Sunday, 21 February 2016

Tata Crucible Campus Quiz Indore 2016 - Indore

The Indore Prelims:

1. Instagram is a portmanteau formed using the words Instant Camera and ______. (FITB)

2. This business school is named after a famous ex-CEO of General Motors. The ________ School of Business. (FITB)

3.This consultancy firm was the first to recruit undergraduates directly for non-technical profiles. Options: a) KPMG b) McKinsey c) PwC

4. Name the group that started the Scindia Steam Navigation Company and Hindustan Aircraft .

5. This bank was founded in 1923 by Bhogaraju Pattabhi Sitaramayya in Machilipatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

6. Name this famous businessman and Oscar Winner.

7. The __________Effect is a book by David Kirkpatrick.

8. Head quarters of which California-based internet company? (Hint: The yellow border is a part of its logo)

9. Andersen Consulting was the name of which famous consulting company?

10. Neerja Sethi and Jayshree Ullal are the to persons of Indian origin to feature in the Forbes' inaugural list of America's 50 richest self-made women. Neerja Sethi founded _______with her husband Bharat Desai. 

11. __________ is an American company which was one of the pioneers of survey based services.

12. _________ was established in 1982 on the recommendations of the Shivaraman Committee to implement the  National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development Act 1981.

13. The FiberNet a service of this ISP founded by Sundar Raju.

14. "The Polyester Prince" is an unauthorized biography of which Indian business tycoon?

15. Which company acquired the German augmented reality company Metaio?

16. The "Sorry for What" is a campaign by which Tata company? (Hint: this company is popular among the youth)

17. Alia Bhatt and Soni Razdan recently filmed for the ad of which company which is famous for its shampoos.

18. The ______ is the second largest stock exchange by market capitalization behind the NYSE.

19. ____ is a very popular Write Once, Run Anywhere (WORA) language.

20. As a part of the Make In India campaign, Arun Jaitley inaugurated this in Hoshangabad, MP. What does this unit manufacture?


2. Sloan
3. McKinsey
4. Walchand Hirachand
5. Andhra Bank
6. Walt Disney
7. Facebook
8. Snapchat
9. Accenture
10. Syntel
11. Gallup
13. ACT
14. Dhirubhai Ambani
15. Apple
16. Fastrack
17. Garnier
19. JAVA
20. Paper for Indian currency notes

We got a score of 11/20 and were among the 6 teams selected for the tie-breaker for deciding the two teams that would join the other 4 in the final round. 6 questions were asked in the tie-break. Some of them were:

The Tiebreak

1. Which company manufactures Funskool toys in India? MRF

2. This Greek word means "a single seller". It is also a popular board game. Monopoly

3. Feta, cottage are types of? Cheese

The Finals

(Format was similar to last year's finals with each question worth 3/4/6 points which was displayed before the question was displayed. The question could also be played on a powerplay which would change the corresponding points values to 4/6/8 respectively. A question was open to a second attempt by any team except the one that made the first attempt. 3 overs with 6 questions each.)

1. The name of this Indian Magazine means urbane, sphicticated or carefree. Which magazine?

2. Connect question: Armadeus, Zoya Akhtar, Timex group and Favre-Leuba.

3. Red OM films is the production house of which phenomenal Hollywood actress?

4. What is TCOC, a very famous document implemented across various companies?

4. Small Wonder is a book authored by Sujata Agrawal, Philip Chacko and Christabelle Noronha. What is the book about?

5. Fleetwod, DeVille, Eldorado are the names of the models of which automobile company? (8 letter word)

6. Connect question: A Rolex ad, UNICEF logo and the poster of the movie Octopussy. Name this Indian.

7.  This silhouette of this person features on a logo. Which logo are we talking about?

8. Name both the economists in this picture. (Hint: One is Keynes, the other one used to sign his name as HDW)

9. This company manufactures malted milk. Its name is also the name for mountains on the poles. (Hint: Almost all of us have experienced this during our childhood)

10. Connect question: Logos of Free Basics, Instagram and an audio.

11. Name the Russian businessman who owns the yachts Eclipse, Titan and Sussurro and a private jet named 'The Bandit'.

12. We do not know this third person that was involved in founding a very famous company. Who?

13. Who succeeded Anne Mulcahy as the CEO of Xerox?

14. This founding dean of the ISB was described as the 'Euroguru' by the Economist. Who?

15. The _________ is a process used established in 2003 to prevent "conflict diamonds" from entering the mainstream rough diamonds market by United Nations GA Resoultion 55/56 following recommendations in the Fowler Report.

16. Some question about a painter businessman. Late 19th century.

17. A question on R. M. Lala

18. A question related to Pepsi.


1. Debonair
2. Titan
3. Julia Roberts
4. Tata Code of Conduct
5. Cadillac
6. Vijay Amritraj
7. NBA: Jerry West
8. Harry Dexter Whitw
9. Horlicks
10. Facebook
11. Roman Abramovic
12. Ronald Wayne
13. Ursula Burns
14. Sumantra Ghoshal
15. Kimberley Process
16. Raja Ravi Verma
17. R. M. Lala
18. Can't recollect!

Anirudh and I from IIT Indore were the runners-up in the quiz! :D

Friday, 19 July 2013

The DRS - Deficient Review System

          The recently concluded first test match of the Ashes was just the perfect match for a cricket cognoscente. While we were still recovering from the hangover of the Champions Trophy, the first Ashes Test provided the perfect start for the cricketing summer. The marvelous innings by the debutant Aston Agar, the spell-bounding spells of Jimmy Anderson, a career-defining innings by Ian Bell and the “cutting-edge” no-walk style of Stuart Broad were some of the highlights of the match that was unarguably the best Test match in recent times. But perhaps, the match would be remembered the most for the use and the effectiveness of the Decision Review System (DRS). As many as 7 reviews yielded controversial decisions and thus was felt the need to “Review the Review System.” So here's my perspective...

          Foremost, the DRS was introduced to eliminate the 'howler' from cricket. A howler is an obvious mistake and hence DRS mustn't be judged from its verdicts in those close calls, it was never exactly meant for them. One must appreciate the fact that DRS has been instrumental in improving the umpiring accuracy considerably. But if it was meant to eliminate the howlers, does having only two unsuccessful reviews help that? It has been a trend to use the DRS when an important batsman is in question. Many times such calls are promptly reviewed even if the team isn't even remotely confident that the call could be overturned. And once reviews are spent this way, in vain, a Michael Clarke doesn't have the option to review a howler like the one of Stuart Broad. So yes, two-three unsuccessful reviews are sufficient only if one uses them prudently.

          Talking about the process of how a decision is reviewed, I find certain obvious flaws in the process. Foremost is the check for a no-ball. Apart from the check in DRS, in recent times we have frequently come across instances when the umpires check for a no-ball after a batsman is dismissed. What is the purpose of the on-field umpire if he has to review that too? This happened in the second Ashes Test when Jonny Bairstow got a reprieve off Peter Siddle for the deliver was a no-ball. Traditionally, a no-ball has to be checked in real-time and an ideal umpire should not review that. And yet if unsure of the legitimacy, he should review it every time he's doubtful and not just when a batsman could be out. An extra run and a ball and a free-hit that's awarded in the shorter formats may likewise change the outcome of a match.

          Then comes the Hawk-Eye technology, and in the words of its managing director Paul Hawkins, “Hawk-Eye isn't infallible but it's pretty damned close.” The Hawk-Eye is a widely used technology and according to Hawkins, Hawk-Eye's margin of error averages about 3.6 millimeters (0.14 inches) and that the system is around 99.9 percent accurate. But the way Hawk-Eye is put to use in LBW decisions is acutely questionable and sometimes even unreasonable, here's why...

The ICC Rules

With regard to the point of impact:

  • If a ‘not out’ decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the point of impact is between wicket and wicket (i.e. in line with the stumps), the evidence provided by technology should show that the centre of the ball at the moment of interception is in line within an area demarcated by a line drawn down the middle of the outer stumps. 
  • If an ‘out’ decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the point of impact is not between wicket and wicket (i.e. outside the line of the stumps), the evidence provided by technology should show that no part of the ball at the moment of interception is between wicket and wicket.

With regard to determining whether the ball was likely to have hit the stumps:
  • If a ‘not out’ decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is hitting the stumps, the evidence provided by technology should show that the centre of the ball would have hit the stumps within an area demarcated by a line drawn below the lower edge of the bails and down the middle of the outer stumps.                                    
However, where the evidence shows that the ball would have hit the stumps within the demarcated area as set out above but that:

  1. The point of impact is 300 cm or more from the stumps; or 
  2. The point of impact is more than 250 cm but less than 300 cm from the stumps and the distance between point of pitching and point of impact is less than 40 cm,
the original decision will stand (i.e. not out).

  • If an ‘out’ decision is being reviewed, in order to report that the ball is missing the stumps, the evidence of the technology should show that no part of the ball would have made contact with any part of the stumps or bails.

Thus the way in which an LBW is analysed depends vastly on the on-field call and that may wrongly influence the final decision.

Controversial Calls

1) Three Reds, is OUT

Three Reds is an out, Shane Watson was ruled OUT just because of the on-field call unlike Steven Finn.
2)  The Distance To Impact

Looks plumb doesn't he? Ruled NOT OUT due to the on-field call else would have rightly been OUT
My Modifications

1) The on-field call should not influence the review and hence two reds must be ruled out.

2) Irrespective of the on-field call, the decision of whether the ball was hitting the stumps must be taken on the basis of Hawk-Eye

3) The centre of the ball should not be considered in the review rules at all, it is only logical that the bails are dislodged even if the ball brushes the stumps.

These modifications would eliminate the grey areas from the DRS and get rid of the ambiguities which currently exist

          The process of a significant revamp in the DRS is about to happen for the Third Ashes Test at Old Trafford. Dave Richardson, the ICC Chief Executive has revealed that from now on, the third umpire will have an array of television screens which would enable him an exclusive access to various normal and Hot Spot camera angles. This would prevent possible manipulation of the feed by the broadcasters or the unavailability of certain evidence as in the case of Johnathan Trott's dismissal in the First Ashes Test. Sports are continuously evolving thanks to the modern technologies and DRS is one of them. I am pretty confident that modernisation of the game is the right way to ensure fair-play and thus uphold the spirit of the game.

Some related links:

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

The Snowden Saga : Data Mining, Privacy, Transparency and Beyond...

          "Edward Snowden is a free man, biding his time somewhere in the transit area between the arrival gates and passport control at the Sheremetyevo airport in Moscow, his arrival was totally unexpected", claims Vladimir Putin, the Russian President. Sure, why not! Mr. President, have we not yet been fooled enough by the so-called "Investigation" and "Security" agencies for you to claim an American security officer free from the hawkish Russian security agents? And even the rest may hardly be true!

          Snowden made headlines internationally after revealing details about the data-mining carried out by the USA and it's allies in Europe. Snowden's revelations include NSA's secret data-collection activities under the program code-named PRISM, NSA asking Verizon to hand over the call-logs of it's customers, electronically tapping into the embassies, etc. Ridiculously branded as a traitor by some, he believes in transparency and his allegiance to internet freedom is reflected in the stickers on his laptop: "I support Online Rights: Electronic Frontier Foundation," reads one. Another hails the online organisation offering anonymity, the Tor Project. His belief in communication privacy is evident from the fact that he has released only the documents related to the schemes that compromise public freedom while he could have easily had access to other confidential intelligence details. This is what separates him from Daniel Ellsberg or Bradley Manning and makes his revelations more appealing and relevant to each and everyone of us.

          Having worked for the NSA, he knows how wide their arms stretch and hence while in his hotel room at Hong Kong, he used to line the doors with pillows to prevent eavesdropping. He also puts a large red hood over his head and laptop while entering his passwords to prevent any hidden cameras from detecting them! These crude precautions taken by Snowden may sound paranoid but they testify that there is no web-security that cannot be breached by these mighty powerful agencies. Reportedly, India is fifth on the data-gathering radar of the NSA and thus internet freedom we seem to enjoy is nothing short of a joke. Snowden has endangered his life beyond imagination by unearthing these operations and it is the need of the hour to focus more on the issues raised rather than Snowden's fate. As Snowden himself states very clearly, "I don't want public attention because I don't want the story to be about me. I want it to be about what the US government is doing."

          Democratic governments empower its citizens with certain rights like internet privacy and freedom of expression. We people do comprehend the threats of terrorism and realise that there has to be secret collection of classified intelligence. If a government carries out programs like PRISM, it isn't unwarranted but it should at least be somewhat transparent to the peoples whilst doing so. This reminds me of Sidney Sheldon's portrayal of the NSA in his book, "The Rage of Angels" where the agency self-certifies it's actions to be directed towards the benefit of the government and its peoples. Prima facie we must remember that we live in a Democracy, where we are entitled to the vested rights of free will and not under any other form of governance where these rights become privileges. Snowden surely isn't a traitor, he is someone who believes in these fundamental rights, the richly paid 29-year old gave up a life in the heavenly Hawaii, now living as a fugitive seeking an asylum. Amidst allegations that he may have chosen Hong Kong to seek refuge and divulge more strategic information, the calm and candid Snowden answers, "The people and the government of Hong Kong are known to be independent and thus unlike in mainland China they do not have restrictions like internet filtering. Besides the two governments may have some conflicts but we are not enemies, the people of the nations are not hostile towards each other and we have the largest free trade amongst us". His understanding of the scenario and audacity is highly respectable.

        It isn't fair to brand Snowden as a whistle blower, he is rather the eleventh hour Samaritan who is willing to confront the most powerful government in the world. Quizzed on why he revealed his identity instead of leaking the data anonymously, he profoundly replies, "I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong", Indeed the situation deemed credibility and not cowardice. It is a Herculean task to expose the truth and then incur the wrath of such cogent agencies and governments and by doing so, he has assured himself a life of utter vexation. Snowden is now seeking asylum to shield himself from prosecution, or shall we say persecution? A country may grant him one, but even then he soon may be extradited after pressure from the mighty US government. One way or the other, he will face extreme charges with minimal hopes of a free trial. 

          But Snowden isn't alone in his fate. The truth is that anyone who uses the Internet is also all in that brightly lit "transit area", the digital-transit. I'm afraid we are all in danger of becoming Edward Snowden now.

Snowden's Interview to The Guardian

Original report in The Guardian - Click here

Convicted US spy Christopher Boyce says, Snowden is Doomed - Click here

Monday, 1 July 2013

Indian Cricket, The Way Forward...(cont'd)

Virender Sehwag

Age : 34 years 254 days

Quite often compared to the likes of Sir Viv Richards, the swashbuckling opener with his trademark cover drive has constructed quite an extraordinary career. With minimal footwork but maximum intent, he just stands and delivers. Named ICC Test Player of the Year in 2010, Sehwag has piled Test runs at a faster pace than anyone in the long history of the game. He is also an annihilative ODI batsman, his 219 being the highest individual score in ODIs. But recently, the prolific batsman has been drawing flak for his reckless batting. Sehwag's Achilles' heel is fending at the deliveries outside off quite early in his innings, evident from the infamous 'King Pair' at Edgbaston and it'd be nice to see him bat with controlled aggression. Fondly called The Nawab of Najafgarh, he has all the skills up his sleeve and his illustrious triple centuries epitomize his capabilities to build a long innings defend impeccably with the straightest of bats. Nearing 35, as an experienced campaigner, he would be eager to shoulder the responsibility of batting the in-transition Test team. After all, bowlers always fancy their chances against a batsman who plays so many strokes; it's just that Sehwag fancies his chances against them much more.

Verdict : With the inconsistency of Vijay, a recall in the Test squad is imminent for Sehwag. An ODI recall though is highly unlikely. It would be way nicer to see Viru grinning after a century rather than after after a joke with the umpire!

Tuesday, 25 June 2013

Indian Cricket, The Way Forward...

            With the recent triumph in the Champions Trophy, the Indian cricket team under the innovative leadership of MSD has reasserted it's dominance in ODI cricket. The win has even impressed Michael Vaughan who didn't miss taking potshots at Team India, the BCCI and even the IPL in the wake of India's dismal show in Test match cricket. But a concern still looms over the future, is this team capable enough for the title-defense in the hostile trans-Tasmanian conditions at WC 2015? And what about the not-so-smooth transition in Test cricket? Let's take a look at the options we have, and then decide if we are ready to go forward with a young team or do we still need the services of the veterans?

Gautam Gambhir

Age : 31 years 254 days

Looking back at the recently concluded ICC showpiece event, when I think about what was missing in the win, I am reminded of the absence of Gautam Gambhir and his anchoring knocks of 75 in the ICC World T20 final in 2007 and 97 in the 2011 WC Finals. The 2009 ICC Test Player of the Year, Gambhir has always been a class act who deserves to play in all three forms of the game. Had Rohit and Shikhar not provided those solid starts, his exclusion in the CT squad would have been much debated. The no. 3 position is an ideal one for him as he has the experience of an opener and can provide stability in case of an early wicket. Now, Virat Kohli is a promising player at no. 3 and hasn't yet put a foot wrong. Of the 13 ODI centuries scored by Virat, 7 have come against Sri Lanka and 11 in the Indian sub-continent.  Though Virat has all the essentials of a successful player - the temperament, technique, agility and positivity (emboldened by his 133* at Hobart), Gambhir feels to be a more reliable bet at no. 3 especially in tough alien conditions. Gambhir can also open the innings with Shikhar Dhawan if Rohit Sharma reverts back to his fickle game. Even in Test matches, Gauti is preferred at no. 3 which will maintain a left hand-right hand opening combination with Sehwag/Vijay alongside a certain Shikhar Dhawan. 

Verdict :  It'd indeed be foolish to write Gautam Gambhir off. Raising his fielding standards (which are not so bad, he does field at silly-point) would pave his way into the ODI playing XI.  Having not been considered for the Tri-Series in West Indies, the determined cricketer must be itching for a comeback into the team. Don't be surprised if he returns as the saviour in 2015 WC!

Monday, 24 June 2013

My First Post

            Writing has always been something I love, right from the school days when there'd be exercises like essay writing, precis writing, idea-expansion, etc. And now having completed an eventful year at IIT, I figured that I'd better keep scribbling my thoughts before they get fossilized under the impervious sediments that'd accumulate whilst meandering through life. And having renounced the "Early to bed..." philosophy, here I am, embarking upon a blogging journey that I'd love to continue forever.

             This blog will feature everything that bubbles up in my mind, downright-outright. Feel free to  critique the posts through comments, e-mails or tweets. I'd love to hear from you all!