Which of the following best explains the term "Telecommuting"? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Which of the following best explains the term "Telecommuting"?

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Which explains that all the galaxies are receding from?....

QA->Which law directly explains the law of conservation of mass?....

QA->Which of the following is the best conductorof electricity ?....

QA->Which country’s parliament has recently approved constitutional reforms which will enable its President to seek a third term and will give him sweeping powers over formerly independent institutions?....

QA->in 1983’which person was the first to offer a definition of the term computer virus?....

MCQ->Which of the following best explains the term "Telecommuting"?....

MCQ-> Answer the questions based on the following information. A series $$S_{1}$$ of five positive integers is such that the third term is half the first term and the fifth term is 20 more than the first term. In series $$S_{2}$$, the nth term is defined as the difference between the (n+1)th term and the nth term of series $$S_{1}$$, $$S_{2}$$ is an arithmetic progression with a common difference of 30.First term of $$S_{1}$$ is
....

MCQ-> Read the passage carefully and answer the given questionsThe complexity of modern problems often precludes any one person from fully understanding them. Factors contributing to rising obesity levels, for example, include transportation systems and infrastructure, media, convenience foods, changing social norms, human biology and psychological factors. . . . The multidimensional or layered character of complex problems also undermines the principle of meritocracy: the idea that the ‘best person’ should be hired. There is no best person. When putting together an oncological research team, a biotech company such as Gilead or Genentech would not construct a multiple-choice test and hire the top scorers, or hire people whose resumes score highest according to some performance criteria. Instead, they would seek diversity. They would build a team of people who bring diverse knowledge bases, tools and analytic skills. . . .Believers in a meritocracy might grant that teams ought to be diverse but then argue that meritocratic principles should apply within each category. Thus the team should consist of the ‘best’ mathematicians, the ‘best’ oncologists, and the ‘best’ biostatisticians from within the pool. That position suffers from a similar flaw. Even with a knowledge domain, no test or criteria applied to individuals will produce the best team. Each of these domains possesses such depth and breadth, that no test can exist. Consider the field of neuroscience. Upwards of 50,000 papers were published last year covering various techniques, domains of enquiry and levels of analysis, ranging from molecules and synapses up through networks of neurons. Given that complexity, any attempt to rank a collection of neuroscientists from best to worst, as if they were competitors in the 50-metre butterfly, must fail. What could be true is that given a specific task and the composition of a particular team, one scientist would be more likely to contribute than another. Optimal hiring depends on context. Optimal teams will be diverse.Evidence for this claim can be seen in the way that papers and patents that combine diverse ideas tend to rank as high-impact. It can also be found in the structure of the so-called random decision forest, a state-of-the-art machine-learning algorithm. Random forests consist of ensembles of decision trees. If classifying pictures, each tree makes a vote: is that a picture of a fox or a dog? A weighted majority rules. Random forests can serve many ends. They can identify bank fraud and diseases, recommend ceiling fans and predict online dating behaviour. When building a forest, you do not select the best trees as they tend to make similar classifications. You want diversity. Programmers achieve that diversity by training each tree on different data, a technique known as bagging. They also boost the forest ‘cognitively’ by training trees on the hardest cases - those that the current forest gets wrong. This ensures even more diversity and accurate forests.Yet the fallacy of meritocracy persists. Corporations, non-profits, governments, universities and even preschools test, score and hire the ‘best’. This all but guarantees not creating the best team. Ranking people by common criteria produces homogeneity. . . . That’s not likely to lead to breakthroughs.Which of the following conditions, if true, would invalidate the passage’s main argument?
....

MCQ->Pick out thể one word for - a secret arrangement....

MCQ->People project their mental processes into handwriting.They subconsiously shape and organise their letters,words and lines in ways that directly reflect their personalities.This explains why no two handwritings are-or even can be-alikethe medium is just too personal.Everyday observation explains the link between handwriting and personality,atleast in an elementary way.Precise people construct their words with care,slowly and exactlydynamic people dash them off.Flamboyant people boldly cover half a page with a few words and a signature,whose size fittingly reflects their expansive sense of self.Most of us have made such observations.But it takes a practised eye to discern the scores of variations and interpret the subtle interplay of forces at work ina ny given handwriting.In fact in Europe,handwriting analysis known as graphology,now enjoys scientific acceptance and common use. If you are a showy and colorful person,your handwriting is likely to be....