Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/wona/wona.github.com

_posts/2017-04-01-now-we-see-you.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: "Now We See You"
+tags: [wona, column]
+image: illustration-camera_1x.png 
+category: phekingnews
+---
+
+A month after the breaking of the metaphorical “pinjra”, IITR has seen a palpable change in the levels of security and surveillance employed in the campus. One of the oft cited challenges to the free-campus movement was the lack of security and the porous nature of our campus. In a fitting response to these issues, the administration has upped the supervision in the institute to previously unforeseen standards with even greater levels anticipated in the future. Upon a closer examination of these measures, there have been some unsettling discoveries that have caught our eye and refuse to let go of it.
+ 
+
+### The low down
+
+The security of the campus can be broadly analysed through the lens of the Human Resource employed and the technology accompanying them. As a first and warranted step, there has been a significant increase in the number of guards patrolling the campus. However, incredulity kicked in when we came across the plan to employ a group of three female and two males to observe vigilance across certain hotspots. The move bears an uncanny resemblance to a policing tactic employed in a neighbouring state. Referred by an uncalled smearing of one of Shakespeare’s chief protagonists, that move has seen considerable flak from various sections of the society for it aims at outright moral policing and privacy breach. We can only hope that this likeness in implementation is not driven by a likeness in vision and aims.
+
+![Respect my authoritah](/images/posts/we-see-you.png)
+
+Our mild incredulity grew stronger upon learning the technological upgrades planned under this security overhaul. We would like to start by outlining the planned purchase of TASER guns and Heat Vision goggles for the security guards. This is accompanied by the acceptable aim of ramping up CCTV surveillance, in and around uncharted territories such as the dark corners of the Civil Department and places where students usually visit in groups of two. The increased security measures would cost the administration Rs 3 cr per year along with a onetime cost of Rs 4 cr for equipments and installation. One can get a decent idea of what this means by comparing with the institute’s annual medical expenses of Rs 3.5 cr and academic scholarship/fellowship spending of Rs 8.5 crore.  
+
+A member of the administration, when questioned about why there was such an indifference towards the student populace’s right to freedom, completely discredited the question, while showing concern about the motives of the students who find themselves out of their hostels late at night. 
+
+"When the students were protesting for a restriction-free campus, they argued that they would use this freedom towards constructive purposes like working in the various technical and cultural societies. However, now we hear cases of students wandering around with no purpose, holding hands and engaging in what we believe are just frivolous activities for students of this age. We expect the students to be more responsible."
+
+He further went on to say that if more such students are observed in the coming days, the administration might have to revoke the liberty that was handed to the students. This comment was a rather unwelcome one, considering the fact that a majority of the IIT Roorkee students have never had a chance to ‘hold hands’ with someone they’d like to.
+
+Our incredulity snowballed into utter disbelief when we were told of an intended purchase of Drones to kick start the much more effective and consequently intrusive aerial surveillance. With drones envisioned to be a part of the IIT Roorkee airspace, what this means for the student community and SDS’s yearly exhibition is something that only time will tell.
+
+### Our two cents of wisdom
+
+We are still unsure of why these measures are being taken, as the institute rules do not categorically ban any forms of PDA. This move clearly questions the students’ morality and instead of being a protective measure, it is more of a privacy breach. There is a fine line between campus security and privacy invasion, and it is ironical how, in spite of being promised “freedom” through the Pinjra Tod movement, the students are still under the watchful eyes of the inner party. 
+
+That being said, Watch Out would like to caution all the students to tread carefully post-midnight and avoid giving the authorities a chance to hold things against us. After all, trying to contain your raging hormones is better than being contained in your hostels post 11.

css/base.scss

@@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ blockquote {
 // ============== POST ============== //
 
 .post {
- 	font-size: 1.1em;
+ 	font-size: 1.2em;
 	line-height: 1.5em;
 	color: #333332;
 

file01

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-+---
- +layout: post
- +title: Can we trust ourselves
- +tags: [wona, column]
- +category: verbatim
- +image: http://media.topito.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Scientific-American-Mind-Amnesia_resultat.jpg
- +excerpt: The problem with people is that they are so stupid. So stupid that they have no idea how stupid they are.
- +---
- +
- +-- _Lanka Adarsh, Vedansh bhartiya, Yash Singh_
- 
- 
- +<b>“The problem with people is that they are so stupid. So stupid that they have no idea how stupid they are.”
-
--John Cleese
-</b>
- +
- +Trust is a fundamental cog in the machinery that drives the world. We trust drivers to follow traffic lights and not bump into cars. We trust news agencies to give us factually correct quality content; our politicians to make the right decisions. However, the grounds on which it is built are largely unknown – our decision to trust others is perhaps a subconscious, impulsive one, acting more as false assurances than absolute security against potential deviations. When weighed collectively with the consideration that our senses (and what they perceive thereof) are not “facts” as we wrongly attribute them to be, an unsettling question presents itself: Can we trust ourselves?
- +
- 
- +George Orwell floated such an idea before the world in 1984. By tampering with evidence and indulging in propaganda, Big Brother is successful in reinforcing the desired belief in the subjects’ mind. Elizabeth Loftus, who specialises in false memories, has shown that they are easily born or planted. In her TED talk, “How reliable is your memory?”, she explains how false memories are responsible for a three quarters of wrongful convictions and other bizarre, irrational beliefs and occurrences that constitute our identity. Memory, she states, is unlike a recording device which stores information without modification; the brain is plastic, and accounts evolve over time into stories that distort the truth to great extents. She attributes this phenomenon to misinformation and the subconscious or unconscious acceptance of memory (or other sensory stimulus) as fact.
-
- +
- +Oftentimes, hypocritical behaviour is foreign to our awareness. Christened the “Actor-observer bias”, this phenomenon encapsulates how our angry disapproval persists despite the probable circumstances under which a fellow human being has committed an infarction (say jumped a signal) – but when the observer becomes the doer, he feels that his act was justified. Here, empathy is stifled by ignorance of the said principle, rendering us not completely impartial, in contrast to what we tend to believe.
-
- +
- +In 1999, Dunning and Kruger presented their hypothesis, seconding Bukowski, who had previously remarked: “The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence”. By checking the consistency of actual test scores of candidates against their own predictions, they concluded that high-ability individuals underestimate themselves, while those with low abilities overestimate themselves. This illusory superiority is a manifestation of the lack of metacognitive abilities; i.e. people are unable to recognize their incompetency.
-
- +
- +Even if it rests on false pretences, trust is necessary for the continuation of normal life. In its absence, external chaos and internal anxiety would uproot all order; it is a safe assumption, having no basis and yet – having no evidence to the contrary either. Every fact or principle was once an assumption; unbounded scepticism is hardly helpful in the establishment of such bases, which the civilized world believes to be true. This said, perfect trust is a symptom of ignorance. The longer one lives, the more selective they become about who they trust. Trust is bestowed upon others because we believe we are intelligent and capable enough to make such choices; however, in light of the above considerations, it seems that the foundations of this faith are built on the marshy lands of our perceptions and memories, which are, in and of themselves, unreliable and fallible.
-+
- +<b>The article features in our Autumn ’16 print issue. The issue delves into the roadblocks to having a truly meritocratic election at IITR and expounds on the limited academic flexibility offered at Roorkee. To read our previous issues visit: https://issuu.com/wona-iitr
-</b>
- +
- 
-