Remove Electronic signature Document Later
Make the most out of your eSignature workflows with airSlate SignNow
Extensive suite of eSignature tools
Robust integration and API capabilities
Advanced security and compliance
Various collaboration tools
Enjoyable and stress-free signing experience
Extensive support
How To Remove eSignature Presentation
Keep your eSignature workflows on track
Our user reviews speak for themselves
Remove Electronic signature Document Later. Explore probably the most end user-warm and friendly experience with airSlate SignNow. Control your entire papers handling and discussing program digitally. Change from hand-held, papers-based and erroneous workflows to programmed, electronic digital and flawless. It is simple to generate, supply and sign any papers on any device anyplace. Be sure that your airSlate SignNow company situations don't move over the top.
Discover how to Remove Electronic signature Document Later. Stick to the easy information to begin:
- Create your airSlate SignNow accounts in mouse clicks or log on with your Facebook or Google accounts.
- Take advantage of the 30-day time free trial offer or pick a prices plan that's great for you.
- Get any legitimate web template, create online fillable varieties and reveal them tightly.
- Use superior features to Remove Electronic signature Document Later.
- Indicator, personalize signing get and acquire in-individual signatures 10 times quicker.
- Establish automated alerts and receive notices at each phase.
Transferring your duties into airSlate SignNow is straightforward. What follows is a simple procedure to Remove Electronic signature Document Later, together with tips to maintain your co-workers and lovers for much better alliance. Inspire your staff using the greatest resources to remain on the top of business operations. Increase productivity and scale your small business speedier.
How it works
Rate your experience
-
Best ROI. Our customers achieve an average 7x ROI within the first six months.
-
Scales with your use cases. From SMBs to mid-market, airSlate SignNow delivers results for businesses of all sizes.
-
Intuitive UI and API. Sign and send documents from your apps in minutes.
A smarter way to work: —how to industry sign banking integrate
FAQs
-
What are the best electronic signature (e-signature) solutions on the market, in your opinion?
[full disclosure: I’m VP Digital Transformation at Solutions Notarius Inc., a company that supplies electronic and digital signature solutions]It completely depends on the requirements. I do not believe there is a uniquely better e-signature solution for all scenarios. For example, if the type of documents to be signed require low to medium reliability only, most modern e-signature platforms could be ok, subject to meeting legal requirements in the applicable jurisdiction, but if the document must meet stringent regulatory and statutory requirements that include high reliability of identity of signers, those platforms do not typically meet that threshold.Ideally, you would analyze, define and obtain agreement as to what constitutes the minimal acceptable legal reliability threshold you are willing to accept - or that readers of that document will accept. Next, define the technology requirements that correspond to that threshold. Finally, research e-signature options that meet these requirements and provide the best combination of price, features, scalability, etc..Finally, it should be noted that higher legal reliability e-signature platforms and solutions can always accommodate lower reliability documents while the converse is not true…
-
Does India have answers to defend against Pakistan's F-16?
On the morning of February 27 2019, 24 fighter jets took off from three air bases of Pakistan and flew towards India. The group of jets included ten US-made F-16 Fighting Falcons (As per IAF electronic signatures). At exactly 10am, few jets entered Indian airspace and rest remained in Pak air space, where waiting Indian Air Force fighter jets engaged them in a dogfight. The fierce fight over Jammu and Kashmir ended up with an Indian MiG-21 Bison shooting down an F-16.The shooting down of F-16 will never be accepted by Pakistan for obvious reason as their official line is only JF-17 and Mirage III planes were used. USA will also keep mum on this F-16 case as confirming F-16 kill by a vintage Mig-21 Bison will be disastrous for its biggest defence hardware manufactures – Lockheed Martin. However, that MiG too suffered a hit and crashed in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Its pilot, Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman, was captured by Pakistan Army. He was released two days later. His quick return proves India, China, Saudi and western countries applied huge pressure on Pakistan to de-escalate.The quick Pakistani response proves that Pakistan wasted no time in responding Indian IAF’s air space violation previous day and dropping of bombs in KP province (not disputed POK) 60 Km from border. Pakistani jets however could not penetrate that much deep into India with few jets venturing only 1 KM inside and dropping bombs. Only one jet entered deep into India and targetted SU-30 MKI’s and ignored two vintage Mig-21 Bisons. Indian SU-30 MKI stayed 50 KM away to protect important Army / IAF installations and did not engage any dogfight with F-16. F-16 fired 4-5 BVR (beyond visual range) AARAM missiles with range 50-60 KM at SU-30 MKI’s which were neutralized by SU-30 MKI.Pakistan is claiming to have shot down a SU-30 MKI based on these AARAM firings but on ground there is no wreckage of SU-30 MKI. In a densely populated country like India and where media signNowes site before government officials, there is no way India can hide a wreckage of big plane like SU-30 MKI. So Pakistani claim SU-30 MKI kill is a hoax probably to deflect domestic attention from loss of one F-16 jet. IAF should investigate if Mi chooper which went down near Srinagar airbase at 10:15 AM on that day (when hostility was going on) was hit by F-16 AARAM missile or it was just accident. If it was a AARAM hit, India should take it up with USA. Pakistan obviously denying any involvement on chopper case as they are denying use of F-16. Nobody in Indian media seems to care about loss of 6 IAF personnel on chopper and only focused on Abhinandan. This is called ‘prestitute’ Indian media who always go for TRP news.It is not clear if SU-30 MKI fired any BVR at F-16. If not, this is a major area for IAF to work on in future. After Kargil war in 1999, IAF realised they need high altitude attack chopper and HAL / DRDO made LCH (Light combat Helicopter) for that purpose. Learning from February 27 2019 is IAF should have more long distance BVR missiles like Meteor and Scalp so that enemy can be targeted from far distance and without the need to engagement of dog fight. Not just Rafale but all IAF jets should have Meteor and Scalp BVR’s in sufficient quantities to reduce casualty.The incident also proves that India has not yet produced / deployed sufficient quantities of SAM (Surface-to-air) Akash-I (25 KM), Akash-II (35 KM) and Israeli Spyder missiles. India just produces too little defence items and creates huge hype.The developments of February 27 morning lasted 16 minutes and it symbolises future wars will be swift. Swift Indian response to prevent a deep penetration by PAF proves that Indian radars like Indra, Rajendra, Rohini and Swathi etc. are deployed at borders in sufficient quantities and they work! This is indeed a good news for DRDO (Defence Research Development Organisation) as many people consider DRDO as ‘dead wood’.India need to remove vintage Mig-21 Bisons from Pakistan front line air bases like Srinagar, Adampur, Naliya, Bhuj, Jamnagar, Jaisalmer, Bikaner etc and shift these vintage jets to southern India. A Mig-21 need to closely follow and lock enemy jet to fire a R-73 air-to-air missile is useless in 21 century.The recovery of parts of AARAM missiles against India may / may not have violated end user agreement by Pakistan as agreements are secret documents. But this should be used by Indian government in future negotiations of purchase of 114 MRCA (Multi Role Combat Aircraft) jet of Boeing FA-18 or F-16 (cleverly renamed by Lockheed Martin as F-21without much change of technology). India should demand assembly in India and complete technology transfer of all parts including engine. Lockheed agreed to local assembly as they want to use USA assembly to make F-35 jets but Boeing had not committed complete local assembly. Both are saying technology transfer should be approved by USA government and Indian government should do that. Indian government should also ask USA to make a law banning supply of F-16 weapons and spare parts to Pakistan illegal any will evoke sanctions against potential suppliers (Like Jordan, Saudi etc.)
-
Why are African leaders and the world quiet about the imprisonment of Diane Rwigara and her family in Rwanda?
Because when you break the Rwandan laws, nobody can come to your rescue in Rwanda. What do you want the African leaders & the world to do? To tell Rwanda that some 35-year-old spoiled lady is above the law, just because she was pretending to run for political office? In case you are not tracking, this is not how Rwanda works.Didier Champion's answer to Why is Diane Rwigara and her family in custody?Rwanda is an independent country and does not receive lectures from the AU or the West. Anything you want to learn about her case, check out my answer on what I think happened and a series of mistakes that she made during her “ political” laughable campaign in Rwanda.This is another article from Johnson Busingye, the Rwandan Minister of Justice. It is an interesting read from the government perspective.Impunity? Not in Rwanda, that's why Diane Rwigara is behind barsThe highly emotional, agenda-driven social media space tends to blur reality, and often drives narratives far removed from facts on the ground.It is important to set straight the matter of Diane Rwigara and put it in the right context, particularly as a misguided campaign that has crossed the line into outright incitement to targeted violence against a particular group.Ms. Rwigara attempted to qualify as an independent candidate in the 2017 presidential elections. However, she failed to meet the requirements laid down in law, which include submitting 600 signatures of endorsement, with at least 20 from each of Rwanda’s 30 districts.Three other independent candidates fulfilled the criteria and were on the ballot, but Diane Rwigara was not. Ms. Rwigara did not contest the National Electoral Commission’s disqualification of her candidacy, nor did she challenge it in court.The NEC also found indications of systematic forgery in the documentation submitted by Diane Rwigara, particularly in the lists of signatures. Electoral fraud is a criminal offense, and the appropriate authorities accordingly commenced investigations.Rule of Law and IntegrityAt the close of investigations, the criminal investigation detectives believed they had evidence of serious crime.Among other things, media then reported unauthorized criminal break-ins into our National Identity Agency and access to ID details of people who would eventually surface on her list of seconders from districts.The Media again reported that many of these people were surprised at finding their names and identification information on those lists. The integrity of Rwanda’s elections is based on the integrity of voters' electronic data and the supporting infrastructure. Any attempt to compromise the system merits thorough investigation.Other suspicious activities involving Ms. Rwigara, her entourage and her family, also attracted media attention and later investigation by police. One example, reported widely in local and international media, and sections of the diplomatic community in Kigali, was the apparent disappearance of Ms. Rwigara, and demands for the government to account for her “disappearance”.Efforts by police to enter the Rwigara home to investigate this allegation were rebuffed by an employee of the family. Days later with pressure mounting, the police’s only option was to lawfully enter the barricaded compound as witnessed by media. Ms. Rwigara and her family were found alive and well in the house.They were taken in for questioning because they had failed to respond to several summonses, as part of the ongoing investigations, and later escorted back to their home.Judicial processMs. Rwigara, her mother, and sister were subsequently charged and presented in court. Charges were later dropped against her sister. Ms. Rwigara and her mother were denied bail because of the likelihood that they would use their substantial financial means to evade justice. The case then proceeded to court.The law presumes the innocence of suspects until proven guilty after trial.Ms. Rwigara and her mother were accorded full rights to legal representation, all the time required to prepare their respective defense, lawyers of their choice and other rights they are entitled to under the law. The next hearing is scheduled for September 24th.It is wrong to claim that Diane Rwigara is undergoing the judicial process described above because she contested the 2017 presidential election. She was a vanity candidate who had no chance of winning more than a handful of votes, and she posed no political challenge to any of Rwanda's established parties.It is also disingenuous to question Rwanda's credentials in women empowerment and gender equality. This policy remains firm in law and practice, and it will grow stronger. It's not just about women; it's about all Rwandans, men, and women. And it's based on the desire to sustain the practice of good politics, which is vital to Rwanda’s rapid and inclusive socio-economic development.Rwanda has recovered, reconciled its population, built unity and continues to register progress in every aspect because Rwandans have turned the page from a destructive era of impunity and entitlement.Where in the past some could and did get away with any kind of crime, today’s Rwanda is characterized by equality and the rule of law. Diane Rwigara is subject to the same rules of the game as any other citizen.In the Rwandan context, turning a blind eye to widely-reported impunity is simply not an option. Ms. Rwigara's rights will continue to be respected, and she will have her day in court. Any opening to impunity would erode Rwanda’s gains.The government I serve believes, as a matter of justice policy, that litigation should come to an end without undue delay, and without consideration of external pressure, so that the ends of justice are served.Hope this helps.Didier Champion
-
What are the important sections of cyber laws in India?
The Government of India enacted its Information Technology Act 2000 with the objectives stating officially as: “to provide legal recognition for transactions carried out by means of electronic data interchange and other means of electronic communication, commonly referred to as "electronic commerce", which involve the use of alternatives to paper-based methods of communication and storage of information, to facilitate electronic filing of documents with the Government agencies and further to amend the Indian Penal Code, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 and the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.The Act essentially deals with the following issues: Legal Recognition of Electronic Documents Legal Recognition of Digital Signatures Offenses and Contraventions Justice Dispensation Systems for cyber crimes.CYBER CRIME- Cyber Crime is not defined officially in IT Act or in any other legislation. In fact, it cannot be too. Offence or crime has been dealt with elaborately listing various acts and the punishments for each, under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and related legislations. Hence, the concept of cyber crime, is just a "combination of crime and computer". Cybercrime means any illegal behavior directed by means of electronic operations that targets the security of computer systems and the data processed by them. Furthermore any illegal behavior committed by means of, or in relation to, a computer system or network, including such crimes as illegal possession and offering or distributing information by means of a computer system or network. Any contract for the sale or conveyance of immovable property or any interest in such property; Any such class of documents or transactions as may be notified by the Central Here are some of the sections of the IT Act 2000 which are related to cyber crimes: Section 43 - Penalty and Compensation for damage to computer, computer system, If any person without permission of the owner or any other person who is in-charge of a computer, computer system or computer network – (a) accesses or secures access to such computer, computer system or computer network or computer resource (b) downloads, copies or extracts any data, computer data, computer database or information from such computer, computer system or computer network including information or data held or stored in any removable storage medium; (c) introduces or causes to be introduced any computer contaminant or computer virus into any computer, computer system or computer network- (d) damages or causes to be damaged any computer, computer system or computer network, data, computer database, or any other programmes residing in such computer, computer system or computer network-3. (e) disrupts or causes disruption of any computer, computer system, or computer network; (f) denies or causes the denial of access to any person authorised to access any computer, computer system or computer network by any means (h) charges the services availed of by a person to the account of another person by tampering with or manipulating any computer of a computer, computer system or computer network- (g) provides any assistance to any person to facilitate access to a computer, computer system or computer network in contravention of the provisions of this Act, rules or regulations made there under, (h) charges the services availed of by a person to the account of another person by tampering with or manipulating any computer, computer system, or computer network, (i) destroys, deletes or alters any information residing in a computer resource or diminishes its value or utility or affects it injuriously by any means, (j) Steals, conceals, destroys or alters or causes any person to steal, conceal, destroy or alter any computer source code used for a computer resource with an intention to cause damage, he shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation to the person so affected. Section 43A - Compensation for failure to protect data Where a body corporate, possessing, dealing or handling any sensitive personal data or information in a computer resource which it owns, controls or operates, is negligent in implementing and maintaining reasonable security practices and procedures and thereby causes wrongful loss or wrongful gain to any person, such body corporate shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation, not exceeding five crore rupees, to the person so affected. Section 65 - Tampering with Computer Source Documents If any person knowingly or intentionally conceals, destroys code or alters or causes another to conceal, destroy code or alter any computer, computer programme, computer system, or computer network, he shall be punishable with imprisonment up to three years, or with fine up to two lakh rupees, or with both. Section 66 - Computer Related Offences If any person, dishonestly, or fraudulently, does any act referred to in section 43, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two three years or with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees or with both. Section 66A - Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device, (a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; (b) any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill will, persistently makes by making use of such computer resource or a communication device, (c) any electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine. Section 66B - Punishment for dishonestly receiving stolen computer resource or communication device. Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen computer resource or communication device knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen computer resource or communication device,4. shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh or with both. Section 66C - Punishment for identity theft Whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly make use of the electronic signature, password or any other unique identification feature of any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to rupees one lakh. Section 66D - Punishment for cheating by personation by using computer resource Whoever, by means of any communication device or computer resource cheats by personating; shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees. Section 66E - Punishment for violation of privacy Whoever, intentionally or knowingly captures, publishes or transmits the image of a private area of any person without his or her consent, under circumstances violating the privacy of that person, Explanation - For the purposes of this section: (a) “transmit” means to electronically send a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons; (b) “capture”, with respect to an image, means to videotape, photograph, film or record by any means; (c) “private area” means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast; (d) “publishes” means reproduction in the printed or electronic form and making it available for public; (e) “under circumstances violating privacy” means circumstances in which a person can have a reasonable expectation that-- (i) he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image of his private area was being captured; or (ii) any part of his or her private area would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place. shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years or with fine not exceeding two lakh rupees, or with both. Section-66F Cyber Terrorism Whoever,- with intent to threaten the unity, integrity, security or sovereignty of India or to strike terror in the people or any section of the people by – (i) denying or cause the denial of access to any person authorized to access computer resource; or (ii) attempting to penetrate or access a computer resource without authorisation or exceeding authorized access; or (iii) introducing or causing to introduce any Computer Contaminant and by means of such conduct causes or is likely to cause death or injuries to persons or damage to or destruction of property or disrupts or knowing that it is likely to cause damage or disruption of supplies or services essential to the life of the community or adversely affect the critical information infrastructure specified under section 70, Whoever commits or conspires to commit cyber terrorism shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to imprisonment for life. Section 67 - Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which5. may extend to two three years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees and in the event of a second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees. Section 67A - Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material containing sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which contains sexually explicit act or conduct shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees. Section 67B - Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material depicting children in sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form Whoever:- (a) publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted material in any electronic form which depicts children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct or (b) creates text or digital images, collects, seeks, browses, downloads, advertises, promotes, exchanges or distributes material in any electronic form depicting children in obscene or indecent or sexually explicit manner or (c) cultivates, entices or induces children to online relationship with one or more children for and on sexually explicit act or in a manner that may offend a reasonable adult on the computer resource or (d) facilitates abusing children online or (e) records in any electronic form own abuse or that of others pertaining to sexually explicit act with children, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and with a fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees: Section 69 - Powers to issue directions for interception or monitoring or decryption of any information through any computer resource.- (1) Where the central Government or a State Government or any of its officer specially authorized by the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, in this behalf may, if is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient to do in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above or for investigation of any offence, it may, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct any agency of the appropriate Government to intercept, monitor or decrypt or cause to be intercepted or monitored or decrypted any information transmitted received or stored through any computer resource. (2) The Procedure and safeguards subject to which such interception or monitoring or decryption may be carried out, shall be such as may be prescribed. (3) The subscriber or intermediary or any person in charge of the computer resource shall, when called upon by any agency which has been directed under sub section (1), extend all facilities and technical assistance to -6. (a) provide access to or secure access to the computer resource generating, transmitting, receiving or storing such information; or (b) intercept or monitor or decrypt the information, as the case may be; or (c) provide information stored in computer resource. (4) The subscriber or intermediary or any person who fails to assist the agency referred to in sub-section (3) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. Section 69A - Power to issue directions for blocking for public access of any information through any computer resource (1) Where the Central Government or any of its officer specially authorized by it in this behalf is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, defense of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above, it may subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order direct any agency of the Government or intermediary to block access by the public or cause to be blocked for access by public any information generated, transmitted, received, stored or hosted in any computer resource. (2) The procedure and safeguards subject to which such blocking for access by the public may be carried out shall be such as may be prescribed. (3) The intermediary who fails to comply with the direction issued under sub-section (1) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and also be liable to fine. Section 69B. Power to authorize to monitor and collect traffic data or information through any computer resource for Cyber Security (1) The Central Government may, to enhance Cyber Security and for identification, analysis and prevention of any intrusion or spread of computer contaminant in the country, by notification in the official Gazette, authorize any agency of the Government to monitor and collect traffic data or information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource. (2) The Intermediary or any person in-charge of the Computer resource shall when called upon by the agency which has been authorized under sub-section (1), provide technical assistance and extend all facilities to such agency to enable online access or to secure and provide online access to the computer resource generating, transmitting, receiving or storing such traffic data or information. (3) The procedure and safeguards for monitoring and collecting traffic data or information, shall be such as may be prescribed. (4) Any intermediary who intentionally or knowingly contravenes the provisions of subsection (2) shall be punished with an imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Section 71. Penalty for misrepresentation Whoever makes any misrepresentation to, or suppresses any material fact from, the Controller or the signNowing Authority for obtaining any license or Electronic Signature Certificate, as the case may be, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.7. Section 72 - BsignNow of confidentiality and privacy Any person who, in pursuant of any of the powers conferred under this Act, rules or regulations made there under, has secured access to any electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information, document or other material without the consent of the person concerned discloses such electronic record, book, register, correspondence, information, document or other material to any other person shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. These are the IPC Section codes : Section 499. Defamation Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter expected, to defame that person. It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives. First Exception.—Imputation of truth which public good requires to be made or published Second Exception.—Public conduct of public servants Third Exception.—Conduct of any person touching any public question Fourth Exception.—Publication of reports of proceedings of Courts Fifth Exception.-Merits of case decided in Court or conduct of witnesses and others concerned. Sixth Exception.—Merits of public performance Seventh Exception.—Censure passed in good faith by person having lawful authority over another. Eighth Exception.—Accusation preferred in good faith to authorised person. Ninth Exception.—Imputation made in good faith by person for protection of his or other’s interests Tenth Exception.—Caution intended for good of person to whom conveyed or for public good Section 500. Punishment for defamation Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.8. CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Para I Punishment—Simple imprisonment for 2 years, or fine, or both—Non-cognizable—Bailable—Triable by Court of Session—Compoundable by the person defamed. Para II Punishment—Simple imprisonment for 2 years, or fine, or both—Non-cognizable—Bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Compoundable by the person defamed with the permission of the court Section 420 Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Punishment—Imprisonment for 7 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Compoundable by the person cheated with the permission of the court. Section 383. Extortion Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits “extortion”. Example; (a) A threatens to publish a defamatory libel concerning Z unless Z give him money. He thus induces Z to give him money. A has committed extortion. (b) A threatens Z that he will keep Z’s child in wrongful confinement, unless Z will sign and deliver to A promissory note binding Z to pay certain monies to A. Z signs and delivers the note. A has committed extortion. (c) A threatens to send club-men to plough up Z’s field unless Z will sign and deliver to B bond binding Z under a penalty to deliver certain produce to B, and thereby induces Z to sing and deliver the bond. A has committed extortion. (d) A, by putting Z in fear of grievous hurt, dishonestly induces Z to sign or affix his seal to a blank paper and deliver it to A. Z signs and delivers the paper to A. Here, as the paper so signed may be converted into a valuable security. A has committed extortion. Section 384. Punishment for extortion Whoever commits extortion shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine or with both.9. CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Punishment—Imprisonment for 3 years, or fine, or both—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by any Magistrate—Non-compoundable.Section 463. Forgery Whoever makes any false documents or false electronic record or part of a document or electronic record, with intent to cause damage or injury], to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.Section 465. Punishment for forgery Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Punishment—Punishment for forgery of such document—Cognizable—Bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable. Section 503. Criminal intimidation Whoever threatens another with any injury to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of any one in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits criminal intimidation. Explanation A threat to injure the reputation of any deceased person in whom the person threatened is interested, is within this section. Illustration A, for the purpose of inducing B to desist from prosecuting a civil suit, threatens to burn B’s house. A is guilty of criminal intimidation. The following are the live cases : Section 43 Related Case: Mphasis BPO Fraud: 2005 In December 2004, four call centre employees, working at an outsourcing facility operated by MphasiS in India, obtained PIN codes from four customers of MphasiS’ client, Citi Group. These employees were not authorized to obtain the PINs. In association with others, the call centre employees opened new accounts at Indian banks using false identities. Within two months, they used the PINs and account information gleaned during their employment at MphasiS to transfer money from the bank accounts of CitiGroup customers to the new accounts at Indian banks.10. By April 2005, the Indian police had tipped off to the scam by a U.S. bank, and quickly identified the individuals involved in the scam. Arrests were made when those individuals attempted to withdraw cash from the falsified accounts, $426,000 was stolen; the amount recovered was $230,000. Verdict: Court held that Section 43(a) was applicable here due to the nature of unauthorized access involved to commit transactions. Section 65 Related Case: Syed Asifuddin and Ors. Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh In this case, Tata Indicom employees were arrested for manipulation of the electronic 32- bit number (ESN) programmed into cell phones theft were exclusively franchised to Reliance Infocomm. Verdict: Court held that tampering with source code invokes Section 65 of the Information Technology Act.Section 66 Related Case: Kumar v/s Whiteley In this case the accused gained unauthorized access to the Joint Academic Network (JANET) and deleted, added files and changed the passwords to deny access to the authorized users. Investigations had revealed that Kumar was logging on to the BSNL broadband Internet connection as if he was the authorized genuine user and ‘made alteration in the computer database pertaining to broadband Internet user accounts’ of the subscribers. The CBI had registered a cyber crime case against Kumar and carried out investigations on the basis of a complaint by the Press Information Bureau, Chennai, which detected the unauthorised use of broadband Internet. The complaint also stated that the subscribers had incurred a loss of Rs 38,248 due to Kumar’s wrongful act. He used to ‘hack’ sites from Bangalore, Chennai and other cities too, they said. Verdict: The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, sentenced N G Arun Kumar, the techie from Bangalore to undergo a rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs 5,000 under section 420 IPC (cheating) and Section 66 of IT Act (Computer related Offence). section 66 A Relevant Case #1: Fake profile of President posted by imposter On September 9, 2010, the imposter made a fake profile in the name of the Hon’ble President Pratibha Devi Patil. A complaint was made from Additional Controller, President Household, President Secretariat regarding the four fake profiles created in the name of Hon’ble President on social networking website, Facebook. The said complaint stated that president house has nothing to do with the facebook and the fake profile is misleading the general public. The First Information Report Under Sections 469 IPC and 66A Information Technology Act, 2000 was registered based on the said complaint at the police station, Economic Offences Wing, the elite wing of Delhi Police which specializes in investigating economic crimes including cyber offences. Relevant Case #2: Bomb Hoax mail In 2009, a 15-year-old Bangalore teenager was arrested by the cyber crime investigation cell (CCIC) of the city crime branch for allegedly sending a hoax e-mail to a private news channel. In the e-mail, he claimed to have planted five bombs in Mumbai, challenging the police to find them before it was too late. At around 1p.m. on May 25, the news channel received an e-mail that read: “I have planted five bombs in Mumbai; you have two hours to find it.” The police, who were alerted immediately, traced the Internet Protocol (IP) address to Vijay Nagar in Bangalore. The Internet service provider for the account was BSNL, said officials. section 66 C Relevant Cases: security number was exposed by Matt Lauer on NBC’s Today Show. Davis’ identity was used to obtain a $500 cash advance loan. University of Pennsylvania faked his own death, complete with a forged obituary in his local paper. Nine months later, Li attempted to obtain a new driver’s license with the intention of applying for new credit cards eventually.Section 66C: Punishment for identity theft Imprisonment upto three years and Fine upto Rs. 1 Lakhs.Section 66D: Punishment for cheating by personation by using computer resourceSection 66E: Punishment for violation of privacy Imprisonment upto three years and/or Fine upto Rs. 2 LakhsSection 66F: Punishment for cyber terrorism May extend to Life imprisonment -do- Non bailable.Section 67: Publishing obscene information in electronic form FirstConviction: Imprisonment upto three years and Fine upto Rs. 5 LakhsSecond or subsequent Conviction : Imprisonment upto five years and Fine upto Rs. 10 Lakhs -do- Bailable in case of first conviction only. Second or subsequent conviction shall be non bailableSection 67A: Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material containing sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form First Conviction:Imprisonment upto Five years and Fine upto Rs. 10 LakhsSecond or subsequent Conviction : Imprisonment upto Seven years and Fine upto Rs. 10 Lakhs -do- Non-bailable in both first and second conviction.Section 67B: Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material depicting children in sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form.Section 67C (2): Deliberate Failure by the intermediary to preserve and retain information as specified by the Central Government.Section 68 (2): Deliberate Failure to comply with the order/direction of controller.Section 69 (4): Failure to extend facilities to decrypt information to govt. notified agencySection 69A (3): Punishment for failure by the intermediary to comply with the order of the notified agency to block websites etc.Section 69B (4): Deliberate failure by the intermediary to provide the notified agency with the technical assistance or online access to the computer resource.Section 70: Unauthorized access to protected system directly or indirectly affects the facility of Critical Information Infrastructure.Section 72A: Punishment for Disclosure of information in bsignNow of lawful contract Indian Arms Act 1959 Imprisonment upto three years and Fine .Bailable Imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine not exceeding one lakh rupees or to both Imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and fine Imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine Imprisonment up to 10 years and fine Cognizable Non bailable Imprisonment for a term upto three years or to a fine upto Rs. 5 Lakhs or to both.Chapter V – Offences and Penalties Sec.25 – Punishment for certain offencesSec.26 – Secret contraventionsSec.27 – Punishment for using arms, etc. Non cognizable -do- Cognizable Non bailable Non Cognizable BailableSec.28 – Punishment for use and possession of firearms or imitation firearms in certain casesSec.29 – Punishment for knowingly purchasing arms, etc., from unlicensed person or for delivering arms, etc., to person not entitled to possess the sameSec.30 – Punishment for contravention of licence or ruleSec.31 – Punishment for subsequent offencesSec.32 – Power to confiscateSec.33 – Offence by companies NDPS ACT On 8th September, 2011, the Government introduced the NDPS (Amendment) Bill, 2011 in the Lok Sabha. The Bill was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance on 13th September, 2011 for further consideration. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 is the central law on control, regulation and prohibition of narcotic and psychotropic drugs in India. The Act was last amended in 2001, to rationalize punishment and adopt a sentencing structure based on the quantity of drugs involved. The stringent penal structure and rigid implementation of the NDPS Act created many problems including non-availability of opioid medication and lack of access to drug dependence treatment. The Bill seeks to amend a number of provisions of the NDPS Act including:•Modification of the definitions of ‘small’ and ‘commercial’ quantity to include the entire amount of drugs involved and not only the pure drug content [Section 2(xxiiia) and Section 2(viia)]•Standardisation of punishment for consumption of drugs to a maximum of 6 months or fine [Section 27]•Transfer of power to regulate “poppy straw concentrate” from the State to the Central Government [Sections 9 and 10]•Widening provisions for forfeiture of illegally acquired property, wherein any property of a person who is alleged to be involved in illicit traffic whose source cannot be proved is termed as ‘illegally acquired property’ and liable to be seized [Sections 68-B, 68H and 68-O]•Addition of the term ‘management’ to provisions on treatment for drug dependence [Section 71] Concerns over the Bill The proposed quantity definitions would have far signNowing implications on sentencing for NDPS offences and may expose low-level drug offenders, including people who use drugs to stringent punishment. Despite standardisation of punishment for consumption of drugs, the policy of criminalisation of drug use remains unchanged. The overbroad scope of the forfeiture provision makes it susceptible to misuse and subject to constitutional challenges. Further still, the Bill fails to address key issues and contradictions that have arisen such as, death penalty for repeat offenders, immunity for treatment seeking, regulation of treatment centres, support for harm reduction measures and access to opioid medicines. Read more. The Lawyers Collective expressed these and other concerns to the Standing Committee on Finance through written and oral submissions on the NDPS (Amendment) Bill, 2011 My request to all the people is to be safe and to be alert and not involve in wrong activities.
-
What is a good annotation of the Bitcoin white paper?
[BAD EARLY DRAFT - This is being continually revised and updated, with important edits from - I hope - you. If I use your suggestion, I will credit you (unless you prefer otherwise). I especially welcome help from developers, cyrptographers, cypherpunks and other writers. I have not coded since high school.]With your help, the best annotation of the Bitcoin white paper will be below - co-built by you, me and other Quorans working together.Our annotation will be the most informative, most plain English and most entertaining annotation of the Bitcoin white paper.Here we go.Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash SystemPeer-to-peer means you and me and indirectly hints at no centralized entity.Electronic cash system means a way to move money (cash) over the internet. Think PayPal instead of paper dollar bills.Bitcoin is 9 years old and is barely used as electronic cash right now.People HODL (stick their Bitcoin under a virtual mattress), use Bitcoin as a capital flight conduit (from e.g. Venezuelan Bolivar to BTC to USD, Swiss Francs, gold, etc.)As inception, Bitcoin was not intended to be digital gold but maybe it’s destined to be that.This is changing as big exchanges like Coinbase (investor) add SegWit and Lightning.Satoshi Nakamoto satoshin@gmx.com http://www.bitcoin.orgSatoshi Nakamoto is a pseudonym. We still don’t know who wrote the paper. Though the NSA might. How the NSA identified Satoshi Nakamoto – CryptoMuse – MediumAbstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.The phrases “purely peer-to-peer”, “sent directly” and “without going through a financial institution” strongly suggests the author’s anti-centralization DNA.Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.Now we get at one of the foundational things the paper and the Bitcoin code solves. Bitcoin is a digital asset that I can give you, but if I do that, I can’t give it to someone else because the Bitcoin blockchain code does not permit it.We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.Bitcoin removes central points of failure.The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing the proof-of-work.Immutable. No one can change the Bitcoin transaction that happened. At all.The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power.Satoshi didn’t foresee the mining pool oligopoly that permeates Bitcoin and most Proof of Work cryptocurrencies today.As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers.What does controlled by nodes mean? Many people run nodes but only a few mining pools mine almost all the Bitcoin.This is also known as the 51% attack. But you just need one more node than 50% (e.g., 50% + 1) so it is more accurately a majority attack.The network itself requires minimal structure.Because?Messages are broadcast on a best effort basis, and nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.As Alex Seewald notes in the comments below, Satoshi is probably referring to best effort delivery. Best-effort delivery - WikipediaWho is doing the broadcasting?Like everything else in Bitcoin, you as a runner of full nodes are free to come and go as you please. That’s why many Bitcoin maximalists argue Bitcoin Core is not centralized.However, others disagree.Quantifying Decentralization – news.earn.com1. IntroductionCommerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments.I think Satoshi is anti-bank, anti-PayPal and anti-Western Union. This is one reason why.While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model.A key facet of Bitcoin is that it is trustless. You don’t have to trust JP Morgan.Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes.Unlike Bitcoin.The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non- reversible services.Debit cards payments are hard to reverse. Cash payments are even harder to reverse. Especially when either is combined with an “All Sales Final” condition.With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads.Yes and many Americans prefer trusting American Express’ customer service over some random merchant on the internet that might rip you off.Merchants must be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need.BItcoin is just reallocating the risk from merchants back to consumers. It’s kind of anti-consumer tbh.A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable.Yes, just like how so many of my friends have lost some crypto stolen or lost. Seems unavoidable!These costs and payment uncertainties can be avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments over a communications channel without a trusted party.He should have said much earlier, “Unlike physical currency…”What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party.Proof of work.Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers.Decentralized escrow? Are buyers to trust a third party centralized escrow service over American Express? As a buyer, I’m not doing that.In this paper, we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server to generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions.Making it easier to follow the money i mean Bitcoin.The system is secure as long as honest nodes collectively control more CPU power than any cooperating group of attacker nodes.Bitcoin relies (trust?) the majority of full node runners to be honest. Here’s hoping mob rule, centralized mining or mass hysteria never takes over.2. TransactionsWe define an electronic coin as a chain of digital signatures.Very unexpected IMO. How is this anything like a normal coin? It is a ledger ledger of all the transactions relating to one asset, which isn’t even totally fungible with others. It seems we can literally give you the coin from Satoshi’s genesis block or another coin that we all know was mined today by F2Pool or whatever.Each owner transfers the coin to the next by digitally signing a hash of the previous transaction and the public key of the next owner and adding these to the end of the coin.Moving the digital signatures off the main chain is a bit scary to some folks - that’s why some dislike SegWit - which does that.A payee can verify the signatures to verify the chain of ownership.Who the heck wants to do an electronic title search every time they spend $100 of Bitcoin? This makes sense for big purchases like real estate and collectibles but not for small or even medium sized purchases.I’m not sure how pragmatic Satoshi was. He built great tech. He was not as great at guessing use cases and what unmet, urgent need Bitocin actually meets.Transaction[Would love it if someone can please help me and copy paste in the diagrams.]Owner 0's SignatureOwner 1's Private KeyTransactionOwner 1's SignatureOwner 2's Private KeyTransactionOwner 2's SignatureOwner 1's Public KeyOwner 2's Public KeyOwner 3's Public KeyHashHashHashThe problem of course is the payee can't verify that one of the owners did not double-spend the coin.Satoshi focuses a lot on double spending.A common solution is to introduce a trusted central authority, or mint, that checks every transaction for double spending.Mints and the entity that checks for double spending can be two different entities, no? In the analog world, the US government prints money. Maybe a private third party company like a PayPal checks for double spending among its users and customers.After each transaction, the coin must be returned to the mint to issue a new coin, and only coins issued directly from the mint are trusted not to be double-spent.This is bad if you believe, like Ray Dalio, government should increase the money supply (issue new coins) when no one’s spending, everyone’s HODLing and the token economy is shrinking. And you should decrease money suply (burn coins) if there is high or hyperinflation.The problem with this solution is that the fate of the entire money system depends on the company running the mint, with every transaction having to go through them, just like a bank.Broadly speaking, we have not really gotten away from that in Bitcoin. We just replaced banks with centralized mining chip makers, mining pools, developers, maintainers, client implementations, exchanges, wallets, owners, etc.We need a way for the payee to know that the previous owners did not sign any earlier transactions.This seems like a total pain. No wonder Hashcash didn’t work.For our purposes, the earliest transaction is the one that counts, so we don't care about later attempts to double-spend.What are the implications of this, if any?The only way to confirm the absence of a transaction is to be aware of all transactions.Awful.In the mint based model, the mint was aware of all transactions and decided which arrived first.To accomplish this without a trusted party, transactions must be publicly announced [1], and we need a system for participants to agree on a single history of the order in which they were received.The payee needs proof that at the time of each transaction, the majority of nodes agreed it was the first received.3. Timestamp ServerThe solution we propose begins with a timestamp server.A timestamp server works by taking a hash of a block of items to be timestamped and widely publishing the hash, such as in a newspaper or Usenet post [2-5].Hmmm…The timestamp proves that the data must have existed at the time, obviously, in order to get into the hash.Each timestamp includes the previous timestamp in its hash, forming a chain, with each additional timestamp reinforcing the ones before it.Owner 3's Private KeyHashHashBlock2BlockItemItem...ItemItem...VerifyVerifySignSign4. Proof-of-WorkTo implement a distributed timestamp server on a peer-to-peer basis, we will need to use a proof- of-work system similar to Adam Back's Hashcash [6], rather than newspaper or Usenet posts.Adam is the relatively (compared to unctuous CTO Greg Maxwell) cypherpunk and CEO of the controversial Blockstream, funded in part by Tencent in China.The proof-of-work involves scanning for a value that when hashed, such as with SHA-256, the hash begins with a number of zero bits.The average work required is exponential in the number of zero bits required and can be verified by executing a single hash.For our timestamp network, we implement the proof-of-work by incrementing a nonce in the block until a value is found that gives the block's hash the required zero bits.[Can someone help translate all this into plain English?]Once the CPU effort has been expended to make it satisfy the proof-of-work, the block cannot be changed without redoing the work.Immutable.As later blocks are chained after it, the work to change the block would include redoing all the blocks after it.The proof-of-work also solves the problem of determining representation in majority decision making.If the majority were based on one-IP-address-one-vote, it could be subverted by anyone able to allocate many IPs.Wonder what Satoshi thought of Proof of Stake at the time he wrote the white paper in 2008.Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote.Does hash rate matter more than full nodes?The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.Some developers like Gavin Andressen IIRC tweeted that the real Bitcoin is the one with the longest chain, and that might be Bitcoin Cash.If a majority of CPU power is controlled by honest nodes, the honest chain will grow the fastest and outpace any competing chains.This is why small blockers want to ensure that blocksizes per second remain small - or become even smaller - so that many people - not just miners - can run full nodes and keep miners honest and reduce the risk of miners colluding and engaging a majority attack.To modify a past block, an attacker would have to redo the proof-of-work of the block and all blocks after it and then catch up with and surpass the work of the honest nodes.It would appear that Bitcoin is only immutable to the extent that most of the CPU power is controlled by honest nodes.We will show later that the probability of a slower attacker catching up diminishes exponentially as subsequent blocks are added.Arguably Bitcoin becomes harder to attack as blocks grow.To compensate for increasing hardware speed and varying interest in running nodes over time, the proof-of-work difficulty is determined by a moving average targeting an average number of blocks per hour. If they're generated too fast, the difficulty increases.5. NetworkThe steps to run the network are as follows:1) New transactions are broadcast to all nodes.2) Each node collects new transactions into a block.3) Each node works on finding a difficult proof-of-work for its block.4) When a node finds a proof-of-work, it broadcasts the block to all nodes.5) Nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid and not already spent.6) Nodes express their acceptance of the block by working on creating the next block in the chain, using the hash of the accepted block as the previous hash.Nodes always consider the longest chain to be the correct one and will keep working on extending it. If two nodes broadcast different versions of the next block simultaneously, some nodes may receive one or the other first. In that case, they work on the first one they received, but save the other branch in case it becomes longer. The tie will be broken when the next proof- of-work is found and one branch becomes longer; the nodes that were working on the other branch will then switch to the longer one.3BlockBlockPrev HashNoncePrev HashNonceTxTx...TxTx...New transaction broadcasts do not necessarily need to signNow all nodes. As long as they signNow many nodes, they will get into a block before long. Block broadcasts are also tolerant of dropped messages. If a node does not receive a block, it will request it when it receives the next block and realizes it missed one.6. IncentiveBy convention, the first transaction in a block is a special transaction that starts a new coin owned by the creator of the block. This adds an incentive for nodes to support the network, and provides a way to initially distribute coins into circulation, since there is no central authority to issue them. The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation. In our case, it is CPU time and electricity that is expended.The incentive can also be funded with transaction fees. If the output value of a transaction is less than its input value, the difference is a transaction fee that is added to the incentive value of the block containing the transaction. Once a predetermined number of coins have entered circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation free.The incentive may help encourage nodes to stay honest. If a greedy attacker is able to assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth.7. Reclaiming Disk SpaceOnce the latest transaction in a coin is buried under enough blocks, the spent transactions before it can be discarded to save disk space. To facilitate this without breaking the block's hash, transactions are hashed in a Merkle Tree [7][2][5], with only the root included in the block's hash. Old blocks can then be compacted by stubbing off branches of the tree. The interior hashes do not need to be stored.BlockBlock Header (Block Hash)Prev HashNonceRoot HashHash01Hash23Hash0Hash1Hash2Hash3Tx0Tx1Tx2Tx3BlockBlock Header (Block Hash)Prev HashNonceRoot HashHash01Hash23Hash2Hash3Tx3Transactions Hashed in a Merkle Tree After Pruning Tx0-2 from the BlockA block header with no transactions would be about 80 bytes. If we suppose blocks are generated every 10 minutes, 80 bytes * 6 * 24 * 365 = 4.2MB per year. With computer systems typically selling with 2GB of RAM as of 2008, and Moore's Law predicting current growth of 1.2GB per year, storage should not be a problem even if the block headers must be kept in memory.48. Simplified Payment VerificationIt is possible to verify payments without running a full network node. A user only needs to keep a copy of the block headers of the longest proof-of-work chain, which he can get by querying network nodes until he's convinced he has the longest chain, and obtain the Merkle branch linking the transaction to the block it's timestamped in. He can't check the transaction for himself, but by linking it to a place in the chain, he can see that a network node has accepted it, and blocks added after it further confirm the network has accepted it.Longest Proof-of-Work ChainBlock HeaderBlock HeaderBlock HeaderPrev HashNoncePrev HashNoncePrev HashNonceMerkle RootMerkle RootMerkle RootHash01 Hash23Merkle Branch for Tx3Hash2 Hash3Tx3As such, the verification is reliable as long as honest nodes control the network, but is more vulnerable if the network is overpowered by an attacker. While network nodes can verify transactions for themselves, the simplified method can be fooled by an attacker's fabricated transactions for as long as the attacker can continue to overpower the network. One strategy to protect against this would be to accept alerts from network nodes when they detect an invalid block, prompting the user's software to download the full block and alerted transactions to confirm the inconsistency. Businesses that receive frequent payments will probably still want to run their own nodes for more independent security and quicker verification.9. Combining and Splitting ValueAlthough it would be possible to handle coins individually, it would be unwieldy to make a separate transaction for every cent in a transfer. To allow value to be split and combined, transactions contain multiple inputs and outputs. Normally there will be either a single input from a larger previous transaction or multiple inputs combining smaller amounts, and at most two outputs: one for the payment, and one returning the change, if any, back to the sender.It should be noted that fan-out, where a transaction depends on several transactions, and those transactions depend on many more, is not a problem here. There is never the need to extract a complete standalone copy of a transaction's history.5TransactionInOutIn......10. PrivacyThe traditional banking model achieves a level of privacy by limiting access to information to the parties involved and the trusted third party. The necessity to announce all transactions publicly precludes this method, but privacy can still be maintained by breaking the flow of information in another place: by keeping public keys anonymous. The public can see that someone is sending an amount to someone else, but without information linking the transaction to anyone. This is similar to the level of information released by stock exchanges, where the time and size of individual trades, the "tape", is made public, but without telling who the parties were.Traditional Privacy ModelTransactionsNew Privacy ModelIdentities TransactionsAs an additional firewall, a new key pair should be used for each transaction to keep them from being linked to a common owner. Some linking is still unavoidable with multi-input transactions, which necessarily reveal that their inputs were owned by the same owner. The risk is that if the owner of a key is revealed, linking could reveal other transactions that belonged to the same owner.11. CalculationsWe consider the scenario of an attacker trying to generate an alternate chain faster than the honest chain. Even if this is accomplished, it does not throw the system open to arbitrary changes, such as creating value out of thin air or taking money that never belonged to the attacker. Nodes are not going to accept an invalid transaction as payment, and honest nodes will never accept a block containing them. An attacker can only try to change one of his own transactions to take back money he recently spent.The race between the honest chain and an attacker chain can be characterized as a Binomial Random Walk. The success event is the honest chain being extended by one block, increasing its lead by +1, and the failure event is the attacker's chain being extended by one block, reducing the gap by -1.The probability of an attacker catching up from a given deficit is analogous to a Gambler's Ruin problem. Suppose a gambler with unlimited credit starts at a deficit and plays potentially an infinite number of trials to try to signNow breakeven. We can calculate the probability he ever signNowes breakeven, or that an attacker ever catches up with the honest chain, as follows [8]:p = probability an honest node finds the next block q = probability the attacker finds the next block qz = probability the attacker will ever catch up from z blocks behindIdentitiesTrusted Third PartyPublicq ={ 1 if p≤q} z q/pz if pq6CounterpartyPublicGiven our assumption that p > q, the probability drops exponentially as the number of blocks the attacker has to catch up with increases. With the odds against him, if he doesn't make a lucky lunge forward early on, his chances become vanishingly small as he falls further behind.We now consider how long the recipient of a new transaction needs to wait before being sufficiently certain the sender can't change the transaction. We assume the sender is an attacker who wants to make the recipient believe he paid him for a while, then switch it to pay back to himself after some time has passed. The receiver will be alerted when that happens, but the sender hopes it will be too late.The receiver generates a new key pair and gives the public key to the sender shortly before signing. This prevents the sender from preparing a chain of blocks ahead of time by working on it continuously until he is lucky enough to get far enough ahead, then executing the transaction at that moment. Once the transaction is sent, the dishonest sender starts working in secret on a parallel chain containing an alternate version of his transaction.The recipient waits until the transaction has been added to a block and z blocks have been linked after it. He doesn't know the exact amount of progress the attacker has made, but assuming the honest blocks took the average expected time per block, the attacker's potential progress will be a Poisson distribution with expected value:=z q pTo get the probability the attacker could still catch up now, we multiply the Poisson density for each amount of progress he could have made by the probability he could catch up from that point:∞ ke−{q/pz−k ifk≤z} ∑k=0 k!⋅ 1 ifkzRearranging to avoid summing the infinite tail of the distribution...z ke− z−k 1−∑k=0 k! 1−q/p Converting to C code... #include
double AttackerSuccessProbability(double q, int z) { double p = 1.0 - q; double lambda = z * (q / p); double sum = 1.0; int i, k; for (k = 0; k <= z; k++) { double poisson = exp(-lambda); for (i = 1; i <= k; i++) poisson *= lambda / i; sum -= poisson * (1 - pow(q / p, z - k)); }return sum; }7Running some results, we can see the probability drop off exponentially with z. q=0.1 z=0 P=1.0000000 z=1 P=0.2045873 z=2 P=0.0509779 z=3 P=0.0131722 z=4 P=0.0034552 z=5 P=0.0009137 z=6 P=0.0002428 z=7 P=0.0000647 z=8 P=0.0000173 z=9 P=0.0000046 z=10 P=0.0000012 q=0.3 z=0 P=1.0000000 z=5 P=0.1773523 z=10 P=0.0416605 z=15 P=0.0101008 z=20 P=0.0024804 z=25 P=0.0006132 z=30 P=0.0001522 z=35 P=0.0000379 z=40 P=0.0000095 z=45 P=0.0000024 z=50 P=0.0000006 Solving for P less than 0.1%... P < 0.001 q=0.10 z=5 q=0.15 z=8 q=0.20 z=11 q=0.25 z=15 q=0.30 z=24 q=0.35 z=41 q=0.40 z=89 q=0.45 z=340 12. ConclusionWe have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust. We started with the usual framework of coins made from digital signatures, which provides strong control of ownership, but is incomplete without a way to prevent double-spending. To solve this, we proposed a peer-to-peer network using proof-of-work to record a public history of transactions that quickly becomes computationally impractical for an attacker to change if honest nodes control a majority of CPU power.Do coins have a majority of CPU power?The network is robust in its unstructured simplicity. Nodes work all at once with little coordination. They do not need to be identified, since messages are not routed to any particular place and only need to be delivered on a best effort basis. Nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them.Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.The controversial UASF (User Activated Soft Fork) push for SegWit was arguably an example of consensus and honest folk running full nodes forcing the Bitcoin community (miners) to make SegWit an option for users, merchants, exchanges, etc. and pave the way for SegWit adoption.8References[1] W. Dai, "b-money," http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt, 1998.[2] H. Massias, X.S. Avila, and J.-J. Quisquater, "Design of a secure timestamping service with minimal trust requirements," In 20th Symposium on Information Theory in the Benelux, May 1999.[3] S. Haber, W.S. Stornetta, "How to time-stamp a digital document," In Journal of Cryptology, vol 3, no 2, pages 99-111, 1991.[4] D. Bayer, S. Haber, W.S. Stornetta, "Improving the efficiency and reliability of digital time-stamping," In Sequences II: Methods in Communication, Security and Computer Science, pages 329-334, 1993.[5] S. Haber, W.S. Stornetta, "Secure names for bit-strings," In Proceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 28-35, April 1997.[6] A. Back, "Hashcash - a denial of service counter-measure," http://www.hashcash.org/papers/h..., 2002.[7] R.C. Merkle, "Protocols for public key cryptosystems," In Proc. 1980 Symposium on Security and Privacy, IEEE Computer Society, pages 122-133, April 1980.[8] W. Feller, "An introduction to probability theory and its applications," 1957.9 -
Rwandan Diane Rwigara has been detained and faces 20 years in prison. What exactly was her crime?
Nobody is above the law in Rwanda.Rich or poor, young or old, male or female, wannabe politician or business person, the laws of Rwanda have to be respected. Plain and simple.I can hardly believe that I am answering a question about some lady who could not even get 600 required signatures out of millions of Rwandan voters. Failing to get 20 signatures from each of the 30 districts? How ill-prepared do you have to be disqualified to launch an independent candidacy in Rwanda?Had I been running, despite being a nobody in Rwanda, I could have gotten 5,000–6,000 signatures very easily.The lady had no idea of what she was doing. She failed to comply with local laws and regulations of the electoral commision. She was looking for attention in the western media. For better or worse, she has got it.Failed to provide enough signatures to support her candidacy to the Electoral Commission.When she failed, the falsified some of the signatures including those of dead people!When her candidacy was denied, she complained to the western media, crying for help. She thought she could get away on the “ woman” card!Later, due to her lack of experience, she started to talk to genocide deniers in Belgium and Europe about some phony advocacy for human rights. On this one, she did not know. But again, her ignorance was very apparent. In my opinion, the government could have dropped these charges.As things got tougher, she faked her disappearance and made the police force look for her. A few days later, she was discovered at her family house. She had been there all along. From there, things went worse for her.All in all, she lacked the experience and made very grave mistakes. She really should not be blaming anybody but herself and her advisors. Did she have any? I don’t know.I have a series of excellent answers on her criminal charges and why she was not ready for the tasks and challenges ahead when she decided to run for the highest office in the land without any qualification whatsoever.Didier Champion's answer to Why is Diane Rwigara and her family in custody?Didier Champion's answer to Why are African leaders and the world quiet about the imprisonment of Diane Rwigara and her family in Rwanda?This is a good article by Johnson Busingye, the Rwandan Minister of Justice about her criminal charges. It is the most comprehensible response from the government perspective.Impunity? Not in Rwanda, that's why Diane Rwigara is behind barsThe highly emotional, agenda-driven social media space tends to blur reality, and often drives narratives far removed from facts on the ground.Criminal ChargesIt is important to set straight the matter of Diane Rwigara and put it in the right context, particularly as a misguided campaign that has crossed the line into outright incitement to targeted violence against a particular group.Ms. Rwigara attempted to qualify as an independent candidate in the 2017 presidential elections. However, she failed to meet the requirements laid down in law, which include submitting 600 signatures of endorsement, with at least 20 from each of Rwanda’s 30 districts.Three other independent candidates fulfilled the criteria and were on the ballot, but Diane Rwigara was not. Ms. Rwigara did not contest the National Electoral Commission’s disqualification of her candidacy, nor did she challenge it in court.The NEC also found indications of systematic forgery in the documentation submitted by Diane Rwigara, particularly in the lists of signatures. Electoral fraud is a criminal offense, and the appropriate authorities accordingly commenced investigations.Rule of Law and IntegrityAt the close of investigations, the criminal investigation detectives believed they had evidence of serious crime.Among other things, media then reported unauthorized criminal break-ins into our National Identity Agency and access to ID details of people who would eventually surface on her list of seconders from districts.The Media again reported that many of these people were surprised at finding their names and identification information on those lists. The integrity of Rwanda’s elections is based on the integrity of voters' electronic data and the supporting infrastructure. Any attempt to compromise the system merits thorough investigation.Other suspicious activities involving Ms. Rwigara, her entourage and her family, also attracted media attention and later investigation by police. One example, reported widely in local and international media, and sections of the diplomatic community in Kigali, was the apparent disappearance of Ms. Rwigara, and demands for the government to account for her “disappearance”.Efforts by police to enter the Rwigara home to investigate this allegation were rebuffed by an employee of the family. Days later with pressure mounting, the police’s only option was to lawfully enter the barricaded compound as witnessed by media. Ms. Rwigara and her family were found alive and well in the house.They were taken in for questioning because they had failed to respond to several summonses, as part of the ongoing investigations, and later escorted back to their home.Judicial processMs. Rwigara, her mother, and sister were subsequently charged and presented in court. Charges were later dropped against her sister. Ms. Rwigara and her mother were denied bail because of the likelihood that they would use their substantial financial means to evade justice. The case then proceeded to court.The law presumes the innocence of suspects until proven guilty after trial.Ms. Rwigara and her mother were accorded full rights to legal representation, all the time required to prepare their respective defense, lawyers of their choice and other rights they are entitled to under the law. The next hearing is scheduled for September 24th, 2018.It is wrong to claim that Diane Rwigara is undergoing the judicial process described above because she contested the 2017 presidential election. She was a vanity candidate who had no chance of winning more than a handful of votes, and she posed no political challenge to any of Rwanda's established parties.It is also disingenuous to question Rwanda's credentials in women empowerment and gender equality. This policy remains firm in law and practice, and it will grow stronger. It's not just about women; it's about all Rwandans, men, and women. And it's based on the desire to sustain the practice of good politics, which is vital to Rwanda’s rapid and inclusive socio-economic development.Rwanda has recovered, reconciled its population, built unity and continues to register progress in every aspect because Rwandans have turned the page from a destructive era of impunity and entitlement.Where in the past some could and did get away with any kind of crime, today’s Rwanda is characterized by equality and the rule of law. Diane Rwigara is subject to the same rules of the game as any other citizen.In the Rwandan context, turning a blind eye to widely-reported impunity is simply not an option. Ms. Rwigara's rights will continue to be respected, and she will have her day in court. Any opening to impunity would erode Rwanda’s gains.The government I serve believes, as a matter of justice policy, that litigation should come to an end without undue delay, and without consideration of external pressure, so that the ends of justice are served.Hope this helps.Didier Champion
-
What are some must have Android apps?
Edit: I wrote this answer for “must have Android apps” but these are same apps which have changed the way I used to live my life. Each and every App has helped me in one or the other way. I hope you will also find them helpful and a bit life changing. So here is the list: 10. Psiphon For those who use WiFi with proxy settings. So Psiphon bypasses and tunnel the websites or app through a different IP Address. 9. Mirror It's a simple app to record your mobile screen. Based on the concept of CamStudio in PC where you can record your screen, Mirror offers recording of your Mobile screen. 8. NTES- National Train Enquiry System If you are from India and you want to know the running status, cancelled train (partial or fully), Live Station and other features, this App is a must have. 7. VOLT Simple but effective for those who want to learn new vocabulary. That's too obvious, then why not others? Coz here you get the “memory key” which helps you relate the words and easier to remember them. 6. Parchi It a note making app. But here’s a catch. You can view, review, edit and add right from your lockscreen without need to open the app. Isn't that amazing! I personally find this app very useful. 5. edX If you are student or a learner who wants learn something new everyday, and cannot afford to go in the prestigious institutions like MIT, Harvard University, Cambridge, IITM, etc ten it is a must have app. Enroll yourself in any course and Bazinga!! You are ready to learn from the most amazing professors. Similar to edX, we have Coursera. 4. Walnut Manage your expenses on your finger tips. Its easier then that. It shows you your monthly expenditure, ATM locations, bill remainders and many more features. Its a must have app. 3. CamScanner Everyone doesn’t own a scanner but most of us have camera. So click the pic, upload to CamScanner and voila you are done. You have the scanned copy of your documents, notes, Marksheet and upload them on your DigiLocker. 2. inshorts Till now you all must be knowing this app. The tagline is also simple “News in 60 words” and trust me it is worth having. In this “I don't have time” world, you need news to be fast and accurate so here it is. 1. DigiLocker If you have this app then you don’t need to carry your personal documents like driving license, Adhar card, voter ID card, or even your Marksheets. Keep them safe in actual locker and leave the rest to your DigiLocker. And the best part is that it is acceptable as the original ones at every governmental or non governmental institution because it is developed under Digital India initiative. That's it for the day. Thank you and Enjoy !!! Update 1: Today I came across two new apps which I found useful. Hope it would help you all. 1.Forest : Stay focused Features • A self-motivated and interesting way to help you beat phone addiction • Stay focused and get more things done • Share your forest and compete with friends • Track your history in a simple and pleasant way • Earn reward and unlock more tree species • Customize your whitelist : Leaving Forest and using apps in whitelist won’t kill your tree. 2. Swachh Bharat Toilet Locator Swachh Bharat Toilet Locator is specifically useful for Indians who're committed for Swachh Bharat. Update 2: So I am back with yet another interesting app for you all. And trust me it is worth hanving. You are bored just go through it and kaboooom !!! You are into a black hole. Enjoy the ride. 3. Curiosity It is the latest app I installed but got addicted to it. It’s exactly works like its name, generates a curiosity which inturn increases your knowledge. It covers a large field of scope from Humanity to science to faith and many more. This app deserves more snapshots but why to increase the length of my answer. Comment below if you think the list should be updated? Thank you.
-
Why have Ramsay brothers stopped making Hindi horror movies?
Hello, I've find an excellent article which will solve your query. I am copy pasting it here or if you want you can go with link. The requiem for Ramsay's horror | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis The disembodied zombies of the season’s word-of-mouth-hit, Go Goa Gone, can’t but remind us of the lords of horror in India — the Ramsay brothers, who entertained and horrified millions much before special effects and lifelike props made their once-scary monsters look like something the cat dragged in. Google the name ‘Ramsay brothers’ and a listing with all possible contact numbers and email addresses of Tulsi Ramsay, one of seven siblings that made up the Ramsay Brothers, pops up everywhere.It’s clear he wants to be found. A phone call to request an interview, and there is excitement in Tulsi Ramsay’s voice. “Yes! Of course. Do you know where I live?” He calls on the day of the meeting, to confirm if the interview is still on. “Sometimes, people forget,” he says, by way of explanation. At the lobby of the high-rise Ramsay lives in (where Hema Malini, Sunny Deol, Akshay Kumar’s mother and sister also have flats, he says), teenagers fan themselves while waiting for drivers to bring cars; a struggling actor, script in his hand, talks animatedly on the phone; a bunch of nannies take kids to the pool, and a production crew steps out discussing edits. Inside his 15th floor apartment, the almost 69-year-old Tulsi Ramsay sits in a corner of his cream, brown and gold couch, nervous. Very odd for someone who’s made it his business to scare others.Introduction to cinema“Are you speaking only to me?” he asks with hesitation. “Yes.” “Oh, there was a journalist who interviewed me and then went and spoke to others,” he says. He has next to him, an old, grey plastic briefcase from which he removes a document and hands it over. It’s an introduction to his production house, and his resume. Tulsi is clearly nostalgic about the good old days, with good reason perhaps. His father Fatehchand U Ramsinghani moved to Mumbai from Karachi after Partition and started an electronics business on Lamington Road. When the industry wasn’t doing too well, he started looking at the movie business. When his second film Rustom Sohrab (1963), a historical epic, did well, Ramsay Sr decided to stay in the business.But the Ramsays really took off in the ’70s and ’80s when they churned out their signature, low-budget horror films, most of which were panned by anyone with any sense of aesthetics. But that hardly mattered — the audience the films were intended for loved it. Discovering horror Throughout the three-hour interview, one gets the sense that Tulsi knows what journalists are looking for. He almost anticipates the questions and eagerly delivers one anecdote after another.He narrates one on how he and his brothers convinced their father to produce horror films.When FU Ramsay’s third film Ek Nanhi Munni Ladki Thi (1970), starring Prithviraj Kapoor, didn’t do very well, brothers Tulsi and Shyam visited a theatre to gauge the audience’s reaction. That’s when they realised a 10 minute sequence in which Prithviraj Kapoor went to a museum to steal a dagger that belonged to his ancestors got the loudest cheers. In the scene, the actor wore an elaborate costume comprising eight inch boots, a scary mask, a cape and a furry costume inside which he was wearing an armour. “He looked just like a monster. When the police shoot at him, the bullets bounce off and people around look shocked and scared. The audience loved it,” says Tulsi. The brothers then convinced their father to focus on horror.Tulsi drops names of the famous stars who he worked with. “Shatrughan Sinha started out with us in Ek Nanni Munhi Ladki Thi. Kishore Kumar loved our films. He would have a lot of fun in recordings. Once, he came to the studio with fake vampire teeth and refused to take them off till the end of the recording. Another time, we went to his house and he refused to come out and was making scary sounds instead.” Those were the times when Rekha would visit the sets in Mahabaleshwar, where most of the films were shot. “Rekha would come just watch Kiran Kumar.They had a romance going, he was so handsome, so attractive. Now, she is still so glamorous and he is an old man,” laughs Tulsi.After the high of the ‘70s and ‘80s, Ramsay produced five shows for Zee TV. The insanely popular Zee Horror Show ran for seven years with record TRPs. But now Tulsi’s clearly hungry for another break. When he realises dna is part of the Essel Group that also owns Zee, he insists we write about his association with Zee and Subhash Chandra, chairman, Essel Group and Zee. “You must write about Subhashji and my association. He was a mastermind, I tell you. If you do, the story will go big,” he says, helpfully.At their peak Talking about the Ramsay focus on horror, Tulsi states the obvious: “It (horror) was our USP. We started it. People lapped it up. It’s what made us. There was sex, drama, songs in between the horror.” He narrates an incident in which one of their most popular films gave a big-budget Bachchan film a run for its money in the early ’80s. “Our cult film Purana Mandir released on the same day as the big budget Bachchan (Amitabh) starrer Laawaris. We were in Delhi then and we saw people lining up for our film. No one wanted to watch Laawaris. We couldn’t enter the theatre to watch our own film. Indira Gandhi was killed few days later and there was a bandh. Two days later, theatres were packed again. It was the second biggest hit of 1984,” he says. The success of their films at the time is still paying off. “It still runs our kitchens,” says Tulsi.The fall and the hunger to rise The lull came because of an overkill of Ramsay-style horror. “People overdid it. After us, several people started to make bad horror films and every channel picked up the horror show idea. The audiences got sick of it.” But has he retired yet? No, he quickly responds. “I am going to start a project in a month or so. But I won’t tell you details. People nowadays copy your ideas If I tell you now, tomorrow someone will shoot it in two days and it will be showing in a four-part series on some channel,” he says. His phone rings in between, he answers and says, “I can’t talk right now.I am in a very, very important meeting… No, no, you don’t get it. Yeh bahut zaroori hai mere liye, aap kal phone karna.” He hangs up and says: “I want to go out with a bang. I want to be remembered.” “Will you let me know when this will be out? This Sunday? I’ll buy some extra copies. Thank you for your time,” he concludes, looking relaxed for the first time in three hours.What’s in a name?Fatehchand U Ramsinghani ran an electronics store in Karachi before Independence. He was a radio engineer and foreigners who visited the store mangled his surname. “My father then realised that foreigners had a problem pronouncing Ramsinghani and changed his surname and the name of the shop to Ramsay,” says Tulsi Ramsay.Radio dealers to movie makersFU Ramsay moved to Bombay after Partition with his wife and four sons and two daughters. Three more sons were born in India. Ramsay Sr re-established his shop on Mumbai’s Lamington Road and became a dealer of the famous Murphy Radio. When the electronics business was doing badly, he decided to give the movie business a shot. He co-produced Shaheed-E-Azam Bhagat Singhin 1954. It was India’s first film on the martyr but it didn’t do too well. “India had just gained Independence and people didn’t care much about Bhagat Singh,” says Tulsi. His second film, Rustom Sohrab (1963), was a historical epic. It did well and Ramsay Sr decided to stay in the business.All in the familyIn the 1950s, to be part of a film crew, one had to be a member of the film workers’ union. “So my father decided to enroll us into the union keeping in mind our interests and talents,” says Tulsi Ramsay. Gangu was a good photographer so he was enrolled as an assistant to a cinematographer, Keshu assisted Gangu. Kiran liked music, so he got to be the sound assistant, and Kumar, “a double graduate,” was the screenwriter Shyam and Tulsi were directors and Arjun worked on edits. The crew of seven brothers were then recognised as the Ramsay Brothers.Tiffin box productions FU Ramsay wanted to train his sons in all aspects of filmmaking. So he took them to Kashmir for a workshop. “We hired a houseboat on the Jhelum and held a four-month long workshop where our father trained us in various aspects of filmmaking. We read books, discussed plots and practiced cinematography,” says Tulsi. Post the workshop, the brothers set out to do what was then unheard of in Indian Cinema. They boarded a bus with unknown actors and family members who doubled up as crew and went to Mahabaleshwar to shoot Do Gaz Zameen Ke Neeche. They lived in a government guesthouse and shot on location so they saved on the cost to put up a set.The ladies in the family cooked for the crew and helped with make-up and the costumes came from their own or the actors’ wardrobes. The film was shot in a 40-day schedule. “My father called it Tiffin Box Productions. He said jab ghar mein khana bana sakte hain, toh hotel se kyun mangayein,” says Tulsi. The film was a rage at the box office and the brothers repeated this model to make over 30 superhit films.Regards,
Trusted esignature solution— what our customers are saying
Get legally-binding signatures now!
Related searches to Remove Electronic signature Document Later
Frequently asked questions
How do i add an electronic signature to a word document?
What is the original on an electronic signature document?
How to use steam esign?
Get more for Remove Electronic signature Document Later
- Can I Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- How To Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- How To Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- How Do I Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- How To Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- How Do I Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- How Do I Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
- Help Me With Electronic signature Maine Police PPT
Find out other Remove Electronic signature Document Later
- Annual report national spiritualist association of churches nsac form
- Altar server certificates templates printable form
- Extension consultation form
- Mirasol shutter form
- Shakin stevens fan club form
- We bought zoo questions form
- Assignment form airhelp
- Sea student entry form 2019 private candidatesdocx
- Student exchange host family application form 2017 memphisinmay
- Online vision board creator form
- Wounded warrior gift form
- Solo parent form
- Knec grade 3 registration form
- Business partner policy on non solicitation oando plc form
- Graphic design order form
- Photograph section 32a form
- San jose unified school district volunteer form
- National honor society certificate template form
- Fiba 3x3 scoresheet form
- Pgvcl full form