On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:21 AM, H.S.Rai <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:04 AM, A. Mani <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The link is on www.aicte-india.org > > > > (scripts need to be enabled) > > > > There is a pdf help file too > > Where? and what will be use of that. > > > . .... activex, iframes, jre, ... > > > > Did you try all of the IE stuff in FF4? > > No. Mine FireFox is 3.6.17, I tired Konqueror, Chromium. > This thread seems to be conjuncted with the other concurrent thread on income tax. The solution provided by DeepRoot seems to me (I am not a user myself at this time, but am interested, obviously, in it being possible for me in years to come) to be a workaround, fitting something in with a spanner and a hammer when a different method, easier to use, is available for those who use proprietary software. It is possible that this AICTE thing may also have a workaround that someone can build, given enough time and assuming the result is worth it. The question is, why? Why should the public be forced to use workarounds as an alternative to using proprietary solutions, that by their very opacity, are possible (I am not making an accusation here, just pointing out the obvious, just as I don't have to put my hand on a kettle on the stove in order to find out whether it is full of boiling water) to seriously compromise one's personal assets? Is it possible to file a suit against the government, citing cases like this? imho, the prayer ought to be that the government take steps to ensure its citizen-facing actions, such as tax filings, or applications for public positions, be open to all without fear or favour. To put teeth into that 'ought', the court needs to levy a penalty on the offending departments, the implication being that departments that wilfully do so in the future will be liable to greater penalties. The penalties can be paid into a fund, from which petitioners who have suffered identifiable cash losses (including penalties for non-compliance with tax directives etc) can be compensated, plus payments can be made to third party vendors who can work with the designated government departments (NIC, for instance) to bring all government departments up to speed. The court also needs to examine (and I suggest this because I think the matter is linked) whether the government, through such actions (ie forcing end-users to use certain proprietary solutions) is endangering national security, and if so, whether inaction on the part of the designated authority (CERT-IN) can be penalised. What will it take to press such a suit? > -- > H.S.Rai > _______________________________________________ > network mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in > -- Vickram Fool On The Hill <http://communicall.wordpress.com>
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
