Seen elsewhere



Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace


You know the BBC doesn't bother to check its own output, seems the same applies to The Times
Pg 37 Marcus Leroux 'gov removal of subsidies has pushed the industry into crisis, shedding 12,500 jobs in the industry' .."onshore wind the most cost competitive of renewable energy..."
pg 43 '12,500 jobs in the (solar) industry says PwC'
- Then on pg 44 There's the story of The Solar Cloth Company a Magic solar crowdfunded corp FAILING and investors losing £1m ..em the boss has used 4 different names in businesses, the co-boss was a struck off solicitor ..they told a bunch of lies...the closure was nothing to do with gov subsidies

Jul 25, 2016 at 2:46 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

What Ridley is talking about I think is something I call : "Having certainty beyond the evidence"

Jul 25, 2016 at 2:17 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

mike fowle, I read it 30 years ago, but the new nuclear powerstation costing £1m and the new bike shelter costing £50 (?) receiving attention and discussion at a board meeting is one I certainly remember.

Circulation patterns at Embassy cocktail parties was another.

Politically incorrect now, but still relevant, was one on 'local Hong Kong civil servants' living in bamboo houses, but driving Cadillacs.

The original 'work expands to fill the time available' essay was about empire building within the Civil Service. Parallels with the EU becoming a selfish interest group serving the selfish interests of those within the EUrocracy, are probably there, but I will have to find a copy to read again!

Jul 25, 2016 at 2:09 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

- Trust experts on anything but the future : Matt Ridley, in today's Times, also in GWPF here

Michael Gove was mocked during the referendum campaign for saying: “I think people in this country have had enough of experts.” Critics asked pointedly if he dismissed the expertise of doctors when ill. Yet subsequent weeks have left economic experts, at least, looking a bit less than the full Nostradamus.

The expert pollsters told the hedge funds that Remain would win right up until it lost, so the pound and the FTSE 100 rose, then crashed. The expert financial forecasters then told investors that the FTSE 100 would fall further, but it quickly recovered all its lost ground and more. The expert analysts told us we should watch the FTSE 250 plunge instead, but that has now returned to the level it was at a week before the referendum.

He ends by referring us to Lovelock
James Lovelock said @I think anyone who tries to predict more than 5-10 years ahead is a bit of an idiot.
Scientist James Lovelock: "It’s easier to save Dorset than the planet" 23/7/2016
>>He added that global warming proponents stated that the earth would get hotter and hotter but “they don’t really know,”<<
>>“Don’t try and save the world, it’s pure hubris.<<

Jul 25, 2016 at 2:03 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Golf Charlie - A couple of Parkinson's illustrations come to mind. one is the meeting to discuss a new (nuclear) power station. Nobody bar one has enough actual knowledge to comment sensibly so the views in favour of it are accepted without question except for the one who does know whose objections are duly recorded. They then discuss I think it's a new bike shed about which they do have some experience and expenditure of a fraction of the power station is discussed exhaustively and sensibly. The other one is how a memo is drafted at various levels in the civil service eventually finding its way to the head man who redrafts it as he would have written it and reflects as he wends his way homeward how his hair has gone grey in the service of the country. (Quoting from memory on both).

Jul 25, 2016 at 1:46 PM | Unregistered Commentermike fowle

EM 10:41 C.Northcote Parkinson wrote a series of humourous essays that were bound into a book, based on his experiences within the Civil Service and Foreign Office. The 'Work expands to fill the time available' essay is the one that became well known, but some of the others are well worth reading too!

Jul 25, 2016 at 12:50 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

AK - see new discussion thread.

Jul 25, 2016 at 12:26 PM | Registered CommenterMartin A

MartinA. For goodness sake, a new task, more precious brain cells to sacrifice. Off to wicip.

Jul 25, 2016 at 11:28 AM | Unregistered CommenterAK

Martin A. Thank you for that. On reflection, i'm not sure I agree entirely with the mythical man month concept. If the additional manpower is of similar merit to those unable to solve the problem I agree. But what if the new people iintroduce new expertise, expertise necessary to solve the problem? Companies do this all the time, they face a problem, say in product distribution, they realize they cannot solve in-house, so they hire this expertise in from outside. The problem, however, remains with communications, will the decision maker hear or recognize the solution to the problem.

I understood the tar pit analogy slightly differently. My take is that when a problem mires the original staff set to solve it,it attracts others (of similar capabilities) who similarly get stuck, remaking the same mistakes . However, I am arguing that if someone better equipped (say with a tractor) is attracted, they can pull the others out.

An interesting mental exercise.

Jul 25, 2016 at 11:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterAK

AK, EM - there is also Amdahl's law.

In some situations, adding resources really can speed things up (to a limit described by Amdahl's law). I guess Amdahl's law would model quite well the rubble-shifting task and the time needed to complete it with N labourers (N = 1,2,3,...,∞). Or shelf stacking.

Jul 25, 2016 at 11:08 AM | Registered CommenterMartin A

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>