here goes my pi experience
no of members: 11
essay topic: should capital punishment be abolished
gave us 30 mins
frst question was what is ur qualification..no'tell me abt urself ' or introduction
grilled me on my low b.tech percntge 59%
so many questions on acads..one guy seemed to be from electronics background.
the lady also asked some acad questions. questions on my xtra curricular..so many on that...
my advice is brush up ur acads subjects... prepare for one favrte sub...dnt wry much abt essay..pi matters..
all the best guys..
bashee312r Saysis their is any reservation category in SDMIMD
dnt thnk so...as they didint ask for any such details in the application form.
to make sure mail them regarding ur query or ask http://www.pagalguy.com/discussions/sdm-imd-2011-2013-admissions-25058880
mannrock21 SaysGDPI on 15th march in delhi. nybody got schedule???
try gdpi connect...
Indias food inflation clocked 18.32 per cent on 25 December 2010 nearly the highest in the year-propelled mostly by a hike in onion, vegetable and milk prices. Onion and vegetable prices rose by over 82 per cent and 58.85 per cent respectively, in the concerned period. Wholesale food inflation stood at 14.44 per cent in the week ending 18 December 2010.
The price trail
In December end, onion prices in Kolkata hovered around Rs 50-60 per kg; retail price in Delhi was Rs 80 per kg. In Maharashtra (India's biggest onion producing state) and the southern cities of Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad prices were in the range of Rs 70-80 per kg. Abnormal rainfall had damaged crops in Maharashtra.
On 8 January 2011, onion retail prices continued to be high at Rs 60-65 per kg in the metros, but wholesale prices declined following nationwide tax raids on traders; wholesale rates for Delhi and Mumbai were Rs 40 per kg and Rs 45 per kg respectively and Rs 50 per kg for Kolkata and Chennai. New supplies had arrived from the states of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Rajasthan. Maharashtra and Karnataka account for 40 percent of Indias average onion annual output of 12 million tonne. Indias total onion production is projected to be 10.5 million tonnes for 2010-11.
Fresh onion crops are expected in the markets from Maharashtra and Gujarat by mid-January and from Nashik and Bijapur in early February (to cater to the shortage in the southern states).
Factors responsible for the crisis
Partly responsible for the inflationary situation is the package of expansionary fiscal measures (like augmented money supply, public expenditure and lowered tax rates) introduced by the government in 2008, to combat the aftermath of the global financial meltdown. The expansionary fiscal policies have inflated Indias fiscal deficit and nurtured the unstable price regime. Indias burgeoning urban middle class with growing purchasing power has stoked demand pressures in the last three years; rural income has also increased significantly on the back of various government sponsored employment generation schemes. On the supply front, agricultural productivity has not increased substantially; the supply chain is far from modernised. Poor transport and storage facilities and presence of multilayered intermediaries lead to wastage, short supply and overpricing of food grains. Late monsoons have led to lower than expected onion harvest in Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Karnataka. The wholesalers and the retailers have blamed each other for charging export price of onions for the domestic market, taking advantage of the poor harvest and unregulated pricing mechanism.
On 6 January 2011, the Pakistan Ministry of Commerce stopped its onion export to India via the Attari-Wagah land route, citing rising prices and supply shortage in its domestic market. The Pakistan ban on exports has also driven up onion prices.
The government action
The ravaging food inflation has prompted some knee-jerk action from the government: for the time being, urea price decontrol attempts have been stalled, despite a hike in the global crude oil prices, the government has ruled out any rise in domestic diesel and cooking gas prices.
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is likely to increase the key policy rates in its upcoming 25 January policy review this will increase the commercial bank lending rates.
While the government is trying to coax Pakistan to resume its full quota of onion exports, Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee has asked the state governments to improve their supply chains for controlling the spiraling food prices. Markets in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana and Chandigarh have come under the Income Tax scanner for singling out hoarders responsible for creating artificial shortage. The Competition Commission of India is investigating the role played by the nationwide cartel of onion traders, for driving up the price through artificial shortage. Media reports point to an unholy nexus between the politicians, traders, middlemen and retailers behind the crisis. Pranab Mukherjee has attributed the soaring prices partly to the rising global commodity prices. In a bid to curtail prices and augment domestic supply, the government has banned onion export and scrapped import duty on onions. The Lucknow district administration had even taken recourse to selling onions through fair price shops.
The global connection
The developing nations worldwide are suffering from persistent food inflation. As per a United Nations index, food inflation reached an all-time global high in December 2010. Developed countries like the US, Japan and Europe meanwhile recorded low inflation - a reflection of their sluggish economic growth. The apex banks of the BRIC countries- Brazil, Russia, India and China- have all hiked interest rates in recent times to suck in the excess liquidity in the system (responsible for fuelling the inflationary pressure). The trade-off is that high interest rates pull down private investment, which chokes growth. Weather conditions have also hampered crop productivity and pushed up international food prices. The G20 forum has taken up the issue of soaring global food prices, which is threatening the socio-economic stability of emerging nations. The hike in the global crude oil prices is likely to affect the Indian economy, by augmenting the cost of cultivation, as it will push up fertiliser and diesel (needed for irrigation) prices and will also increase the transportation cost and other associated indirect costs.
Analysts predict that a better-than-expected US recovery may also fuel global inflation, by creating a demand surge in the global supply chain, thereby sending into overdrive the developing economies already running at full capacity.
The International Monetary Fund has projected India's economic growth to be 8.75 percent for the year ending 31 March, but inflation is eating away into the economic gains of Indias salaried class and her marginalised population. Experts are worried that, the sustained high food inflation may lead to the building up of inflationary expectations among the people and undermine the credibility of the apex monetary authority. We can conclude that short run policies will not offer a permanent solution to the supply side problems behind persistent food inflation side-by-side prudent demand management and a calibrated monetary policy approach is the need of the hour.
WikiLeaks is an international new media non-profit organisation that publishes and comments on leaked documents alleging government and corporate misconduct. The organisation describes its founders as a mix of journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa. Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, is generally described as its director.
In April 2010, WikiLeaks posted video from a 2007 incident in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by US forces, on a website called Collateral Murder.
In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released Afghan War Diary, a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan, not previously available for public review.
In October 2010, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War Logs in coordination with major commercial media organisations.
WikiLeaks has won a number of awards, including
The Economist's New Media Award in 2008 and Amnesty International's UK Media Award in 2009.
In 2010, the New York City Daily News listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news",
and Julian Assange was named the Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year in 2010.
Supporters of Wikileaks in the media have commended it for:
-- Exposing state and corporate secrets
-- Increasing transparency
-- Supporting freedom of the Press
-- Enhancing democratic discourse while challenging powerful institutions
According to Charlie Beckett of London School of Economics: WikiLeaks is now at the centre of a global battle between media and those in power but what's new about what Julian Assange is doing? WikiLeaks is much more than just another journalistic scandal, it is a challenge to the way that power and news media operate in the Internet Age.
In some ways WikiLeaks is a traditional investigative news operation. It gets its information from a source and the journalists decide what they will publish. It needs a platform, an audience and revenue just like any other newsroom. It can also be sued, censored or attacked. But because it is trying to operate online outside of normal national jurisdictions it is harder to hold to account. It can use mirror sites and multiple servers to avoid physical restraint.
It also disseminates data on such a vast scale and directly to the public so it is posting a different threat to those in authority used to being able to influence if not control the media. It is independent and not run for profit and the people who work for it are ideologically motivated. This all makes it much harder to clamp down.
Oxford University Internet analyst John Naughton says that what WikiLeaks is really exposing is the extent to which the western democratic system has been hollowed out. It is not that what it publishes will endanger lives or make government impossible. It is that it forces power out into the open. That is why those in power are attacking it. WikiLeaks worries them because it protects its sources and gives the evidence directly and in great detail and scale to the citizen.
It is also a challenge to mainstream media. As Columbia University digital journalism expert Emily Bell argues, it forces journalists and news organisations to demonstrate to what extent they are now part of an establishment it is their duty to report. In other words, WikiLeaks exposes the degree to which normal journalism has lost its watchdog role.
Mainstream journalism stands accused of failing to be critical enough of those in authority. Over the economic crash of 2007 and over intelligence and the Iraq war, it failed to challenge the conventional wisdom. It was not a conspiracy or a failure of resource. It was because journalism can be too responsible, balanced and passive. Sometimes journalism needs to be disruptive, critical and even partial.
No-one denies that what WikiLeaks has revealed about the Iraq war or the diplomatic cables is true. It is important because it has revealed specific abuses such as the collateral damage video of UK military executing civilians. But the latest release of diplomatic communications are even more significant because they show how power works, not just what it does. It gives an insight into the values, priorities and knowledge of authority that helps us to make much better-informed judgements of what those in power actually do. Surely, that is precisely what journalism is for?
It is encouraging to see how WikiLeaks is now working with mainstream news media organisations on their latest stories. It is good that the expertise within those newsrooms can be used to help filter, explain and contextualise the raw data. It can then be presented in a way that allows for proper responses by the authorities and the public. That kind of interaction is exactly what should happen over these issues, not the knee-jerk attempt to kill the messenger.
Instead of blocking access to websites and hiding behind firewalls it would be sensible for those in power to consider a more mature and transparent relationship with their citizens.
Of course, some of these revelations may compromise safety and security. There should always be limits on free expression. Responsibility comes with rights for the journalist. However, even when it is damaging, disclosure should always be welcomed. It's why it's the First Amendment.
The danger is that we are now heading towards a future where governments from Beijing to Washington will welcome more controls on the Internet. This would then limit the power of the most liberating technology the world has seen since the invention of printing itself. It would be nave to expect those in power to embrace radical accountability. So we need to fight for transparency and embrace the opportunity that initiatives like WikiLeaks represent.
I recognise that WikiLeaks is not itself entirely transparent but I think that it is becoming more so and other better versions will follow.
The real problem in the world is secrecy not leakers.
Several government officials across the globe have criticized WikiLeaks for:
-- Exposing classified information
-- Harming national security
-- and compromising international diplomacy
Some journalists have criticized a perceived lack of editorial discretion when releasing thousands of documents at once and without sufficient analysis.
Among negative public reactions in the United States, people have characterized the organization as irresponsible, immoral, and illegal.
The leading newspaper of Jamaica, Jamaica Observer, writes in its Editorial: It is unlikely that the world will remain the same, if WikiLeaks is allowed to prevail in its quest to expose government secrets.
The debate is already well underway, and, we believe, will intensify, about whether what WikiLeaks is doing is good for the world or not. It is clear to us that this is one issue on which the global family will remain seriously at odds for the foreseeable future.
The undergirding concept of the WikiLeaks exposure, the website owners contend, is freedom of expression and the right to know, its mission to shine the light of truth on government wrongdoing.
It's a concept that is difficult to resist because it is at the very heart of our democratic way of life. Put another way, 'I might not agree with you but I'll defend your right to your opinion'. The more we know, the better we are at making decisions and at planning our lives.
On the other hand, critics see what WikiLeaks is doing as the work of anarchists bent on destroying relations among countries.
To be sure, there is much discomfiture in revealing information that in the first place was never meant to be exposed. At every level of life, human beings hold discussion about other human beings, using terms that they would not have been prepared to use were they facing the subject of their discussions. 'Not everything good fi eat good fi talk,' say our wise old folks. That is what we understand to be the raison d'tre for privacy.
As a newspaper sworn to the fight for and promotion of freedom of expression for all, we are very supportive of any attempts to advance this concept.
Yet, we have enough sense to know that some things have to remain private, whether in the family, the community, the government or the world, in order to advance the good.
WikiLeaks can do a great service to help defeat government-sanctioned wrongdoing and help create a better world. But it must exercise great discretion in knowing what to release and what not to.
Computers and the internet are becoming an essential part of our daily life. They are being used by individuals and societies to make their life easier. They use them for storing information, processing data, sending and receiving messages, communications, controlling machines, typing, editing, designing, drawing, and almost all aspects of life.
The tremendous role of computers stimulated criminals and terrorists to make it their preferred tool for attacking their targets. The internet has provided a virtual battlefield for countries having problems with each other. This transformation in the methods of terrorism from traditional methods to electronic methods is becoming one of the biggest challenges to modern societies.
In order to combat this type of terrorism a lot of effort should be done at the personal level, the country level, the regional level, as well as the international level to fight against this transnational type of crime.
Cyber terrorism is a phrase used to describe the use of Internet based attacks in terrorist activities, including acts of deliberate, large-scale disruption of computer networks, especially of personal computers attached to the Internet, by the means of tools such as computer viruses. Cyber terrorism can also be defined much more generally as any computer crime targeting computer networks without necessarily affecting real world infrastructure, property, or lives.
What is Cyber Terrorism (there are different definitions therefore mentioning all)
Unlike a nuisance virus or computer attack that result in a denial of service, a cyber terrorist attack is designed to cause physical violence or extreme financial harm.
The FBI definition of terrorism:
"The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."
U.S. Department of State definition of terrorism:
"Premeditated politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents"
Definition of Cyber Terrorism:
The FBI defined cyber terrorism as "The premeditated, politically motivated attack against information, computer systems, computer programs, and data which result in violence against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents".
The U.S. National Infrastructure Protection Center defined the term as:
"A criminal act perpetrated by the use of computers and telecommunications capabilities, resulting in violence, destruction and/or disruption of services to create fear by causing confusion and uncertainty within a given population, with the goal of influencing a government or population to conform to particular political, social or ideological agenda".
James Lewis from the Center for Strategic and International Studies defined cyber terrorism as:
"The use of computer network tools to shut down critical national infrastructure (such as energy, transportation, government operations) or to coerce or intimidate a government or civilian population".
Technolytics Institute as
"The premeditated use of disruptive activities, or the threat thereof, against computers and/or networks, with the intention to cause harm or further social, ideological, religious, political or similar objectives or to intimidate any person in furtherance of such objectives." The term was coined by Barry C. Collin.
The National Conference of State Legislatures, an organization of legislators created to help policymakers issues such as economy and homeland security defines as:
The use of information technology by terrorist groups and individuals to further their agenda. This can include use of information technology to organize and execute attacks against networks, computer systems and telecommunications infrastructures, or for exchanging information or making threats electronically. Examples are hacking into computer systems, introducing viruses to vulnerable networks, web site defacing, Denial-of-service attacks, or terroristic threats made via electronic communication.