Mahesh Kumar asked   •  6 hours ago

Creation of applications for things ranging from silly stuff, like virtual watermelon seed spitting, and serious uses, like real-time intensive-care patient monitoring, third-party companies will continue to make the iPhone a force of creative destruction.
... more

Roman Grebenyuk asked   •  2 days ago

Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations.   Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies’ peril.   In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were "vastly superior" and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers.  However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines.  Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price.  Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras.   Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.
Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies.  A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril. 
The author of the passage would make which of the following recommendations to the managers of the incumbents. 
... more

Pradyumna Mudholkar asked   •  2 days ago

Information is the essence of universe and means distinction between things. It is the very basic principle of physics that distinctions never disappear even though they might get scrambled or mixed away even after a seemingly irreversible change – say a magazine gets dissolved into pulp at a recycling plan, the information on the pages of the magazines will be re-organized and not eliminated and in theory the decay can be reversed; the pulp reconstructed into words and photographs. The only exception to this principle in physics is if the magazine were thrown into a black hole, a singular object in this regard, since nothing can emerge out of it after all. Even after Stephen Hawking showed in 1975 that black holes can radiate away matter and energy, the radiation seemed devoid of any structure, indicating that all information is lost in a black hole – a conclusion that has been hotly contested by physicists all over the world who argue that the entire structure of theoretical physics will disintegrate once you accept the notion that information can be lost, even if in a black hole.
Even though Hawking was not easily convinced, the physicists adopted a new theory called the holograph principle that states that when an object falls inside a black hole the stuff inside it may be lost but the objects information may be imprinted on the surface of black hole and with the right tools you may reconstruct the magazine from the black hole just as you would have reconstructed it from the pulp. This principle which may sound like an accounting trick has some serious implications if true. It implies that all information about 3 dimensional objects is stored in 2 dimensions and that there is a limit to how much information can be stored on a given surface area.  While this theory plugs a key gap in Hawkins assertion its corollaries spring some interesting implications that may have a tough time standing up to the scrutiny.
According to the passage, prior to 1975 it was believed that black holes were unique because:
... more

Oscar Mishra asked   •  2 days ago

Although the journal Social Text was never at the forefront of publishing articles on feminism and never debated whether capitalism was the source of women’s oppression in 1970s or whether male supremacy was itself a systematic form of domination, it is not clear whether social feminist’s classification of the journal as the one run by “boy’s club” could have been completely justified till recently. There could have been many reasons that the journal’s mission statement as set out in its first prospectus in 1979 did not take notice of the burning issues feminists were then discussing. May be triumvirate of founding editors were too focused on Marxist high theory to consider gender alongside economic class as an important mode of social organization and oppression, or on the other hand they may have simply chosen on purpose to not include feminism specifically in its charter.
The recent paper by Rosa Luxemburg suggests that the first prospectus contained the seeds of its own feminist undoing. The founders demarcated fields of focus for the journal that could hardly be explored without attention to gender, sexuality, and the historical experiences of women. They were rather interested in “everyday life,” “mass culture,” and “consumer society”. Hence, the little feminist work that appears in Social Text is in the realm of cultural analysis not revolutionary praxis and is often buried in the back of the journal in “Unequal Developments,” the section that offers reviews and experimental writing.
For example, in the second edition of the journal in the section Unequal Developments, Christine Holmland performs a thorough feminist dissection of the then-current Disney film ‘The North Avenue Irregulars’, showing how this comedy about a group of church ladies who take on the local mafia superficially celebrates, but finally deflates the idea of women’s activism, and along the way reinforces gendered roles at every level of social life.
Why does the author cite Christine Holmland’s example to?
... more

Ahsan Hossain asked   •  3 days ago

Tenured professors at higher education institutions are certainly given more prestige than other lecturers are. But they are not better teachers as shown by a working paper published by National Education Research Institute (NERI).  NERI collected, from more than 15,000 students, ratings for both tenured and non-tenured professors. Even though we would expect tenured professors to get much better ratings because of their much greater experience, the results showed otherwise. Non-tenured professors got better ratings, slightly though, than tenured professors. This clearly shows that there is an immediate need to do course correction – after all, the whole purpose of the existence of the education system is to provide quality teaching to the students.
In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
... more

Fetching relevant content for you