Chess And LIFE . . .

White moves first: Black people are allowed by the rules to mainly be reactive
Pawn promotions: The smallest people can become the greatest, with perseverance
Castling: The top people never fight from the front
King: The ruler is weaker than he should be
En Passant: When your opponent makes swift progress and rubs shoulders with you, you can cross him and take him out to retain advantage
Queen: Women, despite being far more powerful than men, are encouraged to be selfless and keep the man's well-being at the back of their mind at all times
Pawns: If the lowest people in your team aren't taken care of well, your group will not last long
Sacrifice: You must be willing to give up the things you love the most to be able to come up trumps at the end
Forethought: To succeed in the long-term, it's crucial to plan well in advance
Impassiveness: It's vital that your opponent never see you suffer, even if you are. When in battle, hide your weaknesses
Rook in the End Game: The quietest and the most unexpected people can often be the most loyal and the most useful during trying times
Connected Rooks: It's more useful to encourage strong members of your team to be together than to keep them divided
Placement: A knight in a corner is a knight wasted. If you don't give your assets what they need, they'll be useless and perhaps leave you eventually
Time control: If you don't value time, you'll lose, despite all your strengths
Pawn unity: If there's bickering and no solidarity in the economically weakest sections, it's a recipe for impending ruin
Pawn play: The poorest and the smallest are often the first to be sacrificed, and suffer the greatest loss

and my personal favourites...
Queen and Bishop: To be the closest to a top person, you must either be his wife, or be willing to cross everybody for him
Multiple Queens: A king is allowed to have multiple queens. Sound familiar?

what if 1$ equals to 1Rs just in no time?

Let us assume that such an event happens overnight without a drastic change in productivity or a massive drop in real wages.

A good Indian engineer makes Rs.75,000 per month. Skills wise, this guy might be comparable to a guy making $3000 in the US.

What if 1 USD becomes 1 INR and this guy's productivity and salary stays the same? The Indian guy's salary becomes equal to $75,000. Before he is happy with his paycheck and go on to buy hot gadgets from the Apple store, a few things change.

Why would a company pay him $75,000 when you can get someone for $3000 in the US? Of course they would not. So, every Indian - engineers, teachers, accountants, designers - would be fired from their jobs and jobs would move out of the country as workers are cheaper outside India. Where you cannot move the job outside India (such as cleaning), companies would find tech. An awesome robotic vacuum cleaner worth $1000 would be used rather than the $4000 pm human cleaner. As people get removed from the jobs, plenty of other jobs that rely on them (restaurants, cafes, retail shops, tourism, airlines...) go kaput.

As people get fired, they will be ready to work for lower and lower salaries, until their salary drops below the international level of say $2500. Since 1 USD = 1 INR, that would make great engineers make Rs.2500 pm. How would they pay their EMI (mortgage) on homes, cars and gadgets? They cannot and they would default.

The banks would have huge unpaid loans and they will go bankrupt. Investors would exit and government would have print a lot of money to keep the banks alive. That would spike up the inflation and push down the rupee so much that things get back Rs. 60 = 1 USD. At that point, the Indian's wage will be so low that jobs will move back again and the cycle would continue.
There are plenty of real life examples of this. In 1986, Japanese yen doubled in strength. $1 was about 280 yens until then and that suddenly become like $1=140 yens. Just that completely screwed Japanese economy, from which they never recovered. Why did Japan increase their currency strength if they knew things are going to get worse? It is because the Americans forced them to do so.


This is the reason why RBI is very careful not to let rupee too strong. It is to India's advantage that $1 equal Rs.60. It helps keep exports high, wages high and imports low.
Ultimately the strength of a currency depends on only two things:
Productivity of the people. If every guy making Rs.75000 pm is able to produce 25 times more output than a foreigner making $3000, then India can enjoy $1 = Rs.1.
Inflation. If a country goes through a sustained low inflation in relation to other countries, its currency would move up. That means after 100 years, if your salaries stays the same at Rs.75000 pm while America's inflation takes an average guy there's salary to $75000, then $1 = Rs. 1
As simple as that. Since, the second scenario is bad, we need to focus only on the first scenario. How do we get an average Indian produce many times more than a foreigner?

"Degree or No Degree"

I see a degree, at least for those last year engineering students without an established career, as a proof of competence. Trying to get hired without a degree, naturally means finding another way to convincingly demonstrate that you have the necessary skills. In other words, “show me what you can do.”

Now in some fields of study, I think this is perfectly reasonable.  For example, comp-sci majors can go develop a web sever or an app and graphic design students have a portfolio.

In some fields, however, the resources required to build a portfolio are just unreasonable for an individual to develop. Good luck finding a spare reactor to hone your skills in nuclear physics. It’s not going to happen outside of a university setting.

In the end, it seems to me like there should be a better way to establish what you have learned (or your ability to learn) outside of a degree. What would it look like? A testing service? An apprenticeship program? Or are portfolios enough? Or maybe just a shift in how people perceive the value of a degree is all that is required. What do you think?

How can we avoid the risk of publishing in a fake journal / how can we evaluate a journal's quality?

Impact Factor (IF) is one of the journal quality measures, but beside arguing about this measure, it is not easy for researchers to find the correct IF of any journal. One may say that we should depend on the IF calculation produced by Thomson Reuters. However, there is an issue here: it is not easy to find their report! And another issue: it is not easy to find the IF of a specific journal in their report (e.g., see attached file). On the other hand, some journals write their IF on their website, but don't declare where they got this IF. 
There are some sites that calculate journal IFs such as:
http://www.citefactor.org/impact-factor-list-2012.html
http://globalimpactfactor.com/
http://www.jifactor.com/ 
But I think that what's most risky here is publishing in a fake journal. For example, this website http://fakejournalss.wordpress.com/list-of-fake-computer-science-journals/
has a list of fake journals, but are they really fake?
Is there any way to know the true quality of journals and to avoid fake ones?

First Blog Post

Hello to the blog world there! This is the first blog post from my side, Even I want to post something about my project work in the UG of Mechanical Engineering.
"Parametric Optimization of Metal Inert Gas Welding and Tungsten Inert Gas Welding By Using Analysis of Variance and Grey Relational Analysis"
This research paper is the key points of what we did in the project.  Simple isn't it? have a look, the link is below!
(http://www.ijsr.net/archive/v3i6/MDIwMTQ0MDU=.pdf)
As reference you can post your ideas regarding to this research final year project or y'all can post comment about your project with paper link.