Interprocess communication ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Interprocess communication

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->computers are linked world wide for communication system is called....

QA->Socratic method of communication is :....

QA->Who discovered Wireless Communication ?....

QA->Communication Year....

QA->Telegraphic communication with Europe opened.....

MCQ-> Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow: An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies. Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that’s unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message). Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one - way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time. Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words - which they aren’t. This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication. Communication as Ping - Pong: Unlike bowling, Ping - Pong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receive) doesn’t. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. Ping - Pong is a back - and - forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories. Communication as Dumb Charades The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping - Pong. It’s a transaction. Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative. One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud. Suppose you drew the saying “God helps those who help themselves.” For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For helps you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg - up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response of them, and by this point a partner may shout out, “God helps those who help themselves.” Success. Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on - going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlap increases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that “God helps those who help themselves’ could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work. Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.The meaning CLOSEST to ‘interchangeable’ in the ‘Communication as Bowling’ paragraph is:
....

MCQ->Interprocess communication....

MCQ-> The table below reports the gender, designation and age-group of the employees in an organization. It also provides information on their commitment to projects coming up in the months of January (Jan), February (Feb), March (Mar) and April (Apr), as well as their interest in attending workshops on: Business Opportunities (BO), Communication Skills (CS), and E-Governance (EG).

M=Male, F= Female; Exe=Executive, Mgr=Manager, Dir=Director; Y=Young, I=In-between, O=OldFor each workshop, exactly four employees are to be sent, of which at least two should be Females and at least one should be Young. No employee can be sent to a workshop in which he/she is not interested in. An employee cannot attend the workshop on[list][*]Communication Skills, if he/she is committed to internal projects in the month of January;[*]Business Opportunities, if he/she is committed to internal projects in the month of February;[*]E-governance, if he/she is committed to internal projects in the month of March.[/list]Assuming that Parul and Hari are attending the workshop on Communication Skills (CS), then which of the following employees can possibly attend the CS workshop?
....

MCQ->If communication software can be called the "traffic cop" of a micro communication system, then what should the modem be called?....

MCQ->The input to a binary communication system, denoted by a random variable x, takes on one of the two values 0 or 1 with probabilities and . The behaviour of the communication system is modelled byP(Y = 1 |x = 1|) = and P(Y = 0|x = 0) = P(x = 1|y = 1) =....