Dexteronica

A Hindu family can setup a separate entity called Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). HUF qualifies for tax benefits and can even own ancestral properties, gifts (cash, jewelry etc.) and also run a business.

More fine prints

Any married man from the Hindu (ONLY Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists) can open an HUF account [0] 

HUF is available for all the following tax exemptions [0, 1] 

Dividend income and the Long-term Capital Gains is exempted for HUF

Short-term capital gain by HUF is at a lower tax rate of 15%

Gifts received by HUF are not subjected to Income Tax

A member of the HUF can give loan to the HUF

Gifts received by HUF from non-relative has a 50,000/- tax exemption 

HUF needs to have a separate PAN card

HUF can also invest in stocks, Mutual Funds etc. 

80C - Rs. 100,000/- tax deduction per annum

HUF can contribute to PPF of members and claim tax deduction 

HUF also allows up to 15,000/- per annum tax deduction for Health Insurance Premium. 20,000/- for senior citizens, 5000/- can be claimed for preventive health checkup. 

Separate 50,000/- deduction for maintenance (including medical treatment) for disability. For severe disabilities, this deduction is 100,000/- under 80D Income Tax Act

 Medical expenditure on certain diseases, ailments as mentions in the Section 80DDB of Income Tax Act can have an additional 40,000/- deduction. Senior citizen expenditure can increase to 60,000/-

HUF can donate to charities, trusts and claim deductions under Section 80G

HUF can claim a self-interest deduction of 150,000/- per annum on self occupied house property 

There are more than 800,000 HUFs as of March 2010. Uniform Civil Code anyone? ;-) [2]

Income Tax Act and Rules, 1961

[0] http://www.business-standard.com/article/pf/huf-helps-couples-save-tax-113081000670_1.html

[1] http://www.moneycontrol.com/master_your_money/stocks_news_consumption.php?autono=1007010 

[2] http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/todays-paper/tp-others/tp-taxation/huf-tax-planners-delight/article2419285.ece

Publications are one of the most important Key Performance Indicator (KPI)  metric for an academic in Computer Science. However, like in all aspects of life, not all conferences are considered to be the same. The range of goodness varies from excellent, to good, to very poor. Computer Science conferences also have various sub-categories including (but not limited to) Machine Learning, Natural Language Processing, Databases and Algorithms. The definition of an area itself is subjective and ephemeral, like most things in Computer Science. There are various websites which give ratings/rankings to such conferences across Computer Science. Some of such rankings are 

CORE Conference Ranking Exercise 

Google Scholar Metrics

Microsoft Academic Search

ArnetMiner

Top quality research labs like Microsoft Research, Yahoo! Research and IBM Research Labs also have their own internal ranking conference list. But, these rankings themselves are based on various metrics like impact factor, citations and some of them could be based on factors apart from research. Thus, no such list is perfect and/or comprehensive. So then, how does one make sense of these rankings and rank the goodness of a conference? Here's my recommendation - Rather than look for the perfect conference ranking list look for evidences that suggest the standing of the conference to argue your case.  If there are multiple evidences, there's not much anyone can argue about it.

So, how do I do so? Before we proceed, let us agree that there are four broad categories of conferences - A* (excellent), A(very good), B(good) and C(average).  Lets take an example. ICWSM is a very good conference for researchers working in social media and social computing. However, surprisingly ICWSM is not even listed on CORE. Now, one could argue that ICWSM came into existence in 2007 and hence, is too early to be listed. But that theory doesn't hold true as WSDM which is almost as good as ICWSM is listed on CORE as B. This is enough to show there are inconsistencies. So, does it then mean that ICWSM is a bad venue to publish? Evidences suggest quite the contrary. ICWSM is ranked #10 under the Databases & Information Systems area on Google Scholar with an h5-index of 41 while WSDM ranks #7 on the same list with an h5-index of 48. Now, the category assigned to ICWSM (A or B) is a separate issue but it seems a bit surprising that it doesn't deserve a place in CORE despite being one of the Top #10. One would also argue that Google Scholar would be just a counter example but Microsoft Academic Research ranks it #14 under the broad Data Mining category. Lets look at an example of another conference - CVPR which is listed on CORE but ranked as A. But, is this an accurate reflection of the standing of CVPR? I would respectfully disagree. Microsoft Academic Research ranks CVPR as the top 3 conferences in Computer Science (read that last phrase once again) and ranks it #1 under the Computer Vision sub-category. You will observe a similar pattern on Google Scholar and ArnetMiner too. CVPR makes a very strong case for an A* rating. 

So, let us summarize the process I suggest - 

Look for a comprehensive independent research rankings like CORE, MS Academic Research, Google Scholar and ArnetMiner. You may include internal lists of other research labs but I doubt they will differ as much

Look for inter-list evidences viz. multiple evidences to suggest the conference rating. If a conference has high standing in multiple lists, it is more likely to be widely acceptable as a good conference.

However, some other questions remain -

What if my conference/research area is new ?

Well, there's nothing much you can do about it. One way to understand if a conference is potentially good is to look at the program committee in addition to the selection rate of papers. A strong PC will more likely drive the conference to be a very good one in the future. However, as of this moment the truth is what you see it.

But, I see top researchers publish in a conference which is not listed or ranked high

People publish at venues for various reasons and sometimes these may be completely unrelated to research purposes. Don't fall into that trap - look for strong PC's coupled with selection rates to decide the standing of the conference. Even so, I would still recommend you to use Google Scholar or MS Academic Research to make your case.

But, it is unfair to ask me to publish in a A* conference!

Unfortunately, we don't have any control over the rules of the game. We only play the game. The only people who have control over the rules of the game are the ones who have excelled at it. 

But, I know of people who don't have publications in A* but work at A* places.

Good for you. In the end, this is all about expectation maximization for the place you want to be. Different places will have different KPIs, its your job to find out the KPIs and deliver on them. That said, academics generally look for publications as their KPI and hence, there's no running around from that part in your PhD.  

What about journals?

Let me be clear here - I am not in the game of accusing anyone of cheating. I am accusing England of preaching moral codes when they themselves do not follow it. In other words, the high handed "spirit of the game" argument which England put forth exposes their moral duplicity. Here are two cases which drive the point - 

Case 1 - Ian Bell Run Out at Trent Bridge vs India 2011

Kevin Pietersen after the 3rd days play of the 1st Ashes Test match had this to say about Broad's incident said that players "Must respect umpire's decision". Flash back to 2 years ago in 2011 at the same ground when Ian Bell was run out under controversial circumstances. If indeed the England believe in "respecting the umpire's decision" like Pietersen would have us believe, why did Strauss & Flower approach the Indian dressing room?

Case 2 - Dilruwan Perera in Sri Lanka, March 2012

Read about the incident here. TL;DR it was a similar incident to Broad yesterday and this is what Swann had to say 

"It was very difficult to take because it was so blatantly out. I'm just glad I live in an age where DRS is in place. The thing that annoyed the players on the field, and annoyed me, was that the umpire was unsighted but the batsman stood there knowing 100 per cent that he was out and chose to cheat, in my view. I think he then opened himself up to the level of abuse that was coming to him. To be honest, I'm glad Straussy was there because I'm sure it would have gone further than that had we not had someone with a bit of intelligence and nous to calm things down. It was just cheating in my view, but we live in an age where cheating is accepted in Test cricket. If people don't walk and think they can get away with it, nobody seems to say anything. But I don't agree with that."

I wonder what Swann thinks about his team mate Stuart Broad. Surely, Broad has opened himself up to the same level of abuse with Dilruwan Perera did. Surely, Broad is as much a cheat in Swann's view as Dilruwan Perera was.

India on Wednesday, July 10 was starred with a landmark judgement by the Supreme Court of India. It brought about a ruling which disqualifies convicted Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to hold their respective office posts. Most legal verdicts are verbose, cryptic and esoteric thus making it difficult for people to understand it (Read the full text of the SC verdict) - this case was no different. It does not help that the main stream media makes no effort to make these things simple for the average reader.

Considering this landmark judgment I wanted to understand the true meaning of the verdict and hence, put some more effort to dig deeper. Here is my opinion on the verdict in layman terms. (I am no legal expert but with a help of a few good friends in the law business I have a good enough idea)

The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA) lays down norms and regulations for including qualification/disqualification requirements for MPs and MLAs. One of the rules for disqualification was on grounds that a MP/MLA is convicted of an offense in a court of law (Refer Section 8 of RPA). The disqualification would be for the duration of the convicted sentence plus further 6 years post release from imprisonment. In addition, the disqualification would start 3 months after the conviction is announced (Refer Section 8.4 RPA). However, this disqualification would be violated if 

Sentence of imprisonment is less than 2 years 

An appeal is filed in a court of law within 3 months from the date of conviction and this appeal is heard, attended to my the court

It is the Point #2 from above which has always been a problem. Following was the regular scenario in case of a MP/MLA criminal proceedings - (a) Case filed in court, (b) MP/MLA convicted, (c) MP/MLA files an appeal within 6 months in higher court - repeat (a), (b) and (c) till the case drags on for years (approx. 10 years). This was abused by the political class to stay in power. The narrow window of 3 months gave them enough time to work around the system. However, now the SC has plugged this "loophole" by stating that once convicted in ANY court of law - an MP/MLA is disqualified. In simple words, the disqualification procedure is same as earlier but there is a slight alteration on one point i.e. there is still a disqualification like earlier BUT the disqualification would be violated if 

Sentence of imprisonment is less than 2 years 

An appeal is filed in a court of law within 3 months from the date of conviction and this appeal is heard, attended to my the court

This means that a MP/MLA gets disqualified the moment he's convicted in a court of law irrespective of the appeal process. The MPs/MLAs still remain disqualified 6 years after they have served their imprisonment sentenceSo there you go, the ruling in simple words - make of it what you want to.

Oh, and more thing - the verdict will NOT be applied retrospectively viz. existing MPs/MLAs with appeals in courts will be exempt from this ruling. It would only apply to members post July 10, 2013.

I leave you with three notes before you make a decision on whether this ruling would affect ground reality. 

Note #1 - A conviction means court directs imprisonment, as one can be imprisoned without a conviction as well

Note #2 - The verdict is 100% constitutional. The SC has complete right to interpret laws, alter them and order the parliament to make new laws

Note #3 - The real effect of this verdict will be visible ONLY if there is good implementation by the police who are responsible for criminal investigations. This police is more or less under the influence of the State governments

The famous Bug #1 for the Ubuntu operating system has been changed to Fixed. The motivation of Bug #1 was to provide "liberation" from proprietary software and prevent users from vendor lock-ins. In an articulate comment on the bug report, Mark Shuttleworth ( founder of Canonical Ltd. and one who provides leadership to Ubuntu Operating System) has detailed on why the status change was made. In particular, two points in the comment caught my eye.

But it's better for us to focus our intent on excellence in our own right, rather than our impact on someone else's product.

I can't help but remembering a similar move by Steve Jobs once he took over Apple in 1997. Ubuntu does not (rather should not) mean "anti-Microsoft" or "anti-Apple" it means (or should rather mean) "great Ubuntu". Now, whether they are able to do that in practice is a different thing but intent is a good place to start with.

For Ubuntu, our goal remains to deliver fantastic experiences: for developers, for people building out production infrastructure, and for end-users on a range of devices. We are doing all of that in an environment that changes completely every decade. So we have to be willing to make big changes ourselves - in our processes, our practices, our tools, and our relationships. Change this bug status is but a tiny example.

The key phrase here for me is the one where he lists changes - in our processes, our practices, our tools, and our relationships. This shows aversion to rigidity and adapting to times. I also think the little word there named "relationships" means a lot. I don't think as an organization you want to be particularly hostile towards your competitors (in particular in words). I always feel that if one needs to be hostile (and/or aggressive); one needs to do that in deeds and not in words i.e. build the best product possible out there using your skills and beat your competitors fair and square. Nothing more satisfying than that, in my books.

Oh and by the way, for people who do not know - MarkShuttleworth is a space tourist and the first African citizen in space. 

Some news on the IPL 6 today and it was spot fixing in highlight. Three players from Rajasthan Royals - S Sreesanth, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan were arrested for spot fixing. Three matches involving Pune Warriors (May 5) at Jaipur, Kings XI Punjab (May 13) at Mohali and Mumbai Indians (May 15) at Mumbai were apparently had some instances of spot fixing. Simple codes like putting on towels, adjusting shirts before the over, performing exercises etc. were used to communicate with the bookies. The spot fixing was to give away X number of runs in an over. 

Delhi police came over this case by "accident" while investigating another case. It also has recorded 100+ hours of audio evidence to prove their case. They denied tapping BBM messenger and stressed that their surveillance teams were present during the games. Delhi police also say that the master mind is someone from the underworld sitting overseas but refused to divulge a name. Police have cleared other international players and team owners & management. 

It will be interesting to see how the Rajasthan Royals react to this. I am a great fan of Rajasthan Royals and Rahul Dravid so I sincerely hope it doesn't affect their IPL winning chances. Rajasthan Royals have had a great season and it would be sad to see them losing their way for what has been a wonderful season.

Cricket fans across the world were abuzz last week on the Ian Bell run out. The above video details the incident. The Spirit of the Game debate was ignited with every fan & cricketer having an opinion. There was quite some talk on it and as always there were three sides of the argument : my side, your side and right side. Cricketers themselves were divided in opinion on the incident. Ian Bell admitted to being naive, Andrew Strauss commended Dhoni's move while Andy Flower denied double standards by arguing that a similar Tendulkar run out would have caused an international incident. In the end, both teams agreed however that the right decision was made. Cricket fans however had mixed opinions. Some called for MS Dhoni's head while some praised him. Here are the assumptions I make before giving my opinion :

Andy Flower and Andrew Strauss approached MS Dhoni to withdraw his appeal

MS Dhoni was not the only one involved in the incident

Here are also some facts :

Andrew Strauss recalled Angelo Matthews in South Africa during a Champions Trophy match

Andy Flower wouldn't have recalled Matthews but respected Strauss' decision

Now, here's my opinion on the incident :

Praveen Kumar was not acting on the field as some reports suggest

Abhinav Mukund I doubt removed the bails for a run out

The decision to appeal came from MS Dhoni, a street smart cricketer. The rest of the Indian players acquiesced 

Ian Bell wasn't attempting the run but should have known to do the right thing which is wait in the crease till the ball is dead

Andrew Strauss and Andy Flower had no business and this infact against the Spirit of the Game to go to the Indian dressing room. Flower always talks about playing hard. If I were Andy Flower, I would have bit the bullet (just as he has talked about in the past) and let Bell learn his lesson while sipping a cup of tea. You take it up your chin and learn the lesson the hard way.

The right decision was made in the end by the Indian team (not MS Dhoni)

It was smart to send Rahul Dravid for the press conference after the day's play!

Here's a parting thought. Was Stuart Broad checking VVS Laxman's bat for vaseline violating  Law 42 (ii) which states 

Fair and unfair play - responsibility of umpiresThe umpires shall be the sole judges of fair and unfair play. If either umpire considers an action, not covered by the Laws, to be unfair he shall intervene without appeal and, if the ball is in play, call and signal Dead ball and implement the procedure as set out in 18 below. Otherwise umpires shall not interfere with the progress of play without appeal except as required to do so by the Laws.

Bloggers on Blogger faced blog issues for the past 20.5 hours preventing users from blogging. I have been facing this from the past 2.5 days! Google has more detailed comments on the issue. In other news, I was linked to this cool application aptly named Document Corrupter. This is what the Read Me says :

We have all been in the situation where we have half-finished work due tomorrow. You can upload a unfinished word document and this tool will modify it so that it cannot be opened. You can send the corrupted file instead to buy yourself some extra time.

A conversation with a wise man is worth months of education.

Some sad news comes in the form of a IIT-Madras student committing suicide under pressure for not completing his project leading to an extension of his graduating date by 6 months. However, what's not come to me as a surprise (and I'm not being sarcastic here) is the reaction of Govardhan M., Dean of Students, IIT-M and I quote :

Why are you always reporting negative news about IIT Madras? We also have the maximum number of patents but you didn't report that. But you would want to report the death of 3 out of 5000 students which is statistically not important. Why don't you go to other engineering institutes and find out how many died there. Why only IIT?

Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal, thinks there is an Higher Education Bubble in the US.

“If Harvard were really the best education, if it makes that much of a difference, why not franchise it so more people can attend? Why not create 100 Harvard affiliates?”

Professor Dheeraj Sanghi, a member of the governing council LNMIT-Jaipur, Guest professor - IIT Gandhinagar, Member of Academic Senate IIIT-Delhi and a professor of CSE department IIT Kanpur, recently wrote in his blog on how India should exploit and in another blog post tries to generalize the situation to India too. Michael Karnjanaprakorn, CEO of Skillshare, explains the economics behind the issue in his Let's Start a Learning Revolution presentation focusing on how students are taking more loans and landing into more debts.

Let's Start a Learning Revolution

The problem is also wonderfully characterized in a 2:08 minute video on the Skillshare blog.

Off late, I see myself lost in a surreal world. I have pretty much lost touch with events happening around me. It seems like I am completely surrounded with NLTK and scikits.learn. Python is no longer a snake but a programming language which has caught my imagination! Twitter has been kind to me in many ways by letting me know something about how the world has moved in the past few hours. Jacob Perkins, author of the Python Text Processing with NLTK 2.0 Cookbook has been really great in helping me out with stupid code bugs I am habituated to make ever since I was born. I also made a huge rant about someone. It was an e-mail (and it generally) is an e-mail which triggers which has now gone on to be named The Rant. It comes out when I feel I am being treated unfairly by people who should ideally know me in and out. The moment I am drawn into a surreal world my mind forces me to think about Alice in Wonderland. 

Probably, it's time for me to be Alice, believe in myself and slay the Jabberwocky. Coming back to reality, I need to perform a help today. More on what exactly the help was for, in the next blog post. I leave you with this anecdote.

Never hate people who are jealous of you, but respect their jealousy. They're the ones who think that you're better than them.

 Just came across this quote, which gave me a different perspective on jealousy. It's not mine but really provides a fresh thought.

On a different note, I slept at 0700 hours and woke at 1700 hours. I am not sure which time zone I belong too. I just wrote a 700 line program (in 3-4 days) in Python using the Natural Language Toolkit(NLTK) framework. Anyone who has done some programming in Python would tell you that 700 LOC is a ridiculously large number. I am performing a text classification task on a few documents using a machine learning/natural language processing framework. 

Courage is not the absence of fear, it is the conquest of fear.