সময় কেবল টিভি দেখুন। Multitask করবেন না।

চেষ্টা করুন Lift এ চলাচল এড়িয়ে চলতে। সিঁড়ি দিয়ে উঠা নামার অভ্যাস করুন।

নিজে নিজে বাসায় রান্না করা শিখুন। বাহিরে খাওয়ার অভ্যাস ত্যাগ করুন। আপনি যদি আপনার পছন্দের Restaurant এর রান্নাঘরে প্রবেশ করতেন এবং তারা কীভাবে রান্না করে তা দেখতে পেতেন তবে আপনি আর কখনই সেখানে পুনরায় খেতে যেতেন না।

দিনের শেষে ১০ মিনিটের জন্য কথা বলা সারা দিন ধরে Chatting করার চেয়ে ভাল।

এমন কিছু করুন যা আপনাকে উদ্বিগ্ন করবে না। আপনার বাবাকে তার ব্যবসায় সহায়তা করুন বা আপনার বন্ধুকে কোন Project এ সাহায্য করুন। মানুষের জন্য কিছু করার জন্য আলাদা কিছু সময় বের করে রেখে দিন।

আপনার বন্ধুদের সাথে দেখা করুন। আপনি যদি আপনার জীবন ও Career গড়তে গিয়ে ভুল পথে চলে যান তবে আপনার বন্ধুরাই আপনাকে সঠিক পথে ফিরিয়ে নিয়ে আসবে।

পরিবারের সাথে কথা বলা ও পরিবারকে সময় দেবার ব্যাপারে কখনই অবহেলা করবেন না।

প্রতিদিন একটি করে Movie দেখার চেষ্টা করুন। এটি আপনার মনকে সতেজ রাখবে।

ব্যস্ততার মাঝেও মাত্র ১০ মিনিটের জন্য একটু শান্ত হয়ে বসুন। চোখ বন্ধ করুন এবং মনকে Relax করতে দিন।

প্রতিদিন Target রাখুন নতুন কিছু শিখতে। দিন শেষে আপনার ফোনের Note Padটি খুলুন এবং আপনি যা শিখলেন তা লিখে রাখুন। এটি আপনাকে শান্তির সাথে ঘুমাতে সাহায্য করবে।

আপনার কাজ করার টেবিলটি যুদ্ধক্ষেত্রের মতো এলোমেলো মনে হলেও সমস্যা নেই, যতক্ষণ না পর্যন্ত আপনি জানেন যে আপনার দরকারী জিনিস গুলো টেবিলের কোথায় কোথায় আছে।

- Jackson Diaz,
  Amateur Photographer & Former Works at Freelancing

2
The top 7 tips for financial independence:

Retirement. Who thought that was a good idea? Resign, revise, retool, redesign. Honestly, you’ll probably hit your stride after several years of experience. I did. Why give up the earnings? And with income, you’ll hit financial independence sooner.

Contentment. Reduce how much money you need to be happy and you reduce how much you need to be financially independent. Pretty simple. That’s why I could figure it out. Determine how much you really need. Focus on that. Then you’ll achieve it.

Debt. Don’t finance or lease depreciating assets like cars, boats, RV’s, motorcycles. If you can’t afford to pay cash then you can’t afford it. Mandatory payments keep you from financial independence. Choose. Independence or toys?

Value. Want to make more money? You need to become more financially valuable. I’m not talking about your value as a person. Or how special your mom said you are. If you want to make more you need to become worth more.

Enjoyment. Find something you enjoy doing. Then don’t quit. Might take you a few ventures. That’s ok. It took me several. But once you find it, you’ll be more content. You’ll enjoy increasing your value. And you’ll want to keep going.

Vision. Create a vision of what financial independence looks like for you. And why you want it. Write it down. Keep revisiting it. Revising it. Dreaming about it. And working towards it. It’s your North Star and compass.

Gaming. Make it a game. Not against anyone else. Just you. Measure how you’re doing. Keep score. Celebrate your successes. Learn from your mistakes. Compete to make yourself the best version of yourself. And you will.
So go for it. Jump in the game.

Keep dreaming about financial independence. One day you’ll wake up and realize you’re no longer dreaming.

Source: https://www.quora.com/profile/Doug-Armey

3
In today’s business climate, serial entrepreneurship is becoming way more common than it was just 5 years ago. However, the difficulties with handling more than one business or with starting afresh repeatedly haven’t waned at all.

To some, serial Entrepreneurship is a child of necessity, but to another group, it is the only reasonable satisfaction for their ever dreaming hearts and idea-generating minds. Many have risen and many have died on this mountain.

If you do find yourself like me in the second category of people, this article is meant to give some guidance as to how to navigate the tricky plane of managing a new business idea. This article contains insights from myself and James Khuri,  CEO of Khuri Enterprises and Holdings, a friend and one of the most successful veteran serial entrepreneurs I know. James has business interests in Real Estate and E-Commerce and has started 9 distinct successful businesses.

Related: 5 Success Tips for the Serial Entrepreneur Entering a New Industry

Decide if it is for you
“Some business ideas are so attractive, violent, and beautiful at the same time that they cannot be ignored. You dream about it, see its relevance in everything, and imagine it fully birthed. However, in the words of James Khuri, “Not every business idea is for you to start and run. The world may need that idea, but you don’t need that drama.”

Not every business is the right fit; your ability to discover a need and generate a viable business idea is commendable but not always an indicator that you should start a whole new endeavor or that you should run it if you choose to start it.

The will power and grit required to start a new business is massive, and you already know that from your previous businesses, but what you may not know is that the reason you have been able to succeed so far is your passion for and knowledge of the business you are presently succeeding at.

Khuri co-founded Beautiful Minds, a social enterprise that focuses on empowering younger and aspiring entrepreneurs with Marco Antonio Letona and Noah Schaa a few years ago. The early mechanics of starting the business instantly made him turn it over to them. The company has since grown in leaps and bounds.

Serial entrepreneurship rises and falls on management
A wise man once said, “How you do one thing is how you do everything.” There are sections of people who claim to be serial entrepreneurs who are just unskilled in the art of business and believe that the next one would be “the one.”

However, I tend to take serial entrepreneurs seriously if their present business is pristine and the management is working properly. What proper management structure does for you is that it enables you to gradually take your feet off the pedal and watch your business cruise.

If you really want to cultivate another idea and start another business, the first step is to put your present house in order. Build firm structures around the right team, put in the work to get your business running like clockwork, and this way, you will free your mind to develop other ventures further.

When this is done, you would need to do the same thing with your new business. If you are to maintain your creative liberty and entrepreneurial nous, you need solid structures to uphold your businesses; people, systems, and platforms. 

The need for novelty
"A new business can be dead weight or a breath of fresh air, it can help you rediscover that excitement of starting afresh, or it can be a millstone around your neck after the excitement wears off." - James Khuri

A diversified business portfolio can be intriguing, or it can just be plain heavy. I often advise entrepreneurs struggling with the “distraction” of a new business idea to ensure that the new idea is feasible, profitable, and novel before devoting any iota of time towards developing it.

There is no need to going into an industry to compete with the other existing businesses there, especially if you already have other businesses to worry about. Over 20 years ago, when James first got into Real Estate, he took the highly unpopular and novel route of investing solely in medical buildings. That single decision made him massive profits years later when his company started dabbling successfully in Apartment buildings.

Related: 3 Tips for Starting a Company in an Unfamiliar Industry

The entrance into a new industry is much more crucial for a serial entrepreneur than for a regular entrepreneur. A regular entrepreneur is in it for the long haul and can afford to take his time to dig in, but a serial entrepreneur suffers more for every failure and time wasted because his other ventures suffer.

In simple terms, as a serial entrepreneur, you have to desperately seek a unique angle to enter a market, a novel path that stands you out. As your new business takes root, you can gradually begin pivoting to other areas of the industry.

What about the money?
How do you intend to finance your new business? If your new business idea is an addendum of sorts to your old one, then you can consider financing the new endeavor as an offshoot of the old. However, you need to make sure you do not promote what James hilariously refers to as “entrepreneurial teenage pregnancy."

This means that not every business is financially stable enough to “have a child” in a manner of speaking. Like with humans, you need to make sure that the old business is mature first of all and able to stand on its own two feet. Pointers that this has occurred are when your business can run with little to no supervision and when your profit margins are still healthy after relevant recurrent expenses and your units are.

The second option I often advocate is self-funding, and by “self,” I mean everyone you know who can give you grants and support. Granted, this is not always easy or possible for every entrepreneur, but it does take a lot of the load off. Banks and investors are a common route that many entrepreneurs take but must be threaded extremely cautiously.

Related: 5 Traits That Distinguish Serial Entrepreneurs

Taking Investment money or bank loans as a serial entrepreneur doesn’t just put your new business in jeopardy should it fail or stumble. It also puts you and, by extension, your other businesses in jeopardy. However, with the right plan, and the right management, a great entrepreneur can make it work.

The plan must therefore be to spend more time analyzing your idea, seeking professional input, and testing it out before you risk it all. As a fellow serial entrepreneur, I applaud your willingness to chop down tree after tree, but at least spend more time sharpening your ax.

Source: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/363033

4
কোভিড প্রতিরোধী ডিআইইউ ক্যাম্পাস



প্রাণ চাঞ্চল্যে সব সময়ই মুখর থাকে ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির ক্যাম্পাস। শিক্ষার্থীদের পদচারণায় মুখর থাকে ক্লাস, করিডোর, ল্যাবরেটরি, লাউঞ্চ! কিন্তু সর্বদা এবং সর্বত্র কী মানা হয় স্বাস্থ্যবিধি? পুরো ক্যাম্পাস ঘুরে সেই চিত্রই দেখব এবার। চলুন দেখা যাক।

শিক্ষার্থী পরিবহনে স্বাস্থ্য নিরাপত্তা
শিক্ষার্থীদের পরিহণের জন্য রয়েছে ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির নিজস্ব বাস। যেসব বাসে করে শিক্ষার্থীরা ক্যাম্পাসে যাওয়া আসা করেন সেসব বাস প্রতিদিন একাধিকবার জীবানুমুক্ত করা হয়। আর বাসের ভিতর শিক্ষার্থীরা বসেন এক সিট পর পর নিরাপদ দূরত্বে।

প্রবেশ দ্বারে নিরাপত্তা
এরপর বাস থেকে নেমে বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় ক্যাম্পাসে ঢুকতেই প্রবেশ দ্বারে রয়েছে থার্মাল স্ক্যানার ও হ্যান্ড স্যানিটাইজার। নিরাপত্তারক্ষীরা থার্মাল স্ক্যানার দিয়ে প্রতিটি শিক্ষার্থীর শারীরিক তাপমাত্রা পরিমাপ করেন এবং থার্মাল স্ক্যানারে স্বাভাবিক তাপমাত্রা প্রদর্শিত হলেই কেবল তিনি ক্যাম্পাসে প্রবেশ করার অনুমতি পান। তারপর হ্যান্ড স্যানিটাইজার দিয়ে হাত জীবানুমুক্ত করার ব্যবস্থাও রয়েছে প্রবেশ দ্বারের সঙ্গেই।

ক্লাসরুমে সামাজিক দূরত্ব
প্রতিটি ক্লাসরুমে সামাজিক দূরত্ব মেনে শিক্ষার্থীদের বসার ব্যবস্থা রয়েছে। এক শিক্ষার্থী থেকে আরেক শিক্ষার্থীর বসার চেয়ার রয়েছে অন্তত ছয় ফুট দূরত্বে। ল্যাব ক্লাসগুলোতেও রয়েছে একই ধরনের শারীরিক দূরত্ব মেনে ক্লাস করার ব্যবস্থা।

নিজস্ব ডাক্তার
ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটি তাদের শিক্ষার্থীদের জন্য সার্বক্ষণিক ডাক্তার নিয়োগ করেছে। শিক্ষার্থীদের যেকোনো স্বাস্থ্য সমস্যায় তাৎক্ষণিক চিকিৎসা সেবা দিতে ড্যাফোডিলের ডাক্তারগণ সদা নিয়োজিত রয়েছেন। মহামারির এই সময়ে ঘরে বসে থাকতে থাকতে অনেক শিক্ষার্থীই হয়তো হয়ে পড়েছেন মানসিকভাবে অবসাদগ্রস্থ। তাদের চিকিৎসার জন্য ও মানসিক উন্নয়নের জন্য রয়েছেন সার্বক্ষণিক মনোচিকিৎসক।

রয়েছে মেডিকেল সেন্টার ও হাসপাতাল
ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির ক্যাম্পাসের ভিতরেই রয়েছে মেডিকেল সেন্টার ও হাসপাতাল। সেখানে অ·িজেন, ভেন্টিলেটর, আইসিইউ থেকে শুরু করে সব ধরনের সুবিধাই রয়েছে। জরুরি চিকিৎসা সেবা পেতে কোনো শিক্ষক-শিক্ষার্থীকে যাতে ক্যাম্পাসের বাইরে যেতে না হয়, সে জন্যই এই ব্যবস্থা।

২৪ ঘণ্টা অ্যাম্বুলেন্স
যদি বিশেষ প্রয়োজনে বাইরের কোনো হাসপাতালে চিকিৎসা গ্রহণের জন্য যেতেই হয়, সে ক্ষেত্রে ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির রয়েছে নিজস্ব অ্যাম্বুলেন্স যা ২৪ ঘণ্টা সেবা দানের জন্য প্রস্তুত।

নিজস্ব মাস্ক, নিজস্ব স্যানিটাইজার
ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির টেক্সটাইল ইঞ্জিনিয়ারিং বিভাগের শিক্ষার্থীরা তৈরি করেছে নিজস্ব মাস্ক। এছাড়া ফার্মেসী বিভাগ এবং পুষ্টি ও খাদ্য প্রকৌশল বিভাগ তৈরি করেছে হ্যান্ড স্যানিটাইজার। ফলে শিক্ষার্থীরা খুব সহজেই আন্তর্জাতিক মানসম্পন্ন ও স্বাস্থ্যকর মাস্ক ব্যবহার করতে পারছেন। একইসঙ্গে ব্যবহার করতে পারছেন স্যানিটাইজার।

নিরাপদ হোস্টেল
ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির যেসব শিক্ষার্থীরা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের হোস্টেলে রয়েছেন তারাও সব রকম স্বাস্থ্যবিধি মেনে বসবাস করতে পারছেন। হোস্টেলেও রয়েছে সব ধরনের স্বাস্থ্য নিরাপত্তা। শিক্ষার্থীদের থাকার জন্য প্রতিটি কক্ষে সামাজিক দূরত্ব মেনে থাকার ব্যবস্থা রয়েছে। ডাইনিং রুমেও রয়েছে একই ধরনের সামাজিক দূরত্ব মেনে খাবার গ্রহণের ব্যবস্থা। এছাড়া রিডিং রুম, জিমনেশিয়াম, ওয়াসরুম, বেসিন, বাথরুমসহ সর্বত্র রয়েছে সামজিক দূরত্ব মেনে এবং মাস্ক পরিধান করে চলাচলের ব্যবস্থা। হলপ্রভোস্ট সহ সকল কর্মকর্তা ২৪ ঘণ্টা স্বাস্থ্যবিধি মেনে চলেন।

স্বাস্থ্যকর খাবার
ড্যাফোডিল ইন্টারন্যাশনাল ইউনিভার্সিটির ভেতরেই রয়েছে ফুড কোর্ট, ক্যান্টিন ও গ্রিন গার্ডেন রেস্টুরেন্ট। ফলে শিক্ষার্থীরা ক্যাম্পাসের ভেতরেই খেতে পারেন সবচেয়ে নিরাপদ ও স্বাস্থ্যকর খাবার।

ঝকঝকে পরিচ্ছন্ন সবুজ ক্যাম্পাস
এক ঝাঁক পরিচ্ছনতাকর্মী রয়েছেন বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় ক্যাম্পাসে। তারা দেড় শ এককেরর সুবৃহৎ ক্যাম্পাস জীবানুনাশক ছিটিয়ে সব সময় পরিচ্ছন্ন রাখেন। তারা পরিচ্ছন্ন রাখেন বনমায়া, অডিটোরিয়াম, ইনোভেশন ল্যাব, লাউঞ্জ ও হলের প্রতিটি স্থানও। ড্যাফেডিল ক্যাম্পাসকে একটি স্বাস্থ্যকর ক্যাম্পাসে পরিণত করতে এই পরিচ্ছন্নতাকর্মীদের রয়েছে অনেক অবদান।

সুবিশাল মাঠ
শরীর সুস্থ রাখার জন্য চাই নিয়মিত খেলাধুলা আর শরীরচর্চা। এ দুটি প্রয়োজনই শিক্ষার্থীরা অনায়াসে মেটাতে পারেন ক্যাম্পাসের সুবিশাল মাঠে। স্বাস্থ্যবিধি মেনে প্রতিদিনই তারা খেলাধুলা করেন এই মাঠে। যেতে হয় না ক্যাম্পাসের বাইরে।

প্রার্থনার জন্য রয়েছে মসজিদ
ক্যাম্পাসের ভেতরেই রয়েছে দৃষ্টিনন্দন বিশাল আকারের মসজিদ। শিক্ষার্থীরা যথাযথ স্বাস্থ্যবিধি মেনে প্রতিদিন পাঁচ ওয়াক্ত নামাজ আদায় করেন এখানে।

সুতরাং, আমাদের ক্যাম্পাস, কোভিড প্রতিরোধী ক্যাম্পাস। সবুজে ঘেরা স্বাস্থ্যকর এই ক্যাম্পাসে শিক্ষার্থীদের স্বাগতম। শিক্ষার্থীদের কলকাকলিতে সব সময় মুখরিত থাকুক প্রিয় এই প্রাঙ্গন।

5
কৃষ্ণ, বুদ্ধ ও যীশু নয় সব অপরাধ শুধু নবী মুহাম্মদের (সাঃ) ! কেন ?



বিশ্বাসী -অবিশ্বাসী , মুসলিম -অমুসলিম, সবার মনেই এই প্রশ্ন,
কেন নবী মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) এর এত বদনাম ?
কেন তাকে অপমান করার চেষ্টা করতে হবে?

যখন উগ্রবাদী শিবসেনা, ভারতে মুসলিমদের উপর নির্যাতন করে, কিংবা কেউ অন্যায়ভাবে কাশ্মীরিদের হত্যা করে, তখন কেউ কিন্তু কৃষ্ণকে এইজন্য দায়ী করেনা I
যখন বার্মায় রোহিজ্ঞাদের উপর এমন পাশবিক
গণহত্যা হলো তখন কেউ এই গন হত্যার জন্য বুদ্ধকে অপমান করার চেষ্টা করেনি I
একইভাবে, ১.৫ মিলিয়ন ইরাকিদের হত্যার দায় যীশুর নেই I

প্রশ্ন হলো, নবী মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) এর এত বদনাম কেন ?

তাঁর কি অপরাধ?

কারন হলো, নবী মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ), অন্যদের মত,  কৃষ্ণ, বুদ্ধ ও যীশুর মত শুধুমাত্র একজন ধর্মপ্রচারক ছিলেন না I
তিনি এই পৃথিবীতে এক ধরণের বিপ্লব নিয়ে এসেছিলেন I
এই কথাটি কেন বলেছি, সেই বিষয়ে কিছু তথ্য দেই, তারপর আমরা আবার মূল প্রশ্নে চলে আসবো I

আপনি কি জানেন, নবী হওয়ার পর এই মানুষটি, সর্বপ্রথম সমাজে কি পরিবর্তন চেয়েছিলেন ?

তিনি চেয়েছিলেন, নারীর অধিকার I

সমাজ পরিবর্তনের জন্য কোরআনের আয়াতগুলিকে শুরু থেকে শেষ পর্যন্ত সাজালে প্রথম আয়াতটির মূল বিষয় ও আদেশ ছিল, "নারী শিশুদেরকে  জীবন্ত কবর দেয়া যাবে না"

এর পর কিছুদিন পরই তিনি বললেন, একজন নারী তার পিতার, স্বামীর ও সন্তানের সম্পদের অংশীদার হবে I

রাসূল (সাঃ) যখন এই ঘোষনা দিলেন, তখনই তিনি সমাজপতিদের রোষানলে পড়ে গেলেন I
এত দিনের মেনে চলা এই সংস্কৃতি ও আইনের বিরুদ্ধে, এই মত তারা মেনে নিতে পারেনি I
 
(নারী শিশুকে জীবন্ত কবর দেয়ার মত অপরাধ এই পৃথিবীতে এখনো আছে, আধুনিক ভারতে প্রতিদিন দুই হাজার নারী শিশুর এবরশন হয় কিন্তু কত জন নারীবাদী এই অন্যায়ের বিরুদ্ধে লড়ছেন ?)

তারপর আসলো ক্রীতদাসের কথা I

তিনি জানালেন, মানুষ আর মানুষের ক্রীতদাস হতে পারে না I
মৃত পিতার রেখে যাওয়া ইথিওপিয়ান ক্রীতদাসী উম্মে আইমানকে নিজের মা, আর উপহার হিসাবে পাওয়া জায়েদকে নিজের ছেলে, হিসাবে যখন সমাজে পরিচয় করিয়ে দিলেন, তখন সারা পৃথিবীতে আলোচনা শুরু হয়ে গেলো,
 
মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) আসলে কি চায় ?

ক্রীতদাস ছাড়া সমাজ ব্যবস্থা কেমন করে চলবে?  অর্থনীতি কি করে আগাবে? ক্রীতদাসের দল মুক্তির জন্য আন্দোলন শুরু করলে কি অবস্থা হবে ?

ব্যাস, তিনি হয়ে গেলেন সমাজের সবচেয়ে বড় শত্রু I

(আজকের আধুনিক ইউরোপীয়ানদের হাজার বছরের ক্রীতদাস প্রথা এখনো বহাল তবিয়তেই আছে I ব্ল্যাক লাইভস ষ্টীল ডাজ নট মেটার )

ম্যালকম এক্সের মত বিপ্লবীরা, মুহাম্মদ আলীর মত শক্তিমান পুরুষরা যখন নবী মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) কে ভালোবাসতে শুরু করলো, তখনই তাদের মনে হলো, সব অপরাধ ঐ আরব লোকটিরই I

তিনি বললেন,
ধনীদের সম্পদের সুষম বন্টন হতে হবে I তাদের সম্পদের উপর গরিবের অধিকার আছে I
তিনি ঘোষণা দিলেন, সবাইকে জাকাত দিতে হবে I
সমাজের ধনী ব্যবসায়ী ও ক্ষমতাবানরা ভাবলো,
মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) একজন সমাজ বিপ্লবী,  তাকে  সমাজ থেকে তাড়িয়ে দিতে হবে I

শেক্সপিয়ারের শাইলকের মত লোভী সব ইহুদি মুদ্রা ব্যবসায়ীদেরকে সুদ বন্ধ করতে আদেশ দিলেন I
ধনী-গরিবের অর্থনৈতিক বৈষম্যকে স্থিতিশীল করার চেষ্টা করলেন I
সবাই ভাবলো, মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ)  একজন সোসালিস্ট, তাকে মেরে ফেলতে হবে I

নিজের অনুসারীদেরকে বললেন,
তোমরা আর মদ পান করবে না I সমাজে অন্যায় অবিচার কমে গেলো I চুরি ডাকাতি কমে গেলো I
মাতাল স্বামীর সংখ্যা কমে যাওয়ায়, নারী নির্যাতন প্রায় বন্ধ হয়ে গেলো I
অসভ্য পুরুষের মনে হিংসা শুরু হলো, এ লোক পাগল নাকি? মদ খাবে না, নারীকে নিয়ে ফুর্তি করবে না
সে কোন ধরণের সমাজ চায়? 
মাদক ব্যবসায়ীরা একজোট হয়ে মুহাম্মদকে (সাঃ) ঠেকানোর জন্য নতুন পরিকল্পনা শুরু করলো I

অসহায় মানুষের কষ্টার্জিত সম্পদ নিয়ে জুয়ার আসরের নিষেধাজ্ঞা আসলো I
মুহাম্মদের (সাঃ) আর কোন রক্ষা নেই I সে বড় বেশি বাড়া বাড়ি করছে I
জুয়ার ব্যবসা ছাড়া সমাজে বিনোদনের আর কি রইলো ?
মুহাম্মদকে (সাঃ)ঘর ছাড়া করতে হবে I তার সব আয়-রোজগার বন্ধ করতে হবে I

এখন কি বুঝতে পারছেন,
কেন মুহাম্মদের (সাঃ)এত অপরাধ ?

এই যে এখন, নবী মুহাম্মদকে (সাঃ) কে এত বছর পর অপমান করার চেষ্টা করা হয়েছে
তার কি কারন?
 শুধু "ফ্রীডম অফ স্পিচ" ?

নো I

যে মানুষটির অনুসারীরা শুধু ভালোবাসা দিয়ে একসময় আফ্রিকা বিজয় করেছিল
সেই আফ্রিকার ২৪ টি দেশের, শত বছরের কলোনিয়াল নির্যাতন নিপীড়ন ও শোষণ থেকে যখন আলজেরিয়া ও তিউনেশিয়ার মত দেশগুলি অর্থনৈতিক ও রাজনৌতিক মুক্তি চেয়েছে
তখনই নবী মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) হয়ে গেলেন বড় অপরাধী I
লক্ষ-লক্ষ মানুষের প্রাণের বিনিময়ে, অসহায় ও নিরপরাধ মানুষকে নিজের ক্রীতদাস করে রেখে যে সম্পদের পাহাড় তারা একসময় গড়েছেন, সেটি যখন হুমকির মুখে তখনই সব রাগ ও ক্ষোভ এসে জমা হয়েছে I
এখন তাদের নবীকে (সাঃ)অপমান করতে হবে, তাঁর ব্যঙ্গ চিত্র প্রদর্শন করতে হবে I
তারপর আফ্রিকাতে আবার জঙ্গি দমানোর জন্য ন্যাটো বাহিনীকে পাঠাতে হবে I

কিন্তু তারা পারবে না I

পিউ রিসার্চের গবেষণা অনুযায়ী, শুধু ইউরোপেই প্রতিবছর প্রায় পাঁচ হাজার মানুষ ইসলাম ধর্ম গ্রহণ করছে I
আপনি দেখবেন কিছু দিন পর এই সংখ্যা হবে, দশ হাজার I
কারন হলো, এই ঘটনার পর, মানুষ জানতে চাইবে, কে এই মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) ?

প্রথমেই সে জানবে I
মানুষটি শুধু আমাদেরকে মনে প্রাণে একজন মাত্র সৃষ্টিকর্তাকে ভালোবাসতে বলেছেন I
মানুষরূপী কোন খোদার কাছে মাথানত করতে নিষেধ করেছেন I

একজন মানুষের জন্য শুধু এতটুকু জানাই যথেষ্ট I

এখন কেউ যদি চোখ বন্ধ করে সূর্যের আলোকে দেখতে না চায়, তাহলে কি সূর্য আলো দেয়া বন্ধ করে দিবে নাকি সূর্যের আলো হারিয়ে যাবে ?

নবী মুহাম্মদ (সাঃ) হলেন এই পৃথিবীতে সেই আলো I এই আলোকে কেউ লুকিয়ে রাখতে পারবে না I

"Truth is Truth" You deny or accept!

সংগৃহীত

6
Islam / Search For Peace & Remain Blessed by Allah
« on: November 01, 2020, 03:14:29 PM »
One day, a very wealthy man was walking on the road. Along the way, he saw a beggar on the sidewalk. The rich man looks kindly at the beggar and asked:

 "How did you become a beggar?”

The beggar replied, “Sir, I’ve been applying for a job for a year now but haven’t found any. You look like a rich man, Sir, if you’ll give me a job, I’ll stop begging.”

The rich man smiled and said, “I want to help you. But I won’t give you a job, I’ll do something better. I want you to be my business partner. Let’s start a business together.”

The beggar blinked hard. He didn’t understand what the older man was saying. “What do u mean, Sir?”

“I own a rice plantation, said the older man, you could sell my rice in the market. I’ll provide you the sacks of rice. I’ll pay the rent for the market stall. I’ll even give you a food allowance every day for the next 30 days. All you have to do is sell my rice. And at the end of the month, as Business Partners, we’ll share in the profits.”

Tears of joy rolled down his cheeks. “Oh Sir,” he said, “You’re a gift from Heaven. You’re the answer to my prayers. Thank you, thank you, thank you!”.
He then paused and asked, “Sir, how will we divide the profits? Do I keep 10% and give you 90%? Do I keep 5% and give you 95%? I’ll be happy with any arrangement.”

The rich man shook his head and chuckled. “No, I want you to give me the 10% and keep 90%.”.
For a moment, the beggar couldn’t speak. When he tried to speak, it was gibberish. “Uh, gee, uh, wow, I mean, huh?” He couldn’t believe his ears. The deal was too preposterous.

The rich man laughed more loudly. He explained, “I don’t need the money, my friend. I’m already wealthy beyond what you can ever imagine. I want you to give me 10% of your profits so you grow in faithfulness and gratitude.”

The beggar knelt down before his benefactor and said, “Yes Sir, I will do as you say. Even now, I’m so grateful for what you’ve done for me!”

Each day, the beggar, now dressed a little bit better, operated a store selling rice in the market. He worked very hard. He woke up early in the morning and slept late at night. And sales were brisk, also because the rice was of good quality, and after 30 days, the profits were astounding.

At the end of the month, as the ex-beggar was counting the money, and liking very much the feeling of money in his hands, an idea grew in his mind. He told himself, “Gee, why should I give 10% to my Business Partner? I didn't see him for the whole month! I was the only one who was working day and night for this business. I did all this work! I deserve 100% of the profits!”

A few minutes later, the rich man was knocking on the door to collect 10% of the profits. The ex-beggar opened the door and said, “ You don’t deserve the 10%. I worked hard for this. I deserve all of it!”. Leave me alone, and he slammed the door.

Now,
If you were his Business Partner, how would you feel ?

What do you think should be done to this ungrateful man?

Whatever your answer(s) is/are, keep it to yourself and bear in mind that you are the ex-beggar and ungrateful man, because this is exactly what happens between us and God.

God gave us everything. He gave us life, every single moment, every single breath, every single second. God gave us talents, our ability to talk, to create, to earn money. God gave us our body, our eyes, our ears, our mouth, our hands, our feet, our heart, HE gave us our mind, our imagination, our emotions, our reasoning, our language. God gave us opportunities, some taken some lost. God put us in positions, he gave us all we have to make the wealth.
YET we take all of it for granted walking on the earth with pride as if we are self-made? We forget His immeasurable bounties and goodies and become ungrateful using the very same blessings He gave us to sin and throwback at Him.

The big questions are,
Which of the favors of our Lord would we deny?
When will we turn back to Him with gratitude and obedience?
 
God has granted us all the opportunities to always remember Him so be in constant remembrance of Him (Ahdkrru Laah), Pray, pay your Zakat/Sadaqat, do good, and always remember you will give an account of your sojourn on earth.

Are we doing it, and in faithfulness?

It is up to us to answer this question's insincerity.

Sow a little seed of kindness today by sharing this message. A friend just shared... I felt it's wise sharing with you too...

7
Country Measures & Experiences in Mitigating The Impact of COVID-19


On 24 June 2020, GPFI members convened virtually for the Second GPFI Plenary Meeting under the Saudi G20 Presidency. The agenda items included COVID-19 Pandemic and the global economic response. Members discussed various activities taken by their countries/organizations to combat the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economy and its consequences on people’s livelihood. With the conclusion of the Second Plenary Meeting, GPFI members issued a Statement on COVID-19 Response, reaffirming the G20 commitment under the G20 Action Plan in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Through the issued statement, GPFI Members affirmed their Commitment to promoting financial inclusion through sharing their country experiences and measures to mitigate the impacts brought by COVID-19. In accordance with the G20 GPFI Statement on COVID-19 Response and based on the commitment made from members on knowledge sharing, this document compiles the collective actions of different countries and organizations globally.


Please see the attachment

8
A recent majority staff report summarizing the findings of a yearlong House Antitrust Subcommittee investigation into competition in digital markets is filled with analytical errors that highlight larger problems with the report’s basic framing and policy conclusions.

OVERVIEW
The U.S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law recently released a staff report under the direction of Chairman David Cicilline (D-RI) to summarize the majority’s conclusions after a yearlong subcommittee investigation into competition in digital markets. The majority report focused in particular on four leading Internet and technology firms: Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple (referred to here as “GAFA”). A detailed analysis of all the legal claims in the more than the 400-page report is beyond the scope of this briefing, but it is worth pointing out a raft of more fundamental analytical flaws in the report. These include the following:

It engages in speculation to paint the most alarming picture possible.
It presents only one side of the story.
It makes claims with little factual support.
It gets privacy issues wrong.
It views the free, advertising-based market as problematic.
It views companies that compete with rivals as inherently suspect.
It privileges competition as the main goal—and assumes more is always better.
It ignores its own conclusion that there are benefits from the scale in technology industries.
It defines relevant markets too narrowly to blow concentration and market power out of proportion.
It objects to platforms improving their offerings to be more convenient to consumers.
It criticizes tech companies regardless of what they do.
It dismisses consumer welfare and elevates producer welfare.
It assumes there is no Schumpeterian creative destruction.
It treats corporate long-term and investing as predatory.
It wants to hold back needed business model transformation.
It is biased in favor of small firms.
It serves as a Trojan horse to drive radical reform of U.S. antitrust law.

ENGAGING IN SPECULATION TO PAINT THE MOST ALARMING PICTURE
The Cicilline report views large firms generally, and large Internet firms in particular, as a suspect. It goes out of its way to suggest that the four GAFA firms have too much power and that their power will only continue to grow unless antitrust enforcers whittle them down to size. But many of the claims of such dominance are exaggerations. For example, the report states: “Just a decade into the future, 30% of the world’s gross economic output may lie with these [four] firms and just a handful of companies.” For this assertion, it references a McKinsey Global Institute study that makes a back-of-the-envelope guestimate about the projected size of the overall future digital economy, which is vastly larger than GAFA or any “handful of companies.”

The report also implies sinister forces at work, with no real evidence, as when it states: “An attorney representing app developers said they ‘fear retaliation by Apple’ and are ‘worried that their private communications are being monitored,’ so they won’t speak out against abusive and discriminatory behavior.” If the committee really believes that Apple is secretly and illegally spying on its customers—an outlandish claim—then it should state as much and ask the FTC for a formal investigation. Otherwise, paranoid delusions from an unnamed individual do not belong in a congressional report.

PRESENTING ONLY ONE SIDE
The report clearly is focused on making its case that big tech has too much market power, and it attempts to marshal all the evidence and claims it can to support its position. The problem is that for virtually every general claim of harm made by experts, there are equally valid claims asserting the opposite. But these are almost never included. For example, it states that Jamie Luguri and Lior Strahilevitz observe that dark patterns “are harming consumers by convincing them to surrender cash or personal data in deals that do not reflect consumers’ actual preferences and may not serve to interest their actual interests.” Yet some scholars have argued that dark patterns are not harmful, and their work is not cited. Overall, such concerns about consumer manipulation echo social critic Vance Packard’s warnings about supposedly manipulative television commercials in his 1957 book The Hidden Persuaders, which raised fears about the ways advertisers leveraged psychological techniques to be more persuasive. Yet we all live with TV commercials, and as TV watchers we are not passive sheep being manipulated into turning over our hard-earned cash.

Similarly, the report states that “Google’s search algorithm in June 2019 decreased a major news publisher’s online traffic ‘by close to 50%’ even as their referrals from other sources—such as their home page and apps—grew during the same period.” This sounds problematic and possibly even nefarious until one realizes that perhaps the regular improvements in Google’s algorithm (updated over 3,000 times in 2018 alone) is likely responsible for this. Moreover, the report fails to ask the next logical question: Did other news sites see an increase in traffic over the same period of time? Likewise, the report references a Pinterest filing that stated, “Search engines, such as Google, may modify their search algorithms and policies or enforce those policies in ways that are detrimental to us.” If Google does this intentionally to harm Pinterest, then it would be an antitrust violation that the federal government could prosecute. Pinterest was likely referring to the regular, ongoing improvements to algorithms that can change page rankings in search results.

One can legitimately wonder: How can an efficient search engine be asked not to discriminate among its search results without returning to what would be tantamount to inefficient Yellow Pages listings? Constant discrimination among search results is the key to keeping up with consumer preferences and returning the most relevant results. Consequently, discrimination is the very essence of competition on the merits of search results. Restricting a search engine from changing results, even in ways that may negatively harm some businesses, would limit competition and run precisely counter to the essence of our antitrust laws.

Unless the report’s authors believe no algorithmic changes that would lead some sites to get less traffic and others to get more should be allowed, then such changes in traffic patterns, as long as Google did not make them intentionally for anticompetitive reasons (and there is no evidence offered that it has done this), should be viewed as a natural result of algorithmic improvement.

MAKING CLAIMS WITH LITTLE FACTUAL SUPPORT
The report repeats many commonly asserted claims about the impact of large tech companies on the economy, without any attempt to ascertain their validity or offer an alternative view. For example, it asserts that the “online platform’s dominance” has “eroded innovation and entrepreneurship.” It goes on to claim: “Unsurprisingly, there has also been a sharp reduction in early-stage funding for technology startups.” But report cited for this claim actually finds that the number of small venture deals critical to start-ups increased from 975 deals in 2008 to 2,768 in 2018 (with the value of investments increasing 180 percent), while medium-sized deals almost doubled. Moreover, Pitchbook data shows that over approximately the last decade the amount of venture investing has grown significantly, with the value of deal investment growing 4.6 times percent from 2006 to 2019 and the number of deals growing 3.6 times. Meanwhile, angel and seed funding deals grew 11 times to 5,207. When MIT professors Jorge Guzman and Scott Stern looked at trends in high-growth entrepreneurship for 15 large states from 1988 to 2014, they found that even after controlling for the size of the U.S. economy, the second-highest rate of high-growth entrepreneurship occurred in 2014. They also found that even after controlling for the size of the U.S. economy, the second-highest rate of high-growth entrepreneurship occurred in 2014.

The report also blames the big four for harming job creation, stating that, “Job creation in the high-technology sector has likewise slowed considerably. In 2000, the job creation rate in the high-technology sector was approaching 20% year-over-year. Within a decade, the rate had halved to about 10%.” But the report picks as the base year the height of the Internet bubble when venture investment and high-tech job creation was at an all-time high. In fact, the study they cite shows that as late as 2008 (before the financial collapse), high-tech job creation was higher than in the first half of the 1990s.

The report also states, without evidence, that: “In the absence of competition, Facebook’s quality has deteriorated over time, resulting in worse privacy protections for its users and a dramatic rise in misinformation on its platform.” Given that Facebook invested 13.6 billion in R&D in 2019—two-thirds more than the National Science Foundation budget—it’s hard to understand how the quality of its service offering has deteriorated.

The report states: “Although Amazon is frequently described as controlling about 40% of U.S. online retail sales, this market share is likely understated, and estimates of about 50% or higher are more credible.” Yet the report provides no data or citations for such a guestimate.

The report makes the claim that Google’s “search page shows users less relevant results.” But there is no evidence offered for this charge. Perhaps the committee is referencing the fact that Google also places labeled ads on top of many searches. But these ads are critical to providing Google search as a free service, and they are intended to be relevant to the users. Moreover, Google is in competition with other search engines to provide the best and most relevant results, so why would it intentionally degrade the quality of its service? This claim is even more striking because the report consistently references how Google uses data to target ads so it can generate results that are more tailored to individuals. So, on one hand, Google makes its results worse, but on the other, it uses data to make them better? The report can’t have it both ways.

The report states with respect to Amazon and its cloud computing division, Amazon Web Services, that there is “the potential for a conflict of interest where cloud customers are forced to consider patronizing a competitor, as opposed to selecting the best technology for their business.” But the report provides no evidence or logic for this. Given that there are multiple cloud providers, including major ones such as Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, it’s not clear why anyone is forced to patronize AWS, especially if it is not the best technology for their business. Moreover, such “conflicts” are not new (for example, companies that competed with IBM for some business also might have bought its mainframes) and are easily worked out in commercial transactions.

GETTING PRIVACY ISSUES WRONG
The report asserts, again without evidence, that “in the absence of adequate privacy guardrails in the United States, the persistent collection and misuse of consumer data is an indicator of market power online.” The report goes on to state, the “evidence of platform market power, therefore, is not prices charged but rather the degree to which platforms have eroded consumer privacy without prompting a response from the market.” The report does this because it is otherwise hard to see consumer harm when consumers are getting all of these services for free.

But this notion implies that consumers are willing to pay for privacy, either directly through subscription payments or through free services that presumably receive less revenue per user and therefore would spend less on providing the service. But there is no evidence of this. In fact, some firms have tried to gain market share on the basis of more privacy-protective value propositions, but consumers generally have not embraced these models. This is difficult for many privacy advocates to accept as they often believe they know what is in the best interests of consumers who are being duped by rapacious monopolists.

The report also claims that the big four have “undermined Americans’ privacy.” But the report provides no evidence or logic as to why having multiple search engines, browsers, social media sites and the like would lead to any more privacy. If the subcommittee is worried about privacy, then its members should encourage their colleagues on the Commerce Committee to pass national privacy regulation, as ITIF has supported.

The Cicilline report claims that targeted advertising “represents an inherent violation of the receiver’s privacy. Every ad targeted using personal information gathered without explicit, informed consent is at some level a violation of privacy.” But it never explains how a computer algorithm analyzing a customer’s data and then matching an ad without ever giving the advertiser personally identifiable information on the consumer is a violation of privacy.

Channeling anti-tech pundits like Shoshana Zuboff, the report refers to the Internet of Things as “the next wave of surveillance technologies,” intentionally ignoring the fact that all four companies have privacy policies that are enforceable by the FTC, and that IoT promises significant social and economic benefits.

VIEWING THE FREE, ADVERTISING-BASED MARKET AS PROBLEMATIC
The report goes out of its way to reject the reality that on the consumer side of these sometimes two-sided markets the price is zero. For example, the report states, “products appear to be ‘free’ but are monetized through people’s attention or with their data.” The report makes this distinction because if the price is zero (e.g., services are free) then it is hard to argue that purported monopolists are using their market power to hurt consumers.

Yet, the report goes on to acknowledge that “data is non-rivalrous—meaning that one party’s use does not prevent or diminish use by another.” In other words, consumers are not really paying with their data since that implies giving away something they would no longer possess.

To bolster its claim that these services are not really free, the report states that, “Recent economic evidence indicates that economies of scale achieved through data collection allow platforms to get more out of consumers than consumers get out of platforms.” It goes on to state that, “notwithstanding claims that services such as Google’s Search or Maps products or Facebook are ‘free’ or have immeasurable economic value to consumers, the social data gathered through these services may exceed their economic value to consumers.” First, it is not even clear what this means. One would hope that any company selling something earns more than its costs on each sale; otherwise, it would soon be out of business. Moreover, the report ignores the consumer surplus, the concept that consumers often obtain significantly more benefit than the cost they pay for a product. A number of studies suggest that the consumer surplus from Internet services is actually quite sizeable. A working paper by economists Erik Brynjolfsson, Felix Eggers, and Avinash Gannamaneni found that consumers surveyed said that they would have to be paid $17,500 to forgo their use of search engines for a year. This does not sound like consumers are being exploited.

VIEWING COMPANIES THAT COMPETE WITH RIVALS AS INHERENTLY SUSPECT
The report suggests that if companies don’t compete then they are lazy monopolists, but if they try to compete and gain market share from rivals, then they are rapacious monopolists. The report quotes tech critic Roger McNamee complaining that Google developed Gmail to get produce lock-in. But isn’t that what companies are supposed to do—develop better products to create loyal consumers? The day American companies stop doing this is the day that innovation will grind to a halt and foreign companies will gain market share. Moreover, McNamee gets it wrong. Google didn’t use its market power to produce lock-in. The main reason Gmail took off was that it provided massively more free data storage than the other principal email providers at the time, Yahoo and Hotmail, and innovated to provide new functionalities like labels, threads, and archiving.

PRIVILEGING COMPETITION AS THE MAIN GOAL—AND ASSUMING MORE IS ALWAYS BETTER
A principal mistake antimonopolists make is to assume that competition is the goal, and therefore that the task of antitrust policy is to produce more of it. But even the original drafters of the major U.S. antitrust statutes never saw competition as the goal; rather, they saw fair competition as a means to an end. The goal was to increase economic welfare, and sometimes more competition serves that goal and sometimes it doesn’t.

There are several examples in which the report quotes opponents of the large tech platforms and antimonopoly advocates to the effect that competition is the goal. It quotes Roger McNamee saying: “At a fundamental level, competition has been a key engine of economic activity in the United States, resulting in the ‘pioneering of entire industries that, in time, come to employ millions and generate trillions.” Antimonopolist Tim Wu states: “Competition is a critical source of innovation, business dynamism, entrepreneurship, and the launching of new industries. Vigorously contested markets have been a critical competitive asset for the United States over the past century.”

But not all economists agree with these views. For example, in 1952 John Kenneth Galbraith wrote, “The modern industry of a few large firms is an excellent instrument for inducing technical change. It is admirably equipped for financing technical development and for putting it into use. The competition of the competitive world, by contrast, almost completely precludes technical development.” More recently, leading innovation economics scholar William J. Baumol emphasized the extent to which competition among oligopolistic firms based on innovation, not prices, is the major driver of technological progress. He compared this oligopolistic competition to an arms race “that participants cannot easily quit.”

Perhaps one of the oddest statements in the report was its claim that in the absence of competition, “incumbent firms lack the incentive to invest in research and development.” One can say a number of things about GAFA, but one cannot claim they don’t invest in R&D. According to the 2019 EU Industrial R&D Scorecard, of the top eight companies globally with the largest increase in R&D expenditures, four were large U.S. tech companies (Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft). And of the top 5,000 companies in the world ranked by R&D spending in 2019, Alphabet (Google’s parent) ranked number 1, Microsoft 3, Apple 6, and Facebook 11. And according to the EU, Amazon would have ranked first overall if it had broken out its R&D and content development expenditures. These firms seem to have plenty of incentive to invest in R&D. Moreover, it is precisely their size and market power that gives them the ability to invest so heavily in R&D. For many years, experts and pundits have criticized American companies for being too focused on short-term returns and not investing enough in R&D. So it is striking that these four firms are now coming under attack for investing in exactly the way so many experts and pundits say American firms should.

IGNORING THE COMMITTEE’S OWN CONCLUSION THAT THERE ARE BENEFITS FROM SCALE IN TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIES
The Cicilline report acknowledges that many benefits come from tech firms having scale and scope. The report rightly notes that “In markets with increasing returns to scale, as sales increase, average unit cost decreases. Because entry into these markets requires significant up-front costs, the market favors firms that are already large, making it difficult for new firms to enter the market and challenge large incumbents.” Likewise, the report states:

Businesses that specialize in providing information, such as Google, frequently benefit from increasing returns to scale. These businesses require high upfront fixed costs, but then may scale with relatively low increases in cost. For example, ‘Google can update Google Calendar for 100 million users with similar fixed expenses as would be needed for only a fraction of such users.

It also states, “Certain features of digital markets—such as network effects, switching costs, the self-reinforcing advantages of data, and increasing returns to scale—make them prone to winner-take-all economics.”

One would think the report would therefore at least discuss the potential problems of using antitrust to artificially add more competitors to these markets that naturally are concentrated, realizing that while there could be benefits from the competition there would also likely be costs to innovation (and competitiveness) and consumer welfare from the reduced scale. Moreover, if at least some of these markets are mostly winner-take-all (or most), then the results the report ascribes to anticompetitive behavior are much more likely to be the result of the natural functioning of these kinds of markets.

DEFINING RELEVANT MARKETS TOO NARROWLY TO MAKE CONCENTRATION AND MARKET POWER LOOK BIGGER
One of the first tasks in any antitrust analysis is to define the relevant market. But in order to make it appear that there is more concentration than there really is, the Cicilline report defines digital markets in the narrowest possible way. For example, it defines social media narrowly to make it seem that the relevant market is posting information for friends to see. To be sure, that market is different than posting short statements (Twitter), interesting short videos (TikTok), and professional information (LinkedIn). But the market for all of these activities is not the narrow social media market, it’s the broader market for online attention, and even beyond that, the total market for our attention (TV, radio, etc.). Companies in a wide array of industries compete for consumer's time, whether it is television, magazines, radio, internet applications, or billboards, or even skywriting. Moreover, because these Internet services are mostly free, the relevant market is the advertising market.

The report makes the same error when discussing Amazon. It states, “Several factors privilege Amazon as the dominant e-commerce marketplace, and also make entry or expansion by a challenger unlikely.” But here the relevant market is not online commerce, where Amazon does face competition; it is retail overall. Consumers face an intensively competitive market in retail from mail order, local shopping malls and merchants, and online commerce, where Amazon, albeit large, is one of many players.

OBJECTING TO PLATFORMS IMPROVING THEIR OFFERINGS TO BE MORE CONVENIENT TO CONSUMERS
The report states, “Since Google and Bing now incorporate information boxes and various specialized services directly onto their general search results page, a market entrant would similarly need to provide a broader set of search features and services.”40 In other words, they are saying that because companies improved their products, requiring competitors to also improve theirs, that this is unfair competition. Again, this makes competition the paramount goal rather than innovation and consumer welfare.

CRITICIZING TECH COMPANIES REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY DO
In many cases, the report damns companies if they do and damns them if they don’t. For example, the report criticizes Google for using the information to target ads to consumers and criticizes the company for not protecting privacy. But it later criticizes Google for eliminating third-party cookies, which make data more private, because it hurts young companies.

The report criticizes Google for requiring mobile phone makers to use Android to “give default status to Google’s own apps.” But the alternative would be for Google to charge cell phone makers a fee for using Android, which would raise prices for consumers, in which case Google would likely be accused of being a price-gouging monopolist.

The report talks about the dominance of Amazon Web Services (AWS), but then says that Google is working to position Google Cloud to dominate the “Internet of Things.” But if AWS is dominant, shouldn’t antitrust authorities want Google to challenge it?

DISMISSING CONSUMER WELFARE AND ELEVATING PRODUCER WELFARE
The report seldom considers how the four companies’ practices benefit consumers. For example, the report states “Google’s preferential treatment of its own verticals, as well as its direct listing of information in the ‘OneBox’ that appears at the top of Google search results, has the net effect of diverting traffic from competing verticals and jeopardizing the health and viability of their business.” But it ignores the increased convenience this provides consumers. Rather than acknowledge there is often a tradeoff between consumer welfare and the welfare of competitors, the report focuses on improving the latter.

ASSUMING THERE IS NO SCHUMPETERIAN CREATIVE DESTRUCTION
The report states: “Strong network effects serve as a powerful barrier of entry for new firms to enter a market and displace the incumbent. When combined with other entry barriers such as restrictions on consumers or businesses easily switching services, network effects all but ensure not just market concentration but durable market power.” In other words, it assumes that there can never be robust atomistic competition and that the only way to get that is for antitrust officials to intervene. And while that may be true in the short- and even midterm, it’s not clear that it is true in the longer term. Schumpeterian “creative destruction”—the entry of new players based on new innovations—describes the history of many industries. We have seen this history play out in retail, with a succession of seemingly unassailable monopolies that ultimately lose out: first A&P, then Sears, then Walmart, and now Amazon. We have seen this over the years in technology. As IT industry expert David Moschella, an analyst at the Leading Edge Forum, writes:

Concerns about monopoly power are not new to the IT industry. In their day, IBM, AT&T, Microsoft, and Intel were all seen as too big, and too powerful, capable of crushing competition before it really emerges. So it is today… Thus, while it is easy to imagine growing pressure to break up Google (search, YouTube, Android) or Amazon (retail, AWS), or make life more difficult for Facebook (limiting certain types of acquisitions), history says that market (China?) and technology shifts (peer-to-peer?) will eventually provide the stronger remedies.”

TREATING CORPORATE LONG-TERMISM AND INVESTING AS PREDATORY
Most innovation-based companies, including Internet and IT companies, must invest massive amounts of capital to create the next generation of innovation, and these are usually highly risky investments, where bets often fail. As such, these sunk costs have to be recouped through sales revenue. All four of the GAFA companies are led by visionaries who have focused on gaining market share in the long term, doing exactly what many pundits and thought leaders complain too many U.S. firms are not doing. Yet, the report treats these firms as predatory because they are investing for the long term.

WANTING TO HOLD BACK NEEDED BUSINESS MODEL TRANSFORMATION
Just as the Sherman Antitrust Act was an attempt to hold back the transformation of the U.S. economy to large, powerful, and efficient industrial corporations so well described by Harvard Business history professor Alfred Chandler, the committee report appears to be motivated by the same conservative impulse: holding back the transformation of the U.S. economy to a digital platform one As ITIF has written:

Many industries that grew up in the pre-Internet era are still structurally inefficient. The simplest answer to both the inefficiencies of human intermediaries and the burnout of the professions is platforms. By “platform,” we mean the establishment of online ecosystems wherein suppliers and consumers can easily come together at scale—with machine learning a natural byproduct. Amazon, Netflix, Uber, and Airbnb are, of course, among the iconic examples. But today, in most nations, such platforms don’t exist (or are at a very small scale) in automobiles, insurance, health care, law, education, real estate, and other important sectors. Again, there are many reasons, including vested interests, antitrust, regulatory compliance, and overall inertia. In fact, the strength of these barriers is one reason many industry observers believe major changes will eventually need to be led by new, disruptive players. Consider Haven—the Amazon, J.P. Morgan, and Berkshire Hathaway entry into health care. But the bottom line is in order to bring scale, efficiency, and intelligence to these traditional sectors, the current barriers will eventually need to be overcome—and how this type of transformation will play out remains one of the biggest strategic unknowns in the market today.”

Likewise, the McKinsey Global Institute talks about the importance of the emergence of digital marketplaces and platforms. In other words, digital platforms in a host of industries—health care, education, transportation, financial services, and others—could become the new business model of the 21st century. Yet, with the report’s focus on ensuring that no firms have anything more than a modest share of any market, the recommendations risk holding back one of the most important economic transformations in economic history.

BEING BIASED IN FAVOR OF SMALL FIRMS
The report wants a key goal of antitrust to be protecting small businesses. It states, “entrepreneurism among locally owned businesses has also suffered as a result of this power. As she noted, ‘Local businesses are disappearing and, with them, a pathway to the middle class.” But as Michael Lind and I showed in our book Big Is Beautiful: Debunking the Myth of Small Business, on virtually every indicator of economic and social welfare, including wages and benefits, diversity, protecting the environment, and even job creation, large businesses on average outperform small. Small businesses already benefit from a significant array of regulatory, spending, and tax preferences on the part of government; they shouldn’t also benefit from a new form of antitrust policy.

BEING A TROJAN HORSE TO DRIVE RADICAL REFORM OF U.S. ANTITRUST LAW
The Cicilline report presents itself as an analysis of and remedies to rein in four firms in the tech sector. But in fact, the goal of the report is to restructure U.S. antitrust policy broadly. For example, the narrative makes it clear that a high market share is inherently bad, regardless of the type of industry. And when it comes to recommendations, that is the direction, including strengthening merger and monopolization enforcement, likely with hard statutory ceilings and bright-line rules and limits on companies with significant market share to move into new markets.

More generally, the report portrays a shift in the approach to the market economy and to innovation: It embraces a precautionary approach toward novel business models, aims to preserve a market structure made of small businesses despite network externalities, and advocate for ex-ante regulation over ex-post antitrust analysis. This precautionary approach clashes with the innovation-based approach one could legitimately adopt when addressing highly competitive and dynamic markets such as the digital markets.

CONCLUSION
Given the importance and size of major technology companies, it is appropriate for Congress to focus on antitrust issues in the industry. But any such focus should at least attempt to be unbiased. Moreover, fundamentally changing U.S. antitrust law and doctrine in the direction the antimonopolists want, with their inherent antipathy toward large companies for the sin of being big (what Progressive Era Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called “the mark of Cain”), would hurt U.S. innovation, competitiveness, and consumer welfare.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Robert D. Atkinson (@RobAtkinsonITIF) is the founder and president of ITIF. Atkinson’s books include: Big Is Beautiful: Debunking the Myth of Small Business (MIT, 2018), Innovation Economics: The Race for Global Advantage (Yale, 2012), and The Past and Future of America’s Economy: Long Waves of Innovation That Power Cycles of Growth (Edward Elgar, 2005). Atkinson holds a Ph.D. in city and regional planning from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and a master’s degree in urban and regional planning from the University of Oregon.

ABOUT ITIF

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research and educational institute focusing on the intersection of technological innovation and public policy. Recognized as the world’s leading science and technology think tank, ITIF’s mission is to formulate and promote policy solutions that accelerate innovation and boost productivity to spur growth, opportunity, and progress.

Source: https://itif.org/publications/2020/10/23/seventeen-flaws-cicilline-antitrust-report-competition-digital-markets?mc_cid=bde63ec23a&mc_eid=b61832c89d

9
Blockchain / National Blockchain Strategy - Bangladesh 2020
« on: October 15, 2020, 08:01:26 PM »
National Blockchain Strategy - Bangladesh 2020


10
As the pandemic disrupted collegiate life, mental-health experts feared a worsening crisis. Some worried that counseling centers would be overwhelmed by demand, leading to longer wait times and less effective treatment for students who were struggling and at risk of dropping out.

But early data from campus counseling centers challenge the idea that colleges are on the brink of a mental-health disaster.

Survey summary

Among the data from 144 responding institutions:

29% decrease in students seeking services
22% decrease in appointments
57% reported an increase in student anxiety, comparing the first four weeks of fall 2020 to fall 2019
81% reported an increase in student loneliness
36% reported an increase in student bereavement/grief and 40% reported an increase in depression
23% of students sought counseling for Covid-19 related reasons
The Association for University and College Counseling Center Directors recently surveyed 144 colleges, asking them to compare the first four weeks of this semester with the first four weeks of fall 2019. The survey found a 29-percent decrease in the number of students seeking counseling services.

Sharon Mitchell, senior director of counseling, health, and wellness at the University at Buffalo and president of the association, cautioned that the data reflect a snapshot in time, and that the survey didn’t dig into the reasons for the decrease.

It’s clear that some students are struggling with their mental health during a challenging semester. The majority of counseling directors (81 percent) reported increased student loneliness, and more than half (57 percent) reported higher student anxiety. Fewer said that grief and depression had risen.

But the data stand in contrast to several other surveys this year suggesting that rising distress could lead to a flood of students needing therapy.

One of the most alarming statistics came from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which found that one-fourth of 18- to 24-year-olds — the traditional age group of undergraduates — considered suicide in the previous 30 days. College presidents took note: Fifty-three percent ranked student mental health as a top concern in a recent poll by the American Council on Education.

Mitchell offered a couple of theories about the apparent decline in demand for college counseling: Students taking classes at home might be accessing mental-health services locally and not on campus. Many college therapists can’t see students who are learning remotely out of state due to licensing restrictions.

And, Mitchell said, some students might be feeling less stressed because they’re surrounded by a support network of family members.

Often, it’s being away from home that’s difficult for students, said Will Meek, director of counseling and psychological services at Brown University. For many students learning remotely this semester, Meek said his sense is that “they’re actually doing just fine — some of them better than when they’re on campus.”

Several counseling-center directors said their institutional figures line up with the national decrease in students seeking mental-health services. That’s the case at Pennsylvania State University, which Ben Locke, director of counseling and psychological services, attributes to the fact that fewer students are living on campus.

Locke is also executive director of the Center for Collegiate Mental Health, which collects data nationally on students who seek counseling. The center’s data from the spring semester, he said, indicated that students weren’t especially anxious and depressed in the first months of the pandemic.

The center looked at average levels of distress for students seeking their first therapy appointments, comparing the figures from March to May 2020 to the same period in 2019. They found that, on most counts, student distress was about the same this past spring semester as it was the year before, despite the onset of Covid-19.

Not all colleges have seen a drop-off in student demand for services. At Texas Christian University, there’s been a 52-percent increase compared to last year, said Eric Wood, director of the counseling and mental-health center. Calls to the university’s 24/7 crisis line nearly doubled in September, compared to September 2019, Wood wrote in an email.

Wood believes that TCU’s hybrid counseling model — with some in-person services — might be more inviting for students than the centers that are operating entirely virtually, with all therapy taking place over Zoom. TCU students can still drop in to the physical location if they’re looking for help.

Even though the national data don’t necessarily paint a picture of a full-blown mental-health crisis, that doesn’t mean colleges should stop prioritizing student well-being and making sure services are accessible, campus officials said.

At Brown, Meek said he’s been getting more calls from parents and friends who are worried about certain students. And some students are coming to the counseling center in a worse emotional state than usual.

In a typical semester, students interact with their friends, their resident advisers, and their professors in person. When something’s wrong, Meek said, there are often early warning signs. In Zoom classes, it’s easier for distressed students to hide.

Some students are really struggling, Locke said. He drew a distinction between those who might have to deal with relatively minor inconveniences, like quarantining for a few days if they are exposed to the virus, and students who are stuck at home in an abusive environment.

When crises like the pandemic occur, research shows there’s often a delay in mental-health issues surfacing, as people focus on immediate needs, he added. He said his center would do a thorough analysis of fall data after the semester has ended.

Some students will face mental-health challenges due to the effects of Covid-19, Locke said, but “those won’t be fully understood until the pandemic begins to clear.”

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.

Source: https://www.chronicle.com/article/did-the-pandemic-worsen-the-campus-mental-health-crisis-maybe-not-data-show

11
Science and Information / New Zoom Competitor Targets Higher Ed Users
« on: October 15, 2020, 07:55:10 PM »
Ed-tech innovators and investors haven't missed faculty members' widespread frustration with current videoconferencing tools' limitations -- frustration that's only grown as the global pandemic drags on and many classes continue to be delivered online or in hybrid formats.

Start-up company Engageli announced today that it has raised $14.5 million in seed funding to develop a new platform for remote instruction. It's an impressive sum for a company that is just a few months old.

Unlike popular videoconferencing tools such as Zoom, the Engageli platform will be built from scratch specifically for higher education use. It will “seamlessly integrate hybrid, synchronous and asynchronous online instruction all in one platform,” said Dan Avida, CEO of Engageli.

Avida's wife, Daphne Koller, is one of the co-founders of online learning platform Coursera. The couple were inspired to build Engageli after witnessing their daughters’ transition to remote learning in March due to COVID-19.

“I noticed that they weren’t always fully focused on the teacher or class and were clearly missing the social engagement, so we decided to find and recommend to their school a better tool than the conferencing software that the school was using,” said Avida.

After reaching out to their contacts with expertise in online learning, Avida and Koller found nothing on the market they considered a good solution and decided to create their own.

Avida and Koller co-founded Engageli along with Serge Plotkin, a Stanford University emeritus professor, and Jamie Nacht Farrell, a former executive at 2U and Trilogy.

At first glance, the Engageli platform has the familiar hallmarks of most popular videoconferencing tools. Attendees' faces are organized into a grid format, and participants have the ability to message each other and virtually raise their hands while a presenter is speaking.

Where Engageli starts to diverge in capability from generic videoconferencing platforms is an ability to host breakout sessions without participants or presenters having to leave one conversation and start another in a new conferencing session.

A simple indicator gives instructors the ability to monitor the activity levels of students in different groups, called tables. Green demonstrates a student is active and engaged in conversation. Red suggests they may have dozed off.

Polls and quizzes will be built into the platform and will be easy for instructors to customize, Avida said. The platform is browser-based, meaning users won’t have to download an app to access class.

To assist students who may be learning in environments where internet speeds are slow, the Engageli platform takes all of the individual video feeds of participants and combines them into one feed. That has the effect of reducing bandwidth requirements.

The company is beginning a pilot program with university partners this week. It is not disclosing which institutions are participating at this time.

Avida wouldn't rule out targeting markets beyond higher ed in the future.

"For now, we are focused on higher ed institutions," he said. "While our features were designed specifically for college and university students and instructors, they are also suited for other learning environments."

Strong demand exists for a Zoom-like asynchronous learning platform designed specifically for higher education, said Joshua Kim, director of online programs and strategy at the Dartmouth Center for the Advancement of Learning and an Inside Higher Ed blogger.

The Zoom platform's beauty is its “combination of simplicity, a well-designed user interface and the quality of its audio and video connections,” Kim said. “If Engageli has built a platform that retains the elegance of Zoom while offering features that are designed for synchronous online learning, then I think there will be strong interest across the higher education community to kick the tires.”

The story of Avida and Koller’s frustration with their children’s remote learning experience driving the creation of Engageli is very similar to the story behind ClassEDU, a newly launched company from former Blackboard CEO and co-founder Michael Chasen.

Chasen announced last month that his company would build an add-on for Zoom called Class for Zoom that would make the platform more suitable for educational use. Like Avida and Koller, Chasen started the company after seeing the limitations of the tools his children were using to learn remotely. ClassEDU raised $16 million in seed funding.

A hole exists in the market for videoconferencing tools designed for higher ed use, said Phil Hill, a partner at MindWires Consulting and publisher of the blog Phil on Ed Tech. At the same time, a large amount of money is waiting to be invested in ed tech.

That reminds Hill of a previous period of high enthusiasm among ed-tech investors -- but also a lot of hype from companies in the space.

“It feels a little like 2009 all over again,” Hill said.

While both Engageli and Class for Zoom will likely compete for the same customers, they demonstrate very different approaches, Hill said.

“ClassEDU has the momentum of Zoom behind it, but Engageli is being designed from the ground up,” he said.

From a strategic perspective, Hill believes it makes more business sense to build a completely new product than to create an add-on for an existing product. But it is riskier. Customers may find it easier to adapt to a Zoom plugin than an entirely new product.

But Hill also pointed to the funding already raised by Engageli. Given the pedigree of the team, he said that if “anyone can do it, they can.”

Source: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/10/15/ed-tech-veterans-launch-zoom-challenger-engageli

12
জীবনের জন্য সবচেয়ে প্রয়োজনীয় বন্ধুটির নাম হলো এন্ডোরফিনস। হাসপাতালের বিছানায় একাকী শুয়ে না থাকা পর্যন্ত অনুধাবন করা যায়না- সুস্বাস্থ্য  জীবনে কত দরকার।  সুস্বাস্থ্যের জন্য দিনে চব্বিশ ঘন্টায় কমপক্ষে আধঘন্টা সময় এই বন্ধুর জন্য ব্যয় করতে হয়। ব্যয়াম করলে শরীর এণ্ডোরফিনস ডিসচার্জ করে। শরীরে একটা হাসিখুশী- হালকা- ভাব আসে। ভালো একটা বই পড়লে , ভালো মানুষের সাথে সুসম্পর্ক  রাখলেও শরীরে জন্য অতি প্রয়োজনীয় এই বন্ধুটির সাক্ষাৎ পাওয়া যায়। তাই, হঠাৎ করে একদিন না। এই বন্ধুটিকে প্রতিদিনই দরকার। মন খারাপ থাকলে প্রিয়জন কাছে আসলে যেমন মন ভালো হয়ে যায়। ঠিক তেমনি- মন যখন খারাপ একটু দৌড়ে আসুন। হেঁটে আসুন। এই এণ্ডোরফিনস নামক বন্ধুটি তখন আপনার ভরসা হয়ে সাথে থাকবে।

অতি প্রয়োজনীয় দ্বিতীয় বন্ধুটির নাম হলো ডোপামিন। প্রথম বন্ধু আপনার শরীরকে লাইনে রাখে। কিন্তু শরীর শুধু লাইনে রাখলে হয়না। পাশাপাশি আপনাকে সৎ একটা জীবনও যাপন করতে হয়। কোটি কোটি টাকা থাকলেও অসৎ মানুষের চেহারা দেখলে বুঝবেন- কি যেন একটা অশান্তি ওদের মাঝে বিরাজ করে। কিন্তু সৎ মানুষের চেহারায় দেখবেন একটা অন্য রকমের দীপ্তি ছড়িয়ে আছে। যখনই সৎভাবে কোনো একটা কাজ আপনি করবেন তখন শরীরে ডোপামিন তৈরি হয়। আপনি পরিকল্পনা করলেন- আজকে ঠিক সময়ে অফিসে যাবেন। অফিসের সব কাজ ভালোভাবে শেষ করবেন। এক টাকাও ঘুষ খাবেন না। ফাইল আটকে রাখবেন না। কোনো রকমের চিটিং করবেন না। কাউকে ফাঁকি দিবেন না। প্রতিদিন যখন এই টার্গেট আপনি পূর্ণ করবেন- শরীরে ডোপামিনের আগমন ঘটবে। ফুলে যেমন প্রজাপতির আগমণ ঘটে।  কারো ভালো কাজে অনুপ্রেরণা দিলেও শরীরে ডোপামিন আসে। স্ত্রী যখন স্বামীর পরিশ্রমকে উৎসাহ দেয়, স্বামী যখন ঘরে গিয়ে দিনের যাবতীয় নানা কাজের জন্য স্ত্রীর প্রশংসা করে- দেখবেন স্ত্রীর চেহারায় একটা লাবণ্য আসে। আপনার কাজ যখন বস এ্যপ্রিশিয়েট করে কিংবা নিজের ছেলেমেয়েকে কোনো কিছু ভালোভাবে শেষ করার জন্য আপনি সাবাশ বলেন- তখন একটা বাড়তি আনন্দ, উৎসাহ তৈরি হয়। এর সবগুলোই হলো- শরীরের অকৃত্রিম বন্ধু ডোপামিনের কাজকারবার। ভালো কিছু অর্জন করুন-ভালো কাজে একজন আরেকজনকে উৎসাহ দিন আর শরীরের ডোপামিনের কলোনি গড়ে তুলুন।

তৃতীয় বন্ধুটি হলো সেরোটোনিন। এই বন্ধুটি হলো- কামিনী রায়ের কবিতার এই দুই লাইন "আপনারে লয়ে বিব্রত রহিতে আসে নাই কেহ অবনী 'পরে, সকলের তরে সকলে আমরা প্রত্যেকে মোরা পরের তরে।" কারো কল্যাণের জন্য যাই করিনা কেন তাতে সেরোটোনিন নামক এই অদৃশ্য বন্ধুটির সাক্ষাৎ পাওয়া যায়। পথের মাঝ থেকে একটা কাঁটা ফেলে দিলেন- কাউকে সুপরামর্শ দিলেন- বৃদ্ধ, মহিলা, রোগী , দূর্বল কাউকে বাসের  সীটটা ছেড়ে দিলেন। দেখবেন- মনে সুখ পাচ্ছেন। শরীরে এই সুখ এনে দেয় সেরোটোনিন নামক এই অদেখা বন্ধুটি। একাগ্রচিত্তে ধ্যান করলেও শরীরে প্রশান্তি আসে। লোক দেখানো না বরং আধ্যাত্মিক সম্পৃক্ততার তাগিদে কেউ যদি কারো ধর্ম বিশুদ্ধ পালন করে - মনে প্রশান্তি আসে। এই প্রশান্তির যোগান দেয়- বন্ধু সেরোটোনিন।

আমাদের শেষ বন্ধুটি হলো- অক্সিটোসিন। প্রিয়জনের সান্নিধ্যে আসলে কিংবা কোনো সুন্দর জায়গা ভ্রমন করলে শরীরে একটা সুখ আসে। কোলাকুলি  করলে- কারো সাথে করমর্দন করলে- অদেখা বন্ধুকে কাছে পেয়ে জড়িয়ে ধরলে -বাবা-মায়ের পাশে বসে থাকলে - এমনকি আপনজনের কন্ঠস্বর শুনলে- পরিবারের সবাইকে ভালোবাসায় জড়িয়ে রাখলে  দেহ মনে একটা আনন্দের ভাব আসে। কেউ যখন খুব কষ্টে থাকে তখন কোনো প্রিয়জন যদি বুকের সাথে শুধু জড়িয়ে ধরে- তখন মনটা অনেক হালকা হয়ে আসে। মনকে হালকা করে দেয়া  এই আনন্দময়ী বন্ধুটি হলো অক্সিটোসিন।

তাই, এন্ডোরফিনস নামক বন্ধুকে পেতে প্রতিদিন ব্যায়াম করা, ডোপামিনকে পেতে প্রতিদিন সৎভাবে জীবনযাপন করে ছোট ছোট কাজ সম্পাদনা করা, সেরোটোনিন কে পেতে পরোপকার করা- বিশুদ্ধ মনে নিজ নিজ ধর্ম পালন করা  আর অক্সিটোসিন নামক অকৃত্তিম বন্ধুকে পেতে  শিশুদের আদর-সোহাগ করা- সুযোগ পেলেই বাবা-মায়ের পাশে বসে থাকা  এবং আপনজনের সাথে সময় কাটানোর কোনো বিকল্প নেই। প্রতিটি পরিবারেরই উচিত শিশুরা যেন  এই চারবন্ধুকে সাথে নিয়ে বড় হতে পারে-সেটা খেয়াল রাখা।  একাডেমিক পড়ালেখার চেয়ে শিশুদের  আরো বেশী দরকার এই চার বন্ধুর।  মোবাইল, ভিডিও গ্যেমে-ডিজিটাল ফ্রেমে  ঘরে বন্দি হয়ে না  থেকে শিশুদের উচিত ঘরের বাইরে প্রকৃতির ফ্রেমে নজর দেয়া। শারীরিক নানা রকমের খেলাধূলায় সম্পৃক্ত করা। এটা হলো- এণ্ডারফিনস। প্রতিটি ভালো কাজে শিশুদের উৎসাহিত করা- শিশুদের যেকোনো ছোট অর্জনকেও অনুপ্রেরণা দেয়া- এটা হলো- ডোপামিন। সহপাঠির সাথে প্রতিযোগিতা না সহযোগিতা  শিখা। খাবার ভাগ করে খাওয়া- একসাথে বসে একটা অংকের সমাধান করা- স্কুলের টেবিল -চেয়ার সাজিয়ে রাখা- বৃষ্টিতে ভেজা কোনো সহপাঠিকে নিজ ছাতার নীচে নিয়ে আসা। এইসব ছোট ছোট পরোপকারই হলো- সেরোটোনিন। আর কাজে যত ব্যস্ততাই থাকুক-জীবন যত পেরেশানই থাকুক ঘরে গিয়ে প্রশস্ত হৃদয়ে শিশুকে বুকে জড়িয়ে ধরা- বৃদ্ধ বাবা-মায়ের খোঁজ খবর নেয়া- অল্প সময়ের জন্যও  সুযোগ পেলে তাদের পাশে বসা থাকাই  হলো-নিজের-শিশুর-পিতামাতার সবার  অকৃত্রিম বন্ধু অক্সিটোসিন।

Collected

13
মানসিক চাপ জীবনের একটি স্বাভাবিক অংশ। কিন্তু নি:সন্দেহে অতিরিক্ত চাপ অনুভব করা দেহ, মন-মানসিকতা, জীবনযাত্রা সব দিক থেকে অত্যন্ত ক্ষতিকারক। তাই তা কন্ট্রোল করা জরুরি।
নিম্নে মানসিক চাপ কন্ট্রোল করার কতিপয় নির্দেশিকা প্রদান করা হল:

১) মানুষের ব্যাপারে খরবদারী করবেন না। কে কী করছে সে বিষয়ে মাথা ঘামানো নিজের মানসিক চাপ বৃদ্ধির একটি কারণ। আরেকটি সমস্যা হবে, অন্যের বিষয় নিয়ে মাথা ঘামালে নিজেকে অন্যদের সাথে তুলনা করার মনোভাব সৃষ্টি হবে। টাকা-পয়সা, সামাজিক অবস্থান, পদমর্যাদা, গাড়ি, বাড়ি, অলংকার, পোশাক, সৌন্দর্য ইত্যাদি দিক থেকে তখন মানসিক চাপ অনুভব করবেন। তাই আল্লাহ আপনাকে যা দিয়েছেন তা নিয়ে খুশি থাকুন আর আল্লাহর শুকরিয়া আদায় করুন। তাহলে হৃদয়ে পরম প্রশান্তি অনুভব করবেন ইনশাআল্লাহ।

২) আপনার যতটুকু দায়িত্ব ও কর্তব্য ততটুকু পরম আন্তরিকতার সাথে পালন করুন। আপনার সাধ্যের অতিরিক্ত দায়িত্ব কাঁধে তুলতে যাবেন না। অনুরোধে ঢেঁকি গিলবেন না। অন্যথায় আপনাকে অতিরিক্ত মানসিক চাপে থাকতে হবে।

৩) মানুষের সাথে অতিরিক্ত সম্পর্ক মানসিক চাপের অন্যতম কারণ। তাই আত্মীয়, বন্ধু, প্রতিবেশী, কলিগ, ক্লাসমেট ইত্যাদির সাথে সীমিত সম্পর্ক রাখুন। সম্পর্ক যত ব্যাপক হবে ততই আপনি নানা বাধ্যবাধকতার জালে আটকে যাবেন।

৪) অতিলোভ করবেন না। অতিলোভী ব্যক্তি অর্থ-কড়ি, ধন-দৌলত, পদমর্যাদা ইত্যাদি বৃদ্ধির চিন্তায় বিভোর থাকে। যদি সামান্য টাকা-পয়সা হাতছাড়া হয় বা চাকুরীর প্রমোশন থেকে বঞ্চিত হয় তবে তার হাহুতাশ দেখে কে? সুতরাং অল্পে তুষ্টি মানসিক শান্তির জন্য খুব গুরুত্বপূর্ণ এবং এটি তাকওয়ারও পরিচায়ক।

৫) সাধ্যের বাইরে নিজের অর্থ-সম্পদ, আরাম-আয়েশ উজাড় করে দিবেন না। যারা কৃত্রিমভাবে নিজের সব কিছুকে উৎসর্গ করে দেয় তারা তাদের কথা-বার্তা ও আচরণে মানুষের ধন্যবাদ ও প্রশংসা পাওয়ার অপেক্ষায় থাকে। কিন্তু যদি তা না পায় তখন তার মানসিক অস্থিরতা ও টেনশন বেড়ে যায়।

৬) আজকের দিনটিকে ভালভাবে উপভোগ করুন। আগামী কাল কী হবে সেটা আল্লাহর উপর ছেড়ে দিন। ইবাদত-বন্দেগীর পাশাপাশি আল্লাহর দেয়া নেয়ামত স্বাচ্ছন্দ্যে উপভোগ করুন। দুনিয়াবী বিষয়ে আগামীর চিন্তায় অস্থির হয়ে মানসিক চাপ বৃদ্ধি করবেন না।

৭) প্রতিদিন একান্ত নির্জনে কিছু সময় কাটান। এ সময় দুনিয়ার কারও সাথে সম্পর্ক রাখবেন না। বিশেষ করে ইন্টারনেট তথা হোয়াটসএ্যাপ, ফেসবুক ইত্যাদি সামাজিক যোগাযোগ মাধ্যম থেকে সম্পূর্ণ দূরে থাকুন। এ সময় আত্মসমালোচনা করুন আর আল্লাহর নিকট দুয়া করুন। তাহলে দেখবেন, মহান আল্লাহ আপনার মানসিক চাপ থেকে মুক্তি দান করবেন ইনশাআল্লাহ।

৮) জ্ঞানীদের জীবনী পড়ুন, তাদের উপদেশ ও মূল্যবান বাণীগুলো পড়ুন তাহলে তাদের জীবনের অভিজ্ঞতা ও উপদেশ দুনিয়ার জীবনে আপনার চলার পথকে সহজ করে দিবে ইনশাআল্লাহ।

৯) জীবনে যত বিপদ ও সমস্যাই আসুক না কেন-যেমন, আর্থিক ক্ষতি, পরীক্ষায় খারাপ রেজাল্ট, অসুখ-বিসুখ ইত্যাদি এগুলো নিয়ে খুব বেশী দু:শ্চিন্তা করবেন না। বরং সহজভাবে মেনে নিন। মনে রাখুন, মহান আল্লাহর লিখিত তাকদিরের বাইরে কিছুই ঘটে না। বিপদাপদেই হয়ত কল্যাণ রয়েছে যা বাহ্যিক দৃষ্টিতে মানুষের দৃষ্টিগোচর হয় না। কিন্তু নিশ্চয় আল্লাহ হেকমত ছাড়া কিছুই করেন না।

১০) সব কিছুই গুরুত্বের সাথে গ্রহণ করবেন না। মানুষের প্রতিটি কথা বা কাজ গুরুত্বের সাথে বিবেচনা করা ঠিক নয়। সব কিছু গভীরভাবে বিশ্লেষণ করা ঠিক নয়। বরং মনে আনন্দ বজায় রাখুন, মানুষের সাথে দেখা-সাক্ষাতে হাসতে শিখুন। আপনার কথা ও আচরণে যেন ফুলের সুঘ্রাণ বের হয়। তাহলে ইনশাআল্লাহ মন ফ্রেশ থাকবে আর মানসিক চাপ কমে যাবে ইনশাআল্লাহ।

১১) শরীরকে তার হক দিন। প্রয়োজনীয় খাবার, ঘুম, বিশ্রাম গ্রহণ করা জরুরি।

১২) দৈনন্দিন গুরুত্বপূর্ণ কাজের লিস্ট তৈরি করে আগেরটা আগে পরেরটা পরে করুন। তবে তা করতে গিয়ে নিজেকে কষ্টের মধ্যে ফেলে দিবেন না। মনে রাখবেন, অগোছালো কার্যক্রম মানসিক অস্থিরতা বাড়ায় এবং মানসিক চাপ তৈরি করে।

১৩) ‘প্রতিটি কাজ ১০০ পার্সেন্ট নির্ভুল করতে হবে’ এই চিন্তা মাথা থেকে সরাতে হবে। কেননা, পূর্ণাঙ্গতার গুণ কেবল মাত্র আল্লাহর। যারা সব কাজ নির্ভুল করার চিন্তায় থাকে তাদেরকে চতুর্দিক থেকে দু:শ্চিন্তা, টেনশন,অস্থিরতা ঘিরে ধরে। ফলে তাদের মানসিক চাপ চরম আকার ধারণ করে।

১৪) নিশ্চিত থাকুন, আল্লাহর সাথে সম্পর্ক যত গভীর হবে দুনিয়া ও আখিরাতের সব কাজ তত সহজ হবে। আল্লাহ ভীতি, নামায, সকাল-সন্ধ্যার দুয়া ও যিকির, নেকীর কাজ, মানুষের কল্যাণে কাজ ইত্যাদির মাধ্যমে আল্লাহ বান্দার মনে অফুরন্ত প্রশান্তি বর্ষণ করেন, সমস্যা দূরভিত করেন আর তখন জীবন হয়ে উঠে আরও প্রাণবন্ত, স্বচ্ছন্দয় ও আল্লাহর ভালবাসায় সুরভিত।
আল্লাহ সকলকে তাওফিক দান করুন।

লেখক : আব্দুল্লাহ আল কাফী বিন আব্দুল জলীল |

Source: https://quraneralo.net/stress-control-1/

14
Photography / Collection of Extremely Rare Photographs
« on: September 26, 2020, 02:45:17 PM »
Collection of Extremely Rare Photographs:

See in the pdf

15
Abstract

Modern challenges, risks, and opportunities of a new technological paradigm of human development—the so-called fourth industrial revolution—are covered in this article. Their social costs and consequences are discussed in detail. The impact of the fourth industrial revolution on business development is analyzed. The development of information platforms of supply and demand is presented as the creation of new business models. When considering the impact of the fourth industrial revolution on the state, it is concluded that the state has increased control over society, while changing the mechanisms of interaction between the state and civil society, the development of competition, and decentralization of power. It is pointed out that the ability of state structures and authorities to adapt to the conditions of the fourth industrial revolution will determine their survival in the new conditions. If they are able to face the world of revolutionary change openly, the ability to change their state structures, make them transparent and the effectiveness will allow the state to maintain its competitive advantages and withstand the tests of a new technological paradigm of human development. Artificial intelligence is considered in detail as the main driver of the fourth industrial revolution.

The world is at the very precipice of a new technological revolution that will fundamentally change our way of being, life, work, and ways of interacting with each other. In its scale, scope and complexity, the transformation/changes will differ considerably from anything experienced by humanity so far. We still have no idea how it will evolve, but one thing becomes apparent: our response should be universal and comprehensive, including all active participants in world politics, from the public-private sectors to the intellectual and civil society. Klaus Schwab, the founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum in Davos, describes these technological transformations/changes as the fourth industrial revolution.

During the first industrial revolution, water and steam power were used to substitute manual work for machine work and develop industrial production, during the second electricity was used to expand and enhance the scale of mass production, during the third electronics and information technology were used to automate production. And right now, the third industrial revolution is being replaced by the fourth, a digital revolution that has emerged and evolved since the middle of the last century. This has been mainly characterized by technology blending, which blurs the traditional borders between the material, digital and biological worlds.

Since 1784, steam power, water, and equipment for mechanization of production marked the first industrial revolution. Since 1870, the division of labor, electricity, and mass production shaped the character of the second. Since 1969, electronics, information technology, and automation of production have become the basic features of the third. Can we identify the primary and main features of the next revolution?

There are three markers, which show that the present changes do not represent a follow-up to the third industrial revolution, but demonstrate the beginning of the fourth. These are the speed, scale of changes, and their effects on the whole system. The speed of the occurrence of new discoveries and technological breakthroughs has never been observed before. In contrast to the previous revolutions, the pace of development of the fourth revolution is exponential rather than linear. Furthermore, almost all industrial sectors in nearly every country are being reformatted, and the breadth and depth of changes foreshadow the transformation of the whole production, administration, and management systems.

The possibilities of billions of people, connected by mobile devices with powerful computing capacity, large amounts of information storage, and access to knowledge, are endless. And these possibilities will be increased with the discovery of new technologies in various areas, such as artificial intelligence, robotics, autonomous means of transport, the Internet of Things, 3D printing, nano-biotechnology, materials science, energy technology, and quantum computing.

1. Challenges and Opportunities

The fourth industrial revolution, as the previous three revolutions, has the capacity to increase global income and improve the quality of life for peoples of the world. Consumers with material possibilities and access to the digital world are those who already enjoy its fruits/benefits; through its technologies, new products, and services which increase efficiency and comfort for everyone. Taxi request, booking of flight tickets, marketing, making payment, listening to music, film screening, or computer games—we have remote access to all of them.

In the future, technological innovations will give rise to significant changes in industrial procurement, with long-term efficiency gains and productivity in this area. Transport and communication costs will be reduced, logistics and global supply chains will be made more efficient, trade margins will be decreased, all this will lead to the opening of new markets and economic growth.

At the same time, the revolution could bring increasing inequality as a result of changes in the labor market. Either automation, which replaces manual labor, or the direct replacement of a worker for a machine, could cause an increase in the gap between the income of capital and the income of employees. However, it is possible that such replacement of workers will in the future provide a net increase in safe and top-paying occupations and jobs.

This shift has never proceeded smoothly without great social expenses. Moreover, most of them took place in the countries that made this shift too late. Thus, the first industrial revolution led to deindustrialization in India (in the 18th century, India produced up to 25% of world GDP, by the mid-twentieth century the share fell to 2%), and there was a serious lack of technology in Russia and Turkey. The second industrial revolution caused the Great Depression, which resulted in major social shocks not only in the United States, Germany, Argentina, but also mass famine in the colonies (at the expense of which the metropolis was getting out of the crisis).

We have not yet generalized data on the consequences of the third industrial revolution. However, the most preliminary estimates show that the deindustrialization of the post-Soviet space, a series of crises in Latin America are the consequences of such a shift, in which these countries have lagged behind. Alternative examples are China and Korea, which integrated technology through competent industrial policy and managed to emerge as world leaders after the third technological revolution.

The most preliminary estimates show that at least 20% of jobs have been cut. And globalization has led to extremely uneven job cuts in different countries. The imposition of overproduction during the transition of the global crisis did not allow occupying the released labor force on a global scale through the growth of production. And the economic growth around the world of 3-4% per year does not solve any of its problems.

So far, it is difficult to foresee the likelihood of developing one scenario or another, but there are historical prerequisites demonstrating that the result will be a mixture of both versions. However, it is obvious that talent, rather than capital, will be a crucial factor in the production function during the fourth industrial revolution. It will result in the division of the labor market into two main segments: “low-skilled labor/low salary” and “high-skilled labor/high salary”, a result of which will be an increase in social tension.

Apart from its crucial economic impact, the disparity will also have a significant social aspect in the context of the fourth industrial revolution. The greatest beneficiaries will be those who provide intellectual and material capital—savers and investors—which explains the widening gap between groups dependent on capital and wage labor. Therefore, technology is one of the main factors of stagnation, as well as declining incomes, even in countries with high levels of income: the demand for high–skilled labor is growing, but it is dropping for medium-skilled labor. As a result, the labor market will be characterized by a high demand for highly skilled and unskilled labor, with little demand for the middle segment.

Resentment could also be strengthened by the spread of digital technologies and the dynamics of social media in information dissemination. Today more than 30% of the world’s population uses social media platforms for communication, education, and information dissemination. In an ideal world, these relationships could provide opportunities for building bridges among diverse cultures and, as a result, for unity and cohesion. Nevertheless, these relationships also could create and promote unrealistic and utopian views of the success of an individual or group, as well as suggest and disseminate extreme (extremist) ideas and ideologies.

The invention of the XXI century was the emergence and quick wins of the information space by social media, which in many respects replaced the traditional media. Thus, according to studies of the international marketing management system HootSuite, as of January 2018 in Belarus more than 49% of the population (4.67 million) are active users of social media. 3.85 million Belarusians use social platforms on smartphones. But the most curious fact is that Belarus ranks first in the world in terms of the percentage of women on Facebook (58%). It should be acknowledged that only 8.6% of Belarusian business pages on Facebook use advertising tools (this is almost 3 times less than the average).

What can be connected with such changes? Firstly, social media is a more mobile way of transmitting and receiving information. It expands access to the social network, and today in Belarus only 3.25 million use the fixed internet, with a constantly increasing speed of access to the network, which makes social networks more competitive.

Thirdly, there is deepening democratization of the information space. Earlier information could be provided only by centralized news agencies, now we see how social networks allow any registered account to become a kind of center for the transmission and dissemination of information. Therefore, today the media community is faced with an entirely new phenomenon—bloggers. Bloggers, in contrast with journalists, are not bound by mass media legislation, act as private individuals, and are not responsible for the credibility in the transfer of information. The same can be said about social media, which leads to consequences in the area of quality of transmitted and reported information, as well as public security.

Sometimes the anonymity of social media leads to greater risks. The anonymity of accounts provides a broad range of instruments to manipulate the information space. Attempts to organize “revolutions through social networks” and as the distressing consequences of the Arab Spring, rumblings of which we still observe in Syria and Yemen, show, social media requires the development of a legal framework that could regulate this sphere. In this regard, in the Republic of Belarus in 2010 in the National security concept, and in 2016 in the adopted New military doctrine provisions on the features of the threat of “hybrid wars” were introduced, namely in the part related to information and psychological methods of destabilization of the situation in the world.

On the one hand, it is necessary to develop legal support for freedom of speech in social media. On the other hand, participants in social networks should feel safe both in terms of access to accurate information and in terms of moral and psychological protection. The latter factors are important. Over recent years, there has been a great number of cases of so-called “catering”, mentally incorrect behavior in social media, which sometimes causes deplorable and tragic consequences. Anonymity and legally undefined aspects of these media create loopholes, including illegitimate and illegal actions. Many social media networks, due to their anonymity, in particular the telegram channel, are used by destructive forces for communication by representatives of criminal and terrorist groups. Therefore, this resource has been recognized as a hazard and blocked on the territory of the Russian Federation. Attempts of numerous information junk shots, misinformation, and manipulation of interpretations of already existing information are also recorded. All these possess a hybrid threat, which is recognized by experts at the world level.

In the next thirty years, the role of the internet and social media will only gain more significance. Audience coverage will expand through a generational change, increasing access to the internet in new regions, and the speed of data transmission. Moreover, in some countries, social networks are already trying to integrate with e-governments, banking systems, and Agency resources. There is an integration of information, management, and payment systems, the process of digitalization, which expands the functions of social networks and requires a more detailed elaboration of security and the establishment of a qualitatively new framework of legal support for social media functioning.

2. Impact on the Business

Nowadays significant challenges remain in thinking or anticipating the speeding up of innovation progress and increasing the pace of change, and these factors are the source of constant surprises even for the most skillful and informed participants. Anyways it has been clearly demonstrated in all sectors of the economy, that the technology marking the beginning of the fourth industrial revolution has a decisive impact on business. The fourth industrial revolution is already happening, it is now picking up and the development of robotics will further digitalize the economy and automate production and services, and expand the use of little-used technologies.

In the supply and logistics of many industries, we can notice the introduction of new technologies, enabling totally new ways of servicing for existing procurement needs, and, consequently, greatly competing with established production and value chains. A similar effect comes from the initiatives of innovative competitors, who due to worldwide digital platforms for research, development, marketing, sales, and distribution, can quickly displace long and well-standing market participants, by improving quality, speed, or cost of providing goods for consumption.

In addition, significant changes on the demand side are arising, as the increasing availability of information, constant involvement of the consumer, and new patterns of consumer behavior (mainly as a result of access to mobile networks and information) make companies adopt ways of development, marketing, and delivery of products or services.

The development of information platforms is a core trend. Such platforms combine supply and demand and undermine existing production structures, and as examples, we can see new business models in the contemporary “sharing” economy and “on-demand” economy. These platforms (“Uber”, “Airbnb”, “Alibaba” etc.), easily used on smartphones, bring people, assets, and data together, thus creating entirely new ways and means of consuming goods and services. In addition, they make it easier to achieve “wealth” for businesses and individuals easier, changing the personal and professional sphere of employment. These new business models are rapidly spreading as a large number of new services are booming, from laundry to shopping, from housekeeping to parking, from massage to transportation.

In general, there are four main effects of the fourth industrial revolution on business—the impact on consumer expectations, on product improvements, on collaborative innovation, and on forms of organization. Tangible products and services can be enhanced by means of digital opportunities that make them more valuable. New technologies make assets more sustainable and flexible, while data and analytics are changing the way they are being maintained. The world of individual consumer experience, widely available information services, and efficient use of assets require new forms of cooperation, especially considering the speed with which changes are going on. And the emergence of global platforms and other new business models, as a result, means, that individual capability, the culture of society, and organizational forms should be revalued.

3. Impact on the State

“The fourth industrial revolution will change not just what we do, but also who we are.”

As a material, biological and digital worlds continue to merge, new technology and platform will provide expanding opportunities for citizens to interact with government agencies, to express their views, coordinate their efforts, and even to avoid authorities’ supervision. Concurrently, government agencies will receive new technological options to strengthen control over society, based on more complex and upgraded monitoring systems of digital infrastructure. However, the authorities will be under pressure to reconsider their approaches to interaction with civil society and pursue policies, as their central role in the latter will go down with the birth of new sources of competition, redistribution, and decentralization of power arising from new technologies.

Ultimately, the adaptability of government structures and authorities will determine their survival. If they are able to accept the world of revolutionary changes, to modify their structures, to make them transparent and efficient enough to maintain their competitive advantages, then they will address new challenges. Otherwise, they may face difficult problems to solve.

This will become especially evident in the field of management. When the time of the second industrial revolution coincided with the then-existing public policy and decision-making systems, decision-makers had time to consider particular issues and formulate necessary solutions or appropriate regulatory frameworks. The entire process was linear, mechanical, with a strict top-down approach.

Such an approach is not suitable for our time. Given the rapid pace and scale of the impact of the fourth industrial revolution, legislators and regulators have faced unprecedented challenges and, mostly, found themselves somewhat helpless.

For example, how could they protect the interests of consumers and society in a broad sense while continuing to foster innovation and technological progress? With the introduction of “flexible” public administration, the private sector has implemented appropriate measures to develop software and business models on a larger scale. It means that regulators should adapt to a new, ever-changing environment, evolving to fully understand what they regulate. For that purpose, the authorities and regulatory agencies should work closely with business and civil society.

4. Impact on Humanity

The fourth industrial revolution will change not just what we do, but also who we are. It will influence our identity and all related aspects: our perception of privacy, understanding of property, consumer habits, time that we devote to work and leisure, career development, a set of skills and competence, and personal relationships. At the core of this question is the permanent use of smartphones that may cause the loss of one of the most important aspects of our existence: to make a pause, to think, and to start having meaningful conversations.

Privacy is one of the greatest personal challenges posed by new information technologies. We reflexively realize how important it is for everyone, though we are aware of tracking and sharing information about ourselves is a crucial aspect of the new information interaction. The fundamental issues of the impact of the loss of control over our information on our private life in the near future will be only discussed more actively. In addition to breakthroughs in biotechnology and AI that redefine the concept of the human being on the whole and push back the boundaries of life expectancy, cognition and human capabilities will make us review our moral and ethical norms.

5. Artificial Intelligence (AI) as one of the main drivers of the Fourth Industrial Revolution

Artificial intelligence already exists in our lives, from self-driving cars and drones to virtual assistants who can translate or invest. By virtue of the exponential growth of computing power and the huge amount of accumulated data, the progress in the field of AI has been impressive in recent years. AI is widely used in creating new types of medicine and developing algorithms which can predict our future cultural preferences. At the same time, digital production technologies interact with the biological world. Engineers, designers, architects combine computer-aided design systems, additive manufacturing, materials science, and synthetic biology for breakouts in the discovery of symbiosis between microorganisms, our bodies, the substances we consume, and even the houses we live in.

Artificial intelligence will become the central driver of change according to the polling of 800 leaders of technology companies which was conducted specially for the 46th World Economic Forum in Davos in 2016. 45% of respondents believe that in 2025, artificial intelligence may be present on the boards of directors of large companies.

Artificial intelligence used to exist only in science fiction, but now it is one of the most promising and rapidly developing technologies. Limited or “weak” AI technologies are already widely used in various spheres: from mobile phones and household electronics to military products. The development of “strong” artificial intelligence, which can make informed management decisions, is on the agenda today. Experts say that the prospect of creating such a technology, questions not only the current system of global labor division but also the world order and international security system.

Discussions at the conference organized by the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR) with the participation of the Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in September 2018 in Beijing showed that AI technologies will be used by nuclear powers in the near future to modernize their strategic weapons. The usage of “weak” artificial intelligence (sharpened to solve a specific task) for early warning of the launch of enemy missiles, as well as for estimating the possibility of such a launch, can give the military command of a nuclear power additional time to decide on the backlash and its scale. New technologies can also upgrade the accuracy of nuclear weapons and the effectiveness of missile defense, improve the protection of nuclear facilities, and provide better data.

At the same time, the acceleration of the decision-making process of one of the parties will inevitably push its potential enemies to search for opportunities for faster delivery of nuclear weapons. Such a race between nuclear powers potentially has a serious threat to world stability, since it will leave less and less time to estimate the threat of a missile attack and the expediency of response. Ultimately, it cannot be excluded that the countries will be forced to automatize decisions about a retaliatory strike, which can lead to unpredictable consequences. At the same time, weaker nuclear powers, feeling vulnerable, in the nearest future may implement an automatic nuclear retaliatory strike system (by analogy with the Soviet “Perimeter” system and the American “Operation Looking Glass”).

As part of the discussion, it was noted that even machine learning experts do not always fully understand how it works. Despite the rapid development of AI technologies, the “black box” problem, when decision-making algorithms remain hidden from developers, remains prevalent. Thus, before trusting artificial intelligence solutions related to the use of lethal weapons, it is necessary to significantly increase their transparency. However, there is inevitably a contradiction arising from the need to combine the transparency of machine learning mechanisms with their protection from the enemy, since the data used by neural networks can be “poisoned” by intentional manipulations (data poisoning). It is also important to note that military forces due to their work specifics have a fundamentally smaller amount of data for machine learning than civilian companies engaged in AI.

However, it is already obvious that in the medium term, AI will make production, transportation, and trade more efficient, improve crop yields, open up many new opportunities for technology development, restructure labor markets and consolidate new approaches to national security and modern military system. One of the tendencies can be particularly shocking: eventually, it is impossible to exclude the possibility that countries will have to automatize decisions about a retaliatory strike, which can lead to unpredictable consequences. Also, the situation is complicated by the fact that autonomous weapons and artificial intelligence are still in the “gray zone” of international law.

It means that countries that are able to develop and use innovations in the field of AI will have good prospects for economic growth and for enhancing national security. In contrast, countries that maintain an excessive dependence on outdated infrastructure and economic models will find it difficult to ensure competitiveness.

The United States is a global leader in AI. Companies such as Google, Amazon, Facebook, IBM, and hundreds of start-ups conduct extensive research focused on developments in this area. In September 2018, a 2 billion dollar campaign was started in the United States to develop the next wave of AI technologies with the goal of “turning computers from specialized tools into problem-solving partners”.

At the same time, China is striving to become a world leader in AI by 2030. In October 2019, China allocated USD 1.6 billion for development in this area, and in 2017 investments amounted to USD 4.9 billion, which was the world’s largest investment in this sphere.

Although the USA and China are the largest players, the development of AI is global. In Israel and the UK, the sector is developing at a high level. Earlier this year, the French government announced a major public investment in this area. The promotion of innovation in the field of AI is also a key focus of governments in Japan, South Korea, and Russia.

In September 2017, Vladimir Putin said that “artificial intelligence is the future not only for Russia but it is also the future of all mankind. The one who becomes the leader in this sphere will be the ruler of the world.” In Russia, in 2017 the capacity of the AI market was less than USD 12 million, and by the end of 2020, it is expected to grow to USD 460 million. The AI market capacity in the industrial sector by 2021 will be USD 380 million.

“Highly automated production does not involve the automation of physical actions and repetitive operations alone, but also the automation of human intellectual activity with its ability to solve non-standard tasks and formulate deep strategic goals.”

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt believes that both Russian and Chinese leaders realized the importance of this area, not only from the commercial point of view but also for military developments. In May 2018, at a meeting on military construction, Vladimir Putin stated that the production of weapons should focus on the implementation of AI and robotics.

In recent years the AI market in Belarus has grown several times. The High-Tech Park (HTP), which was established in 2005, has about 400 residents now. In 2018, more than 70 companies are engaged in AI, of which the most famous are MSQRD, AI Matter, Viber, and EPAM. The number of specialists in the field of AI reaches 1,700 people.

The Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko “On the Development of the Digital Economy”, signed at the end of 2017, served as an impulse for the active development of technologies by IT companies. The main developments in Belarus on AI are applied in the fields of the car industry, health care, agriculture, industrial production, finance, transport, and environmental protection. Solutions are being developed for automated vehicles, speech recognition, search technology, computer vision, increasing the effectiveness of the use of acreage, yield forecasting, etc.

Highly automated production, changing the configuration of socio-economic and administrative relationships, does not involve the automation of physical actions and repetitive operations alone, but also the automation of human intellectual activity with its ability to solve non-standard tasks and formulate deep strategic goals. Despite the presence of advanced systems that automate certain aspects of human intellectual activity, it is extremely difficult to realize the ability to solve non-standard tasks and formulate deep strategic goals at a high-quality level. At the same time, it is necessary to understand that the technology of machine learning in practice proved the possibility of formalization and subsequent implementation throughout computer technologies of non-algorithmizable processes and subject areas. So we can conclude that high quality in this area is possible.

Now the main thing that is necessary is to understand how safe such an impulse will be for humanity, the established system of norms, and institutions.

Despite the fact that artificial intelligence, as a scientific area, is the source of a great diversity of principles and paradigms, methods of data processing, semantic methods, and technologies are currently the most advanced and promising. In particular, algorithmic methods for creating intelligent systems based on formal-logical models, in a general sense, represent the way to create syntactic structures that do not carry information about the content and meaning of data, and therefore systems based on these models can hardly be called intelligent.

Today, the efforts of all professionals to create intelligent expert systems are aimed at the formal expression of such objects as “inference”, “meaning”, “knowledge” and, based on the practical awareness of the limitations of classical methods, experts increasingly come to understand that without semantic methods and technologies further progress in the field of artificial intelligence will be impossible. One way or another, it became clear that without these methods, intelligent systems would be just a game of imitation of communication, argumentation, understanding, and purposeful action. Moreover, the limits of this imitation have already been achieved. A good example is the “intelligent” chatbot, which for the first time managed to pass the Turing test “at the tests, organized in 2014 by the University of Reading (United Kingdom). At the same time, in order to hide the semantic errors associated with the patterned nature of the system, based on statistical methods of syntactic information processing models, the developers came up with a legend according to which the program is a 13-year-old boy from Odessa who does not speak English well.”

Despite the fact that the first Eliza bot was written in 1966, we still cannot talk about tremendous progress in this direction. In particular, the bot still works by certain instructions and relies on pre-formed keywords “understood” by the bot. Each command must be written by the programmer separately using regular expressions or other forms of string analysis. If the user does not use keywords, the bot responds with messages like “sorry, I did not understand.” At the same time, despite limited functionality, such bots sometimes can be effective. It often concerns electronic legal systems and electronic lawyer systems, since the dialogue between users is served by much greater standardization and formalization.

In addition to bots, search, engineering, economic, medical, and military systems with elements of artificial intelligence, intriguing enough, especially for scientists, is the creation of automated systems for identifying and prioritizing research projects in terms of socio-economic development. In particular, according to academician Igor Sokolov, the director of the Research Center “Informatics and Management” of the Russian Academy of Sciences, separate fragments of this system are already used by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and some industrial enterprises.

The main benefits of the implementation of AI should be noted:

automation and widespread cost reduction;
the emergence of autonomous transport and robotization;
optimization of logistics processes and supply chains;
optimization of energy and transport networks;
development of sensor networks and monitoring of agriculture;
development of information services and a distributed economy;
development of personalized medicine, clinical practices, and infrastructure for distributed and secure access to medical data;
the emergence of personal educational trajectories and the development of social engineering;
creation of autonomous weapons systems.
Of course, large-scale technological development within these areas and the introduction of relevant results in various aspects of socio-economic practice without proper scientific and economic expertise brings some potential risks.

So, according to many forecasts, AI will already surpass the human intellect by 2035-2050. However, as we noted at the beginning of the article, the current results, despite the seemingly impressive character, are more likely to be in the area of imitating of intellectual activity or performing easy algorithmic tasks. Therefore, in our opinion, these dates can be significantly postponed.

“A positive trend in the development of society is possible, provided that the state authorities are able to adapt to the new conditions of the information society.”

Recently, there is an opinion in the expert community that AI systems will deprive people of work. In this case, the restructuring of the labor market, the withdrawal of professions related to the same type of processes and standardized physical manipulations, and the reduction of the working day are obvious. But, despite this development of AI systems, undoubtedly, new, creative, and highly skilled professions will arise. Thus, the thesis about increasing social inequality in connection with the introduction of AI seems to be incorrect, since the emergence of such professions (provided timely and efficiently organized retraining of personnel and equitable distribution of large additional funds raised from productivity growth and cost reduction) will help to overcome the era of alienated, mechanistic labor and to make the work of interacting with AI systems less complicated and more fascinating.

The speed, scale, and impact of change on the entire systems of the fourth industrial revolution are unprecedented in human history. The challenges and risks of the modern technological paradigm of human development, its social costs, consequences, and contradictions are also great. Creation of new business models on the basis of information platforms of demand and supply, strengthening of control over society and personality by the state, radical change of mechanisms of interaction of the state with civil society, development of competition and decentralization of power, creation of artificial intelligence—all these can lead to significant progress in the development of society and its degradation. A positive trend in the development of society is possible, provided that the state authorities are able to adapt to the new conditions of the information society.

Bibliography

Braudel F. / Material civilization, economy, and capitalism, XV-XVIII centuries. T. Structures of everyday life: the possible and the impossible / 2nd ed.; tr. from fr. L.E. Kubbel; entry art. Yu.N. Afanasyev. -- М.: Publishing House “Ves Mir” (All the World), 2006. – p.592.
Virginsky V.S../ Essays on the History of Science and Technology of the XVI-XIX Centuries - Moscow: Enlightenment, 1984. – p.287.
The grammar of Civilizations / Fernand Braudel; Preface M. Emar; tr. from fr. - М.: Publishing House “Ves Mir” (All the World), 2008. – p.552.
John Bernal/ Science in the History of Society - Moscow: Foreign Literature Publishing House - 1956, p.738.
Klaus Schwab / Fourth Industrial Revolution / Moscow: Eksmo, 2016, p.208.
Kurzweil Ray / Evolution of the Mind; Eksmo - M., 2015. – p.352.
Michi D., Johnston R. / The computer is the creator; World - M., 2011. – p.255.
Osipov G. S. / Lectures on artificial intelligence; Librokom - M., 2014. – p.272.

Source: http://eruditio.worldacademy.org/volume-2/issue-6/article/fourth-industrial-revolution-challenges-risks-and-opportunities

Pages: [1] 2 3