Getting smaller

We are on an unstoppable rollercoaster.

We don’t use the word miniaturisation much. I wonder why? Everyday we take for granted incredibly powerful handheld computing machines. They are only possible because of miniaturisation.

If digital signal processing was your thing in the 1970s, it would have involved several heavy cabinets of electronics. Lots of chunky circuit boards and a reliable way of removing all the heat they generated. As an example, there’s a nice dusty relict of a Cray computer[1] in the Science Museum in London. Later, I’ll read this again on a popular handheld device that has innumerable functions. Just as powerful.

This week, in 2007 the first iPhone was launched[2]. With a reasonably sized touch screen and a camera, it was launched with lots of hype. Rapidly this device started to change not only the marketplace for phones and cameras but the way we live, work and play.

I wasn’t a first adopter. At the time, I think I was faithful to Nokia. But somewhere in a cupboard, I still have an iPhone 3G, the successor to the first iPhone. 16-years on, it feels like there was never a time when we didn’t have the iPhone, or one of its competitors.

Miniaturisation has squeezed capable and flexible digital computing into small spaces. It’s made it possible to concentrate multiple functions into one device. The sheer convenience of that has crushed the non-professional camera marketplace. Streaming music has superseded traditional media, like tape and disks, almost to the point of their extinction.

The societal implications of this technological transformation are much talked and written about but maybe read by few. It’s fascinating to speculate if we have come to the end of Moore’s law[3]. That’s the empirical relationship that seems to hold for semiconductors. So far, Moore’s prediction has held-up well for the semiconductor industry. As the density of semiconductors doubles about every two years, so nothing ever stands still.

We might shrug our shoulders and carry on as if nothing has changed. Or just not care to look at this phenomenon, thinking its irrelevant to the important political machinations of the day. However, the impact of the steps that have led to more and more dependency on personal devices is something we should be concerned about. There’s little, or no possibility of reversion back to more manual ways of doing business. We have been captured by the convenience of affordable internet connected handhelds.

Decarbonisation is the big policy of the day. Miniaturisation is a two-edged sword in this respect. More people, holding more devices, in the billions, which are regularly superseded by the next upgrade all has a downside. Not only that but networks and massive file server farms backing-up the internet as they hungerly consume ever more energy. Thousands of new satellites mean instant connection on any part of the globe.

We are on an unstoppable rollercoaster. We think we have a choice but we don’t.


[1] https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/supercomputers/10/7

[2] The first iPhone Release Date: 29 June 2007.  

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

Titan’s fate

Firstly, condolences to the families and friends of those who perished in the deep ocean last week. This fatal tragedy took place in the full glare of the public spotlight. It’s time to give those affected time to grieve for their loss.

I will address the subject of vehicle safety in a technical manner. It’s immensely sad when what is known must be re-learnt in such a tragic way. By their nature, passenger vehicles that enter hostile environments will present high risks. There is always a likelihood of an event of significant severity as to cause injury. The imperative should be to reduce that probability as much as possible.  

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB)[1] has launched an investigation into the events that led to the loss of the submersible called: Titan. That organisation will do a detailed investigation into the reasons behind the accident that led to the deaths of five people on-board. 

There’s much conjecture about the factors involved in this catastrophe. News media and social media are awash with speculations. The facts are that contact was lost with the Titan’s support vessel and a catastrophic event took place[2].

What has come to light in the aftermath of this event is the public statements made by the driving force behind the Titan project. This has been contrasted with the those from the submersible community who spoke out on their concerns about the project.

My reflection on this information is to say that – safety starts at the top. If the entrepreneurs who promote these adventures are not literate, humble, and vigilant then outcomes are going to be negative. Those in leadership positions need to listen to those with expertise in their field of endeavour. Accepted, that it’s not the case that everyone will agree all the time about operational and technical risks but an open dialogue is vital.

I know that innovation often takes the path of trying, failing, trying again, failing, and trying again to eventually succeed. However, no vehicle should enter public service without sufficient proving.  Independent oversight adds value too. The cultural framework within which this happens shapes success or failure. That’s why there’s good reason for design certification. That’s to apply time and energy to extensive testing, applying recognised standards and listening to reputable expertise. At its best it’s an opportunity to draw on widespread experiences from the past – good and bad.

Systems that prove to be safe most often come about from those who take on knowledge, experience, and learning. Yes, this work is not free. It can cost much to go from theory to practice. When the impact of failure, when the outcome is tragic for families, loved ones and colleagues these expenses are not so large.

We must take every opportunity to learn from such fatal accidents to make them extremely rare. 

#Safey Management #SystemSafety #HumanFactors #SafetyCulture


[1] https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/deploiement-deployment/marine/2023/m23a0169-20230623.html

[2] https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/enquetes-investigations/marine/2023/m23a0169/m23a0169.html

Glasto

Standing in a field in Somerset. I did a lot of that in my youth, but I’ve only been to the Glastonbury Festival[1] once. That was in the early 1980s. Elvis Costello was headlining. That much I remember. That and an image of Glastonbury Tor[2] off in the distance with a dark and stormy sky overhead. It wasn’t the greatest night of my life, but it was a fun weekend. At the time, I was living in Bristol and the trek back to the city was a real pain.

There’s a symbiosis. Some local people objected to the imposition of tens of thousands of people descending on them every year. Other local people made a healthy income from the annual pilgrimage to Glastonbury.

I wouldn’t say that a field full of cows in Pilton is particularly mystical, but Glastonbury certainly has an air of the unusual. I recently drove through part of the Somerset Levels[3], it’s an expanse of drained wetlands. It’s farming country but rich in wildlife[4]. It has an ancient past. Sheltering in the marshes had an advantage for early humans. At later times, the marshes became an impenetrable defence from raiding invaders.

Glastonbury Festival maybe a mix of social conscience and pleasure-seeking but the early history of that area was more monks, churches, peat, and escape routes for Anglo-Saxon. Places like Burrow Mump were islands. A perfect place to watch a sunset/sunrise. This calm and quiet place is a million miles from the frantic hedonism of Glastonbury Festival.

The festival’s growth was topic of conversation in my family. Two of my great uncles farmed close to the village of Pilton. They were an age that looked upon hippies dancing naked in the rain as funny, confusing and downright weird. For the most part they smiled about the whole event when they talked about it. Being business orientated they assumed that there was good money to be made entertaining all these strange folk from London.

Out for the experience of their lives there were years when all revellers were met with was a crowded and isolated muddy field. Tales of people falling into the pits dug for toilets were enough to freak even the most hardened party goer.

Today’s version of the festival is an outdoor experience, but it’s been sanitised to the Nth degree. Pilton’s lush green pastures host a small city. Partygoers would be more likely to be run over by a media camera crew than a tractor or traveller’s bus. The cows are hidden away.

The BBC are playing a selecton of past performances. There’s real gold in these clips BBC iPlayer – Glastonbury – Episode 1

Glastonbury’s annual muisc gathering is over the 50-year mark. There’s no reason why this huge festival shouldn’t go on and on. Michael Eavis has a legacy to be proud of.

POST: The size of it is not so easy to get a grip of Glastonbury Webcam – Events – BBC


[1] https://glastonburyfestivals.co.uk/

[2] https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/somerset/glastonbury-tor

[3] https://www.visitsomerset.co.uk/discover-somerset/inspiration/natural-beauty/somerset-levels-moors

[4] https://www.somersetwildlife.org/create-living-landscapes/levels-moors

Momentous Vote

Will a line be drawn under the shenanigans of the last few years?

Number 3 on the BBC News list? This was not a vote in the Conservative Party it was a vote in the mother of Parliaments. It was a vote that put the likelihood of Boris Johnson making a political comeback at extremely improbable. Yet, it was number 3 on BBC News. Well, I guess it was considered by the newsroom as a minority interests subject at 10 pm in the evening.  

A House of Commons (HoCs) vote took place on the findings of the Committee on Privileges[1]. Not a great title but that committee thoroughly undertook the job of addressing the vexed question of a Prime Minister lying to Parliament. That means lying to us all. 

19 June 2023 should go down in British history. There was no civil war. The statue of Cromwell outside parliament remained unmoved. Parliament deftly asserted its right to take a view on the behaviours of a former member. Not just any former member but a former Prime Minister (PM). A PM being held in contempt of Parliament is not an everyday event.

The current PM staying away was a show of poor pollical antenna. Images of a vacuum in leadership will haunt him here on in. While another former PM endorsed the report and thanked the committee for their work. Several cabinet members did the same. The leader of the house acted with a solemn certitude that she is becoming known for.

For Conservative Members of Parliament, it was a sad and difficult duty. Each member was given the chance to make up their own minds about the report.

Upholding the truth matters. Both the Parliament’s HoCs and the Committee on Privileges set themselves on the path to restore public confidence in democracy.

Questions as to why Boris Johnson was ever elevated to the position of PM in the first place were not answered. Some members spoke with anger in their voice. It’s the case that magnificent oratory was missing from many contributions, but the heartfelt reflection of constituents’ rage was sincere.

To succeed, in the British political system a PM must have an effective working relationship with Parliament. They don’t need to like each other but a degree of respect is essential.

Parliament may look weak in that there’s limited meaningful sanctions that it can impose on a past member. A member who jumps before they are pushed appears to get off. However, the impact of the events of 19 June 2023 means that Boris Johnson will practice only with a media bully pulpit.

What remains for us to find out over the next few years is how that will play out[2]. Will a line be drawn under the shenanigans of the last few years?


[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65953605

[2] https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-vote-sunak-privileges-committee-report-on-lied-to-parliament-12593360

Vinyl

Vinyl records gave us a whole langauage.

When I think about playing music a couple of sketches come to mind. One is the Not The Nine O’clock News sketch about a HiFi Shop[1]. It’s jargon loaded customer service that’s now moved on-line whereas then it was a face-to-face experience. The term Audiophile doesn’t seem to have become Digitalphile. No not Digital File. Maybe it should for those who impatiently mock anyone wrestling with a poorly designed App.

The other is Flanders and Swann and their Song of Reproduction (1957)[2]. Again, the joke is a superb mockery of the non-technically minded when faced with the modern fashion of the time. This obsession with getting better and better sound reproduction hasn’t gone away. My tinkering with amps and speakers in the 1970s may have led to my interest in electronics.

The above are comic stories of the era of Polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Better known simply as Vinyl when talking about to the way we played music for several decades. Collecting vinyl records is making a big resurgence. I’ve been hit by the bug. 

Pick it up for £1 in a charity shop. Play it. It’s perfect. Well, not in every case but there are some surprises when playing 50-year-old disks. Some former owners cherished and cared for their collections. 45 RPM may not mean a lot to the streaming generation. That said, there are not so many popular objects that are a half a century old that you can simply play as if they were new.

I’m playing the 1972 hit “Stuck in the Middle with You” by Stealers Wheel.

Vinyl records gave us a whole langauage. The phonograph, disk jockey, jukebox and hit parade are becoming as unfamiliar as a conversation in a Victorian salon. The inconvenience of having to get-up and place a disk on a turntable is part of the experience. It’s a task that isn’t matched by swiping a small glass screen.

Yes, vinyl disks get scratched, warped, and cracked. That makes them ephemeral and more akin to a living artifact. A stream of digital “1” and “0” never ages. There’s something sterile about that.

Strangely the 6-inch disk shaped the way popular music was made as much as how it was played. Having to fit everything into a 2- or 3-minutes slot focused song writers, musicians, and producers to go the extra mile.

I’m now in 1967 and playing “Autumn Almanac” by The Kinks[3].

A number of these plastic artifacts may end up being one of the rare items playable in a 1000 years’ time. I wonder what those in 3023 will make of these primitive tactile objects. They may value them greatly.


[1] https://youtu.be/HoPXQ9fotZM

[2] https://youtu.be/EL5SzTSMxLU?list=RDEL5SzTSMxLU

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autumn_Almanac

digital probing

It’s the Japanese knotweed of the digital world.

Advertising, marketing, promotion, selling, I expect some of those cave paintings of ancient men and women were showing-off to the rest of their society. They’d be saying, extra tasty bison if you head on down to this big watering hole. Throw your spear this way for the best results. The communication medium, a rock face isn’t so different from billboards, hoardings and signage that line busy roads. Catching your eye is the aim. Doing it on a busy throughfare is a proven method.

Too much of this can be annoying, distracting and ultimately defeating. Wall-to-wall advertising that’s pushy, gaudy and litters the highway is a nightmare no one wants to see. It’s not just the urban planners that get riled-up when they see streets plastered with garish advertising.

What of the digital worlds we inhabit? It’s clear they’re no exception. A great deal of the money to be made digitally comes from advertising. My beef here is with the saturation questioning that this industry uses to accumulate data. The bombarding of people with questionnaire after questionnaire is as annoying as any gaudy poster. Survey after survey pops-up as soon as you give away your e-mail address in any purchase. “We’d love to know more about the experience you recently had……………” 

It’s one reason why I always refuse any request made at a till in a shop. Occasionally, shop assistants will look offended. It’s as if you have slighted them, is some incomprehensible way. It’s no good them saying they can reassure you that your data will be “protected”. Such reassurances are meaningless.

There are so many examples of data held securely and in line with data protection rules being hacked[1][2][3][4] and spread around like confetti. Compensation after the event is not compensation for the aggravation.

Making purchases it’s inevitable that we will give away data. Few of us read the terms and conditions under which we give away our data. There’s an expectation of “protection”. The conveniences of digital transactions are traded against the risks of losing vital personal data.

When it comes to advertising there’s no necessity. Unless there’s some form of inducement. One came into my in-box saying, “win a £10,000 holiday”. I did what I normally do – deleted it. I find such hooks like “This survey will only take a few minutes to complete” as annoying as improbable competitions and insincere thanks.

I don’t suppose I’m eccentric in disliking all this unrelenting digital probing. It’s clutter. It’s invasive. It’s the Japanese knotweed of the digital world.


[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45446529

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52722626

[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-57210118

[4] https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/american-airlines-says-data-breach-affected-small-number-customers-employees-2022-09-20/

Charm

It’s a curious question. What part does “charm” play in life? Does the charming man or woman get the job and the dull or grumpy but competent person fail? Do charming people get more done, or are they more inclined to laziness?

Like most assertions or questions, it’s as well to start with some definitions. If we put aside nuclear physics and jewellery the definition of “charm” could be said to be the power or value of delighting, attracting, or fascinating other people. It’s an intrinsic human characteristic but I’m sure it can be learned by those who start of with basic abilities.

One of my favour fictional characters, from the 1960s has this in bucket loads. Personified in the TV series The Saint[1], Simon Templar played by Roger Moore exuded charm. In this exhibition of charm, it’s more than an external attractiveness. It’s also a moral and ethical code.

Perhaps it’s not just charm that I’m discussing. When I asked the question of a supporter, what do you see in Boris Johnson? The answer came back – charisma. It’s a power to stand above the crowd and exert influence over people. Here’s another fuzzy characteristic. Everyone recognises charisma exists but may choose to describe it differently in different people.

The reality seems to be that charm and charisma may be combined but they have little to do with moral and ethical behaviour. However, the general perception is that there’s “good” in these characteristics. Is this obvious, and thus not warranting much further thought? Or is it, that because this seems obvious, that in the hands of the “ungodly,” as The Saint would say, these characteristics can feed unfairness, injustice, or corruption?

What I mean is that “bad” charming or charismatic people are allowed to get away with misdemeans and occasionally down right criminality without the accountability that would punish others. We can add to the equation the current social media explosion. Most platforms are a gift to the self-publicist. They can be a shop window and a soap box for the adoration of charming or charismatic people, good or bad.

Maybe instead of Twitter’s blue tick there ought to be an emoji of the devil or an angel. No – that would be worse than nothing at all. In the end we do depend on authors, journalists and investigators looking behind the masks that prominent personalities keep up. What I can say is that, if there are contemporary Robin Hoods that prevents the “ungodly” from succeeding, they may need help. It’s not so easy to stay one step ahead.


[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055701/

Eurovision

Eccentricity, excess and exuberance. That’s entertainment. Eurovision is a big mark on the calendar. Each year it’s getting bigger. It has songs and it has a contest and much more besides.

This year’s coverage is a bit OTT. Now, I like the occasional bacon and eggs for breakfast, but I don’t want it for lunch and dinner too. And for supper I’d like anything but bacon and eggs. Media’s May menu is a video age version of Monty Python’s Spam sketch. That’s how I’m getting to feel about the wall-to-wall coverage. Yes, you can have too much of a good thing.

That’s what’s special about Eurovision. It comes but once a year in a blaze of musical colour and preposterous lyrics. Then it’s gone only to rise like a phoenix in the year to come.

This scribbling is no criticism of the massive stage set and inventive use of every form of graphical illusion. Even some music. Liverpool is proving to be a number one venue for this extravaganza. The stage set and the mastery of its technical complexities are outstanding.

Please, no more Beatles illusions. We get it.

Earlier this evening, BBC Radio 4 gave us proof that Artificial intelligence (AI) has a way to go. It’s attempts at writing funny jokes are beyond a joke. With that in mind, maybe the writers of the hosts scripts for the semi-finals were using AI. I’d cringe even if I didn’t hide behind the sofa. I know British humour doesn’t always translate well but it’s better if it’s aimed at real humans.

Musicality is all well and good, it’s the weirdness that makes an act stand out. Staging a whole song around Edgar Allan Poe[1] is mind bending. Well, you might say, why not? I wish Austria well with their catchy use of Poe, Poe, and more Poe.

Australia is not in Europe. Who said that? It doesn’t matter. They are 100% welcome. Especially when they bring a regular rock rampage to the stage. Their efforts are not going to win. That much doesn’t matter. Their stadium rock show number is still going to do well.

I not sure why but my soft spot goes to Belgium. That guy has got a star quality that shines bright. Is he a contemporary version of Boy George? Not sure. Then there’s Cyprus. At the other end of the scale, he’s auditioning to be a Greek God. Thunder and lightning. Very Very Exciting (to quote Queen).

Sweden has the drama. It’s a mega blast that dominates the arena. She could be the winner.

Saturday evening should be a memorable triumph. Let’s hope it is for the sake of unity and good fun.

POST: Liverpool is twinned with Cologne in Germany. I’ve always found that a good match. Two major cities with a strong sense of their identity and place in the world.


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Allan_Poe

Deregulation

There’s nothing wrong with making an argument for deregulation. What’s absurd is to make that argument as an unchallengeable dogma. It’s the irrationality of saying that deregulation is good, and regulation is bad, de-facto. This kind of unintelligent nonsense does permeate a particular type of right-wing political thinking. It pops it’s head up in a lot of Brexiters utterances. For advocates of Brexit their great goal is to throw away rules and lower standards. Mostly, this is for financial gain.

Let’s take some simple examples. The reasons for rules and regulations can often be found in recent history. Hazards are recognised and action is taken.

There’s still lead paint to be found in many older houses. There was a time when such paint was used on children’s toys. Toy safety has been a confusing area of law, and there have been several sets of regulations since the 1960. From our current perspective this past laxness seems insane, but such lead paint mixtures were commonplace. In fact, all sorts of toxic chemicals have been used in widely used paints.

I remember working in one factory building where a survey was done of the surrounding grounds. Outside certain windows there were small fluorescent flags placed at in the grass verges. They marked places where minor amounts of radiation had been detected. This came from discarded paint brushes and tins that had accumulated in the war years. At that time radioactive luminescent paint was used to paint aircraft instrument dials.

Any arguments for the deregulation of toxic chemicals in commonly used paints should be one that is quashed instantly. However, some deregulation fanatics are only to happy to endorse a loosening of the rules that protect the public from toxic chemicals.

One result of the loosening of public protection is often to put greater profits in the hands of unscrupulous industrialist. Across the globe there are numerous cases studies of this sad folly. Newspapers and political parties that push the line that rules, regulations and regulators, by their very nature are crushing our freedoms are as bad as those unscrupulous industrialists.

Yes, there’s a case to be made for pushing back over-regulation. There’s risks we are prepared to take where the risks are low, and the benefits are large. This is a matter for intelligent debate and not throwing around mindless slogans. We should not be cowed by loud voices from small corners of society intent on tearing down decades of learning and sound practical laws. I could come up with an encyclopaedic list of examples. Opponents rarely, if ever want to address a particular case since it’s much easier for them to thunder off sweeping assertions. Beware these siren voices.

NOTE: The Toys (Safety) Regulations 2011 implemented the requirements of Directive 2009/48/EC, whose purpose is to ensure a high level of toy safety.

Oath

Oh dear. What do they say: the road to hell as being paved with good intentions. Maybe that’s a bit extreme. It’s not necessarily “hell” that I’m talking about here but something that does the opposite of what’s intended. I can image the planning meeting where someone pipes up – I’ve got an idea.

Swearing allegiance to the King[1] might sit well in a Hollywood movie of knights in armour and English castles standing proud against the green, green countryside. In the 21st century it sounds quaint and patronising to say the least. Strange vestiges of the historic riddle of our constitution.

The public is being asked to swear allegiance at the King’s coronation. These words are proposed: “I swear that I will pay true allegiance to Your Majesty, and to your heirs and successors according to law…….

Now, I know that Members of Parliament (MPs) must swear a similar allegiance before taking their seat in Parliament. MPs cannot take their seat, speak in debates, vote, or receive a salary until taking an oath or affirmation[2]. For them it’s more about being elected lawmakers than allegiance to a single person. It would make much more sense if they swore an oath to the British Constitution but there lies the problem.

Such quintessentially British activities hark back to a day when everyone knew the rules of cricket, knew their place and, as John Major once put it in his failed Back to Basics[3] campaign, old values. In 1953, the time of the last crowning, Britain was a deferential society, now it’s not.

The question is – should a “modern” constitutional monarchy be asking for allegiance in this public way whilst knowing that most the population will ignore the whole exercise? Not only that but a considerable number of people will think the exercise utterly ridiculous.

There’s not so many large counties in the world where subjects are asked to swear an oath to an unelected head of state and his dysfunctional family. That’s a family that has filled the media with unhappy stories for years. It gets stranger and stranger depending on how you look at it.

It’s not what you might call democracy or meritocracy in the normal sense, it’s more of a ritual of imperial legacy. In this green and pleasant land some people think this is a fantastic advertisement for our great nation across the world. I disagree.

British Citizens have a proud allegiance to their country, but this is to one man and his whole family. Now, that is peculiar. It’s feudal. Sadly, to point out the obvious just gets branded as anti-monarchist.


[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65435426

[2] https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elections-and-voting/swearingin/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_to_Basics_(campaign)