On the Wrong Planet

Building Modern Cathedrals

Managing a team of software engineers, as I do, was once likened to ‘herding cats.’ I knew immediately what was meant.

We expect a lot from software engineers. Their work requires them to obey very specific rules – rules of the computer. So when it comes to controlling them in other ways, their energy for obeying is all spent. The tedium of the machine’s demands dominate any demands that I may have.

The software engineer, or programmer, has to work to a consistently exact set of rules. Everything she or he creates must comply, there is not escape. The code must compile! Before the code can be used, or even tested, the exact syntactical rules of a software compiler must be obeyed, without question. You have nothing until all the compiler errors are gone.

Now getting your program to compile is only the first step. There are other things I want our software engineers to do. I want their software to do something useful. I want it to meet the customer needs and do this better than the competition.

To do this, I want us to create software that is easy to use. Anybody who has used a computer has come across software that does not seem to make sense; you just can’t work out what buttons to click or what to type on the keyboard to get what you want. I don’t want that to happen with our software.

Also, I do actually want the software to do what it is supposed to. If is has to add up a column of numbers and then find the average, then that is what it must do… under all circumstances. Is that too much to ask?

Then there are the bugs. What happens when the computer’s disk is full? Does the program grind to a halt, but never reveal the secret of why it has stopped doing anything. If you do things in an unusual order, or simply use a feature that no one actually tested, does it ‘crash’ or ‘hang’ – i.e. stop working either by disappearing, or freezing. Does the program ‘crash’ or ‘hang’ just occasionally, for no apparent reason? That is the most difficult one to sort out!

Finally, how quickly does the program work? If the user asks for something, by clicking on a button on the screen, how long do they have to wait before it happens?

The compiler checks for none of these things; all the compiler is interested in is that it can understand the code the programmer has written. It checks for syntax, a bit like a very fussy spelling and grammar checker. If you get both these correct, it is happy. If the sentence you have written is complete gibberish, then that is of no concern to the compiler.

In order to build large and complex applications with lots of useful features and do this in a reasonable time (months not years) you need a team effort. All the discipline of the software engineer must now happen whilst a whole team work on all the code together. Each coder will be working on different bits, but everything must join up and work together. This is not easy.

In spite of the demands on software engineers, my greatest satisfaction is to see their devotion to their art.

Our application is not the biggest or hardest piece of software that engineers have created. An operating system, the bit of software that runs the whole computer and allows various applications all to run together, is even more complex.

In his book ‘The Craftsman,’ Richard Sennett talks of modern crafts: Linux (an operating system), for Sennett, is the work of a community of craftsmen “who embody some of the elements first celebrated in the (Homeric) Hymn to Hephaestus”. Craftsmanship is “an enduring, basic human impulse, the desire to do a job well for its own sake”.

The Trial – Franz Kafka

We all have stories that you could not make up. I was once allocated the budget to recruit a new member of the engineering team I managed. However, before I could spend this approved budget, I had to apply for approval to ‘increase the head count’. To do this, I had to submit a particular form at a certain date to the HR department and this, I was told, would be reviewed at the next board meeting. My first submission was rejected, with the instruction that more information was needed, which I duly provided – a full A4 sheet justifying the need for the post. This was also rejected – I was informed that the extra information must fit the form. OK, much reduced information was now provided, and soon I heard from one source that the position had finally been approved, and I should expect official notification soon. I proceeded with the recruitment, but on the day before a second interview with a candidate to whom I expected to make a job offer, I was told through the official channel that in fact the position had not been approved. I cancelled the interview. Half an hour later I heard from a more senior person in the organisation that yes, the position had been approved. After explaining the situation, I got an e-mail endorsed by the CEO to confirm this. Through the recruitment agent I then tried to contact the candidate, who as it happens was flying to the UK for the interview. Sorry, I wanted to say, can you come after all? The message did not get through. The second interview never happened. Who in their right mind would want to work for an organisation which behaved like that? Like me? How could I find myself in such a position? In the event I had to continue the search and the position was filled more than a month later than it could have been.

Kafka knows this world. A world were little makes sense. Where each action you take made sense at the time, but, when you are judged by the result, none of it makes sense. A world where snippets of information must be weighed for their value in influencing your decision, but the rules are never clear and the results unpredictable. A world where your emotions, your anger, must be harnessed, not unleashed, if you are even to survive. In the human search for understanding, familiarity sufficient to achieve predictability, there is so much to digest, so many theories to test against the meagre data.

‘The Trial’ is probably Franz Kafka’s most pure example of his art. A complex fabric of topics, treated with consummate ease. In simple language.

On bureaucracy? Is Kafka’s world an amplification of the absurdity we find all around us? That absurdity that results from human behaviour that is the natural consequence of animals with consciousness, driven by emotion. We only pretend to be working in a rational framework of necessary rules designed to achieve a clear purpose. Worse than that, the fabric grows as we each attempt to carve out our own livelihood in what has gone before. We are at once cushioned and shielded from the original intent by the ever expanding fabric of the organisation. Inscrutable procedures are evident but few clues as to what you should do are available. The rules are never explicit; they depend on interpretation and everyone has their own interpretation.

Equally, this novel evokes a tingling sensation reminiscent of that curious state between wakefulness and sleep, between dream and reality where nightmares are mixed with reality and it is impossible to tell which is tangible and which pure imagination – or horror. For a Jew living since the holocaust this novel is a chilling echo to the view held by Nazis that Jews are in some way guilty to the extent that they must be eliminated, a whole race. But no one can say what they are guilty of.
Sex is a recurring theme. Kafka explores this in its many aspects. Read the novel, there is much, much more in store for you!

EDF – Rewards You for Using Less!

EDF now have an advertising campaign in which the strap line is “rewarding you for using less.” This is a very interesting concept in view of the way they treated me. I used less electricity (because I left my house vacant) and they rewarded me by charging me for a complete trip round the meter, which incidentally costs about £13,000!

I moved to a rented house in another part of the country and left my house in Bolton empty because of a change of job. As it happens, just before I moved I changed gas and electricity provider. This is something we should all do periodically in our free market economy of energy supply. I this case, it was a coincidence that I made the change just before moving out of the property. But the consequences were very interesting:

On 2nd January 2007 EDF Energy claimed £13,367 from my bank account. This was done under a Direct Debit arrangement. In the event, my bank honoured the payment, but informed me by letter: “We’ve made all the payments that you arranged to come out of your account this morning. Unfortunately, because there was not enough money in your account to cover them, this means your account is now over your overdraft limit.” A slight understatement!

EDF Energy customer services were phoned immediately on receiving the letter. They told me that obviously an error had been made, but that it would take weeks to refund the money as it would need to be approved by a series of managers. When I asked why a similar procedure was not in place when claiming large amounts from domestic customers, they declined to comment (the line went silent).

After discussion with my bank, I requested that the money be claimed back under the indemnity insurance for direct debits. Interestingly my bank did not tell me that this was possible when I phoned them initially. Until that could be arranged I had to transfer some of my savings into my current account, so that I could continue to operate my bank account. The bank charged me £30 for dealing with exceeding my overdraft limit plus some interest charges.

Having looked into this further, I find that this has occurred as a result of a series of mistakes or poor practice made by EDF Energy, Atlantic Electric and Gas (my previous supplier) and possibly a meter reader contracted by EDF Energy. These three organisations each played a part. Further investigation reveals further alarming practices by both EDF Energy and Atlantic Electric and Gas.

My findings are as follows:
1. EDF Energy failed to put in place any system to check a claim for payment against a domestic customer that was clearly ridiculous.
2. EDF Energy also failed to present me with an invoice for this claim for payment. Interestingly, this was a final payment arising from us moving out of the property with tenants moving in on 1st December 2006. Final meter readings were phoned through for both electricity and gas at the same time. We received a final invoice for the gas, which we settled by cheque, but no invoice for the electricity has arrived. The first we knew about it was when my bank contacted me.
3. A meter reading made on 25 November 2006 by a contractor was incorrect for both the daytime and night-time meters. Either this or EDF Energy deliberately changed the readings.
4. Atlantic Electric and Gas, who were my supplier until 12th March 2006 provided EDF Energy with estimated meter readings that were artificially high and presented these as actual readings. This enabled them to claim more money than they were due, at a time when they knew that they were loosing the account to EDF Energy. To me, this looks to me like sharp practice.
5. EDF Energy increased their prices just one day after I transferred to them as a supplier. Clearly I changed supplier in order to achieve the best possible price. This again looks suspicious to me. Did all their customers have increased pricing on 13th March 2006?
6. Atlantic Electric and Gas produced a series of inaccurate meter readings for my night meter. This simply suggests incompetence to me.

Poor Rowan – He is Doing his Best

The commentary and controversy about Rowan Williams’ recent foundation lecture at the Royal Courts of Justice entitled “Civil and Religious Law in England: a Religious Perspective” seems to be generated by people who neither heard the lecture nor took the trouble to read the transcript. Here is my attempt to translate – from Dr William’s regrettably difficult turn of phrase – the last three paragraphs (my apologies, Dr Williams, if I have mistranslated):

The concept of human rights now dominates the thinking behind the laws of many countries, including Britain. However, we must remember that our laws stem from our historical context of religion and culture. With respect to certain “aspects of marital law, the regulation of financial transactions and authorised structures of mediation and conflict resolution” there is room to reconcile Islamic law (Sharia) with UK law. This may be achieved by parallel systems, as is currently the case with the Beth Din, a Jewish court which mediates on a range of disputes within the orthodox community. If we wish to reconcile the particular religious beliefs of minority groups within our society with our current laws, both sides must be prepared to work at this (“transformative accommodation”). The legal systems stemming from particular religions must be careful not to alienate their followers by being “inflexible or over-restrictive” and the secular legal system may need to find creative ways to prevent “ghettoising and effectively disenfranchising a minority.” In running parallel systems, one religious and one secular, however, it is “unavoidable” that people will have to make choices between the two.

What is so wrong with what Rowan Williams has said? I suggest that the reaction that has ensued betrays a deep prejudice and bigotry. Dr William’s legacy may turn out to be as precipitator of a turning point in cultural reconciliation. Sorry, to translate: we may one day be thankful for what Rowan has said, because when we have worked out what he meant, it will help the world become a better place.

Public and Private – Do Not Mix

In the public sector, by due process of democracy, politicians are elected, majority parties form governments, ministers are appointed by a party elected party leaders (prime ministers) and ministers run departments to spend tax payers money. The government, and hence the ministers and the departments are accountable to the electorate via the ballot box. Opposition parties are able to challenge on a weekly basis (question time) the decisions made by the prime minister and his or her ministers. Guided by party policy, declared in a manifesto, ministers and or officials in a department can be held accountable and ultimately may loose their jobs if the wrong decisions are made or behaviour deemed unacceptable. The whole system is designed to achieve the best interests of the taxpayer, in terms of how our money should be spent. Government also proposes new legislation and deals on an hour by hour basis with both internal and external (foreign) issues that may arise, such as natural disasters, war, terrorism, and defending our borders against a foe. Success or failure is judged by how successfully the government meets the will of the people, collectively by a democratic system.
The private sector is regulated by legislation developed by various elected governments over a period of decades such as the companies act. It is, however, a completely different system. In this system everyone is accountable to the shareholders. The driving force is profit. Please let us not confuse this. The success or failure of a company is ultimately judged purely by profit. The ultimate threat to those running either publicly quoted or private companies is that the company may fail financially. If no profit is made, or insufficient investment is made by the share holders backing a new venture whilst it is being developed to profitability, financial liability will exceed assets and this will become evident in the accounts a company is required prepare under the companies act. If a company fails, the shareholders loose their money, the company is sold or closed, creditors may never get paid and jobs may be lost, in that order. In particular, the shareholders are motivated to ensure that the executives they employ to run their company do a good job in creating the profit, and it is the shareholders who decide whom they employ.
So when fines are imposed on an organisation, the effects are quite different under the two systems. Fining a company for misbehaviour or poor performance will affect the share holders first and foremost. The company in question may have to be closed, if the fines are large enough or frequent enough. Fining a part of government funded organisation however has no such effect. It merely reduces the funds available that may be needed to tackle the problem. No shareholders are penalised. No threat of closure exists.
So, Mr Cameron, when you propose that NHS trusts are to be fined for allowing MRSA infections in patients to occur, what exactly do you expect to happen? Who are the shareholders who will suffer personally as a result of the mismanagement? When did an NHS trust close and all the business go to competitors because of financial pressure as a result of such fines? The whole concept of private/public partnerships is totally misconceived. This is a good example of why. Please get your thinking straight.
Also when asked, you were unable to say how, realistically, you could tell if such an infection were brought into the hospital by the patient, or acquired by the patient whilst in hospital. Your off-the-cuff reaction was that “surely modern technology could be used to check each patient when they arrive by screening them”. Just think about that for a moment. What are the costs? What is the bureaucratic burden? What a complete and utter waste of time and money!
I’m only glad that the democratic system kicks in here, so that the holders of such poorly thought out thinking will not find themselves in power in our government! At least I hope that is the case. All systems are fallible.

Nutcracker – Gerald Scarfe Style

The Coliseum (St Martin’s Lane) is a spacious, opulent theatre of distinctive Rococo style, home of Sadler’s Wells Opera Company (now English National Opera) since 1968. Here is an institution of classic style; with gravitas and dignity. The auditorium is huge and grand, almost breathtaking on your first visit; the proscenium arch is the widest in London. There are innumerable boxes of varying styles and sizes; some clearly designed to be seen in rather than from which to see. With over 2300 seats, this is a large impressive theatre.

So this is a fitting setting indeed for the latest English National Ballet production of Tchaikovsky’s Nutcracker which breaks some conventions and challenges the style barriers for this much loved Christmas tradition. With a compelling mix of old and new styles, the first act was a stunning array of humour, style and story portrayed by dance and mime. Traditional German wooden nutcracker dolls usually crack nuts in their mouths; this nutcracker, however, cracks nuts between his legs – there is a very dark joke there somewhere! Grandfather flirts with house guest Miss V. Aggra, to the consternation of Grandmother. When given a phial of medicine by Herr Drosselmeyer, he is transformed from aged Zimmer-frame user to agile and comic star. He tops an initial circus level summersault laden dance with a spectacular second wind (more Viagra!) ending in a frankly dangerous stunt with his Zimmer frame. The army of mice wear gas masks; the toy soldiers include those arriving by parachute; the snow fairies arrive through the opened door of a fridge and Clara and her Prince leave on a paper aeroplane!

The second act was a little disappointing after the standard set in the first: the medley of dances (Spanish, Chinese, Arabian, Russian etc) in a land of sweets had some original touches. Clara and the Prince viewed from a box of chocolates. The Russian dance was performed in a turquoise bear outfit, the Chinese dancers showed again the humour and slick mesmerising sparkle of Act 1. However, for the Sugar Plum Fairy pas de deux, and their solo set pieces, choreography reverted back to the traditional Ivanov version. We all love this of course, but have seen it so many times before. At this point, Gerald Scarfe’s set had nothing to add to the atmosphere.

Global Economy – Personal Choice

I ordered two tickets for the ballet from londonwestendtheatretickets.com. Seven days later, they arrived – from Oslo. Curious?

So what is happening here? londonwestendtheatretickets.com has clearly chosen to contract its ticket distribution process, and the best bid was from a company in Norway (!?). The tickets were sent by airmail. The risk of them arriving late was compounded by their long journey – they warned me to leave 7 days before they might arrive and they were not wrong. Obviously, their carbon footprint must have been a little larger than being printed and posted from London, but for something so light, is that important? However, unless londonwestendtheatretickets.com is run by idiots, it must make commercial sense to use this contractor.

Of course today we should all been concerned about carbon footprint. For example, shipping tomatoes and other produce from Israel to the UK, by air freight is often quoted. In this case, however, it may make sense, commercially and environmentally. The cost (and environmental impact) of heating a greenhouse in England to grow the same product is actually higher than the airfreight footprint (the necessary sunlight in Israel is free). However, the irrigation needed to grow organic carrots in Israel for consumption in the UK could be destroying the environment.

Perhaps this highlights the need for sensible restrictions of air freight. It is reminiscent of the use of containers, which in recent decades have allowed a free economy between road and rail. Who won? Well, left to commercial pressures, always the lowest cost options – very often road, although the use of rail has actually increase in the UK in recent years. So is this where government tariffs come in? Just make it the lowest cost to use the most environmentally friendly option.

Come to that, a ticket is not something that should need to be sent through the post, anyway. When you check in to an airline, all you need is your passport and a reference number (often, only your passport). Why can’t I check in to the theatre in the same way? Well of course I can, but using a credit card. However, my expectation is that this will be arduous and stressful. I have to use the machine in the theatre to get the tickets printed – I’ll probably be arriving at the last minute. Will there be enough machines. If I can’t get the machine to work, say I can’t work out which card I used, what will I do? Will there be adequate support? Will the box office even be open? So I opt for making sure that I have the physical tickets in my hot paw. I truly didn’t expect that I would be using airfreight in this process, though. It is my choice – maybe next time I will make sure I use the environmentally friendly option.

So what is bin Laden’s problem?

At http://www.acommonword.com/, 138 Muslim scholars, clerics and intellectuals have come together to declare the common ground between Christianity and Islam. Since October 10th, 2007, 3560 visitors have endorsed the site. Today, this same group of Muslims responded with a half page advert in the Sunday Times, to deliver a “Muslim Message of Thanks and of Christmas and New Year Greetings.” This is a very positive gesture in a mad world where differing points of view are normally so polarised.

In 1947, the United Nations approved the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine (originally 1920) into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Arab League rejected the plan, but on May 14, 1948, Israel declared its independence. We should all remember what US and UK (supported by Australian and Polish) action was taken starting on March 18^th 2003, to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein. The resulting war has resulted in over 4000 coalition casualties and more than 600,000 Iraqi deaths.

Meanwhile, reported on Xinhua, a Chinese news site: “A year after former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was executed, his influence is still strongly palpable at his hometown as the country remains polarized in sectarian hatred.” Abdullah Jbara, governor of Salahudin province in northern Iraq, told Xinhua that the role Saddam had played should be viewed in an impartial manner just like any other political figures in the history. “The man had good acts as well as bad ones. So we need to look at his good deeds and make use of them, and at the same time we need to fix the wrongdoing he had committed,” said Jabara, who gained reputation and respect in the province for insisting that Saddam should be buried at his birth place instead of a secret location. This comes after a report in Reuters on 6^th December: “Iraq will have to cut food rations in 2008 because of insufficient funds,” Trade Minister Abdul Falah al-Sudany said. So after all that has happened, and using a ration system developed by Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi people now face harsher rationing than was needed when the West imposed trade embargoes on Hussein. Are we proud of the progress we have made?

Also, in a statement posted on the Internet on 29-12-07, Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden accused the United States of having a plot to take control of Iraq’s oil (is this news?). In the statement, bin Laden also accused Washington of seeking to build military bases in Iraq and dominate the region. The United States is making efforts to rebuild a pro-Washington national unity government in Iraq, which is meant “to give the Americans all they wish of Iraq’s oil”, said the statement, urging Iraqis to reject it. bin Laden also made very clear in this statement that a primary concern was the fate of the Palestinian people, and his intention of giving them back their territory between the river Jordan and the Sea.

So, whilst a small group of Muslims make strenuous efforts to bring peace and understanding between Islam and Christian groups, there is a miserable response from the Christian community. Instead, Al-Qaida will continue to gain sympathisers because of historical US and UK action in Palestine and Iraq.

Human Rights – Not for Al-Jedda

Do we take the law on human rights seriously? It seems that the British legal system is prepared to indulge in petty argument about jurisdiction rather than deliver justice. An Iraqi citizen, who subsequently claimed asylum in the UK in the 1990s returned to Iraq in October 2004, was arrested and has been detained in Basra ever since. He may well be a terrorist, but no charges have been brought against him. In this country, of course, he could be detained for no longer than 28 days under such circumstances. However, in Iraq, it seems, detention can be indefinite. Meanwhile, this case attracts very limited coverage in the press, or even by Amnesty International. Why? Have all you journalists and campaigners gone to sleep for Christmas?

Hilal Abdul-Razzaq Ali Al-Jedda, 50 year old father of 6 and holder of dual British and Iraqi nationality has been held prisoner in Iraq since being arrested on October 10^th 2004 by US forces and handed over to the British forces. He complains that his detention infringes his rights under article 5(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. These claims were rejected by the Queen’s Bench Divisional Court and also by the Court of Appeal; both courts “delivered lengthy and careful judgments, commensurate with the importance and difficulty of the issues then raised”

From 29^th to 31st October the House of Lords had a hearing of his case based on a new question: “the attributability in international law of the conduct of which the appellant complains.” (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ ldjudgmt/jd071212/jedda-1.htm). So is Al-Jedda subject to UN or British law? The judgement was made by the House of Lords on 12^th December. After thirty nine paragraphs, covering the history of who had jurisdiction over whom during both the course of the Iraq war and the period following it, we finally hear: “There is in my opinion only one way in which they can be reconciled: by ruling that the UK may lawfully, where it is necessary for imperative reasons of security, exercise the power to detain authorised by UNSCR 1546 and successive resolutions, but must ensure that the detainee’s rights under article 5 are not infringed to any greater extent than is inherent in such detention. I would resolve the second issue in this sense.

Furthermore, a third issue arises: “whether English common law or Iraqi law applies to the appellant’s detention.” Apparently, after further deliberation “The appellant’s claim in tort is governed by the law of Iraq”

In other words, the British acting in Iraq can make up their own laws, not the same as those exercised within Britain, and when it is convenient, they can claim that it is nothing to do with them, in any case, since Iraq is now in charge of their own country.

Ethiopia – Unique Watercolours

Artist and explorer Sir William Cornwallis Harris led a mission to the Court of Shewa in the Highlands of Ethiopia between 1841 and 1843. Whilst there he recorded in watercolour a unique collection of images for a three volume book about the country (The highlands of Aethiopia – 3 vols., 1844). Some of his illustrations were also used in the Illustrated London News, and were some of the first images the western world saw of that part of Africa, its people and culture. The illustration shown here dates from a earlier hunting expedition into the interior of southern Africa in 1836-7.

A unique insight into the perception of Africa in the 1840’s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Cornwallis_Harris