Idiom of Fair and square ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Idiom of Fair and square

Answer: Honestly and according to the rules

Reply

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Phrase of the Idiom " Fair and square....

QA->The bronze bust of British Indian spy tortured and killed by the Nazis is unveiled by Princess Anne on 8 November 2012 in Gordon Square Gardens, London. Name that British Indian Spy?....

QA->The angle between horizon mirror and index mirror of an optical square is :....

QA->The least number of square tiles required to pave the floor of a room having length 11m 47 cm and 10m 36cm breadth is ...........

MCQ-> Based on the information below, answer the questions which follow.Six friends Albert, Betty, Claire, Daisy, Evan and Fred who are working in different organisations, are looking for a switch in their jobs. They came across an advertisement in the newspaper regarding a job fair being organised in New Delhi. After enrolling for the fair, different days are allotted to each one of them from Monday to Saturday not necessarily in the same order, starting from Monday. They also had to arrange for their stay in different hotels to concentrate well while preparing for the upcoming interviews namely Taj, Hilton, Crowne Plaza, Radisson, Hyatt and Marriott. Additional information provided is as follows: i. Albert prefers to stay in Taj but not in Hilton. Albert does not work in Whirlpool and participates in the Job fair on Monday. The person who works in Whirlpool participates in the Job fair on Saturday.ii. Fred does not stay in Hyatt but works in Himalaya. iii. Betty and Daisy participate in the Job fair on consecutive days. iv. Claire participates in the Job fair on the day before the person staying in Crowne Plaza but on the next day of Pepsi employee. v. The person working with Oppo participates in the Job fair on Friday and does not stay in I {ikon.vi. Claire who is working with Nestle participates in the Job fair at a gap of one day prior to Evan.vii. Daisy stays in Marriott and attends the conference on the last day of the week. viii. The person working with Apple stays in Radisson.Which of the following friend is working with Apple?
...

MCQ-> A word and number arrangement machine when given an input line of words and numbers rearranges them following a particular rule in each step. The following is an illustration of input and rearrangement. Input : but 32 71 glory fair south 65 84 Step I : south but 32 71 glory fair 65 84 Step II : south 84 but 32 71 glory fair 65 StepIll : south 84 glory but 32 71 fair 65 StepIV : south 84 glory 71 but 32 fair 65 StepV : south 84 glory 71 fair but 32 65 StepVl : south 84 glory 71 fair 65 but 32 and Step VI is the last step of the rearrangement. As per the rules followed in the above steps, nd out in each of the following questions the appropriate step for the given input.Step III of an input is : year 92 ultra 15 23 strive house 39 How many more steps will be required to complete the rearrangement ?
...

MCQ-> Read the following passage and answer the questions. Passage Trade fairs are among the most memorable events that take place periodically with the purpose of promoting sales, launching new products, bringing together manufacturers of a particular line of products and educating the public. They are held at all levels-international national, state and district. The most prominent among them are the India International Trade Fair. World Book Fair. Information Technology fair. Electronic Trade and Technology Fair. Textile Fair. Auto Expo. state level book fairs. district level exhibitions etc. India Trade Promotion Organisation (ITPO), which was incorporated in 1992 by the merger of Trade Development Authority (TDA) with the Trade Fair Authority of India (TFAI), has been playing a commendable role in this respect It can be said without a doubt that sales promotion is the most important purpose of these fairs. Bringing together the largest possible number of manufacturers, suppliers, existing and potential buyers under the same roof helps to promote the products in an effective way. All these people come together on a single platform for a fixed period of time. This offers a unique opportunity to manufacturers and suppliers to display their best products and services and the buyers get a chance to see a wide range of products and services. Conferences, seminars, live product demonstrations and presentations are regular features of these fairs and exhibitions. Besides these, colourful cultural programmes are also important features of such fairs. These fails give a good opportunity to the artists to showcase their skills and talent at such specially organized programmes.ITPO stands for:
...

MCQ-> The current debate on intellectual property rights (IPRs) raises a number of important issues concerning the strategy and policies for building a more dynamic national agricultural research system, the relative roles of public and private sectors, and the role of agribusiness multinational corporations (MNCs). This debate has been stimulated by the international agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), negotiated as part of the Uruguay Round. TRIPs, for the first time, seeks to bring innovations in agricultural technology under a new worldwide IPR regime. The agribusiness MNCs (along with pharmaceutical companies) played a leading part in lobbying for such a regime during the Uruguay Round negotiations. The argument was that incentives are necessary to stimulate innovations, and that this calls for a system of patents which gives innovators the sole right to use (or sell/lease the right to use) their innovations for a specified period and protects them against unauthorised copying or use. With strong support of their national governments, they were influential in shaping the agreement on TRIPs, which eventually emerged from the Uruguay Round. The current debate on TRIPs in India - as indeed elsewhere - echoes wider concerns about ‘privatisation’ of research and allowing a free field for MNCs in the sphere of biotechnology and agriculture. The agribusiness corporations, and those with unbounded faith in the power of science to overcome all likely problems, point to the vast potential that new technology holds for solving the problems of hunger, malnutrition and poverty in the world. The exploitation of this potential should be encouraged and this is best done by the private sector for which patents are essential. Some, who do not necessarily accept this optimism, argue that fears of MNC domination are exaggerated and that farmers will accept their products only if they decisively outperform the available alternatives. Those who argue against agreeing to introduce an IPR regime in agriculture and encouraging private sector research are apprehensive that this will work to the disadvantage of farmers by making them more and more dependent on monopolistic MNCs. A different, though related apprehension is that extensive use of hybrids and genetically engineered new varieties might increase the vulnerability of agriculture to outbreaks of pests and diseases. The larger, longer-term consequences of reduced biodiversity that may follow from the use of specially bred varieties are also another cause for concern. Moreover, corporations, driven by the profit motive, will necessarily tend to underplay, if not ignore, potential adverse consequences, especially those which are unknown and which may manifest themselves only over a relatively long period. On the other hand, high-pressure advertising and aggressive sales campaigns by private companies can seduce farmers into accepting varieties without being aware of potential adverse effects and the possibility of disastrous consequences for their livelihood if these varieties happen to fail. There is no provision under the laws, as they now exist, for compensating users against such eventualities. Excessive preoccupation with seeds and seed material has obscured other important issues involved in reviewing the research policy. We need to remind ourselves that improved varieties by themselves are not sufficient for sustained growth of yields. in our own experience, some of the early high yielding varieties (HYVs) of rice and wheat were found susceptible to widespread pest attacks; and some had problems of grain quality. Further research was necessary to solve these problems. This largely successful research was almost entirely done in public research institutions. Of course, it could in principle have been done by private companies, but whether they choose to do so depends crucially on the extent of the loss in market for their original introductions on account of the above factors and whether the companies are financially strong enough to absorb the ‘losses’, invest in research to correct the deficiencies and recover the lost market. Public research, which is not driven by profit, is better placed to take corrective action. Research for improving common pool resource management, maintaining ecological health and ensuring sustainability is both critical and also demanding in terms of technological challenge and resource requirements. As such research is crucial to the impact of new varieties, chemicals and equipment in the farmer’s field, private companies should be interested in such research. But their primary interest is in the sale of seed materials, chemicals, equipment and other inputs produced by them. Knowledge and techniques for resource management are not ‘marketable’ in the same way as those inputs. Their application to land, water and forests has a long gestation and their efficacy depends on resolving difficult problems such as designing institutions for proper and equitable management of common pool resources. Public or quasi-public research institutions informed by broader, long-term concerns can only do such work. The public sector must therefore continue to play a major role in the national research system. It is both wrong and misleading to pose the problem in terms of public sector versus private sector or of privatisation of research. We need to address problems likely to arise on account of the public-private sector complementarity, and ensure that the public research system performs efficiently. Complementarity between various elements of research raises several issues in implementing an IPR regime. Private companies do not produce new varieties and inputs entirely as a result of their own research. Almost all technological improvement is based on knowledge and experience accumulated from the past, and the results of basic and applied research in public and quasi-public institutions (universities, research organisations). Moreover, as is increasingly recognised, accumulated stock of knowledge does not reside only in the scientific community and its academic publications, but is also widely diffused in traditions and folk knowledge of local communities all over. The deciphering of the structure and functioning of DNA forms the basis of much of modern biotechnology. But this fundamental breakthrough is a ‘public good’ freely accessible in the public domain and usable free of any charge. Various techniques developed using that knowledge can however be, and are, patented for private profit. Similarly, private corporations draw extensively, and without any charge, on germplasm available in varieties of plants species (neem and turmeric are by now famous examples). Publicly funded gene banks as well as new varieties bred by public sector research stations can also be used freely by private enterprises for developing their own varieties and seek patent protection for them. Should private breeders be allowed free use of basic scientific discoveries? Should the repositories of traditional knowledge and germplasm be collected which are maintained and improved by publicly funded organisations? Or should users be made to pay for such use? If they are to pay, what should be the basis of compensation? Should the compensation be for individuals or (or communities/institutions to which they belong? Should individual institutions be given the right of patenting their innovations? These are some of the important issues that deserve more attention than they now get and need serious detailed study to evolve reasonably satisfactory, fair and workable solutions. Finally, the tendency to equate the public sector with the government is wrong. The public space is much wider than government departments and includes co- operatives, universities, public trusts and a variety of non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Giving greater autonomy to research organisations from government control and giving non- government public institutions the space and resources to play a larger, more effective role in research, is therefore an issue of direct relevance in restructuring the public research system.Which one of the following statements describes an important issue, or important issues, not being raised in the context of the current debate on IPRs?
...

MCQ-> My aim is to present a conception of justice which generalizes and carries to a higher level of abstraction the familiar theory of the social contract. In order to do this we are not to think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a particular form of government. Rather, the idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality. These principles are to regulate all further agreements; they specify the kinds of social cooperation that can be entered into and the forms of government that can be established. This way of regarding the principles of justice, I shall call justice as fairness. Thus, we are to imagine that those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social benefits. Just as each person must decide by rational reflection what constitutes his good, that is, the system of ends which it is rational for him to pursue, so a group of persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust. The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty determines the principles of justice.In ‘justice as fairness’, the original position is not an actual historical state of affairs. It is understood as a purely hypothetical situation characterized so as to lead to a certain conception of justice. Among the essential features of this situation is that no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like. I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. This ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances. Since all are similarly situated and no one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain.Justice as fairness begins with one of the most general of all choices which persons might make together, namely, with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. Then, having chosen a conception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitution and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially agreed upon. Our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we would have contracted into the general system of rules which defines it. Moreover, assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles, it will then be true that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles, those engaged in them can say to one another that they are cooperating on terms to which they would agree if they were free and equal persons whose relations with respect to one another were fair. They could all view their arrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledge in an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable constraints on the choice of principles. The general recognition of this fact would provide the basis for a public acceptance of the corresponding principles of justice. No society can, of course, be a scheme of cooperation which men enter voluntarily in a literal sense; each person finds himself placed at birth in some particular position in some particular society, and the nature of this position materially affects his life prospects. Yet a society satisfying the principles of justice as fairness comes as close as a society can to being a voluntary scheme, for it meets the principles which free and equal persons would assent to under circumstances that are fair.A just society, as conceptualized in the passage, can be best described as:
...