If This Is "Vintage Wolfe" What Does That Make Me?

 Browsing the fiction department in Foyles the other week, I found this...

Um. I read this when it first came out.

It's now "Vintage".

That wasn't supposed to happen.

And yet, it did.

Two Shots of Regent's Park

 

Sis and I took a stroll from Primrose Hill through Regent's Park the other Saturday. The view from Primrose Hill needs more than an iPhone to do it justice, but the view over the Regent's Canal and the playing fields are okay. I had no idea there was so much space given over to football pitches, and it looked like every third amateur football team was out that Saturday. And why not?

The Drums Are In The Middle

Where are the drums in your audiophile soundstage?

They're in the middle.

Which is odd, because in the studio, the drummer is usually in an isolation booth. A very isolation booth. Nowhere near the middle of anything.

In the mix, the drums are always in the middle.

Those are the rules.

Because at a live gig, the drums are always in the middle. (Even in an orchestra.)

Here's your starter for ten. All those speakers on and around that big stage. Stereo or mono?

Nope. Those speakers are mono. Maybe different frequencies from different parts of the speaker cabinet, but all the speaker units are relaying the same thing on both sides. (Unless they want a sound effect.)

Live concert speakers have to be mono, or most of the audience would get a horrible sound experience. Like sitting behind the horns at an orchestral concert.

The soundstage on a CD is not an attempt to present what was in the studio (there's no studio for EDM, for one thing).

It's an attempt to create a kind-of-live experience.

So now you're going to mix the first CD from a new band. There's a limited budget for mixing time. What do you do?

Make all the channels equal, both sides.

Just like it would be at the gig.

Then throw in enough differences to spread the sound between the speakers. Maybe shift the guitar slightly to the right, the bass to the left, the keyboards to the right of the guitar, but keep the sax solo in the middle. Because that's what would happen at the gig. Maybe someone wants the chorus voices to be well to the left and the synth to the right.

Yep that sounds good. Next track.

A bunch of the CDs I have must have been made like that.



And a lot were not.



(YMMV via You Tube and your hi-fi.)

Modern abstract music depends on sound design for its effect. Orchestras have a bias to the right where the horns, cellos and basses are. EDM is designed to swirl around between the speakers. Though the voice is usually in the middle, because that's where we expect the singer to be on stage.

But the results all have one thing in common.

The drums are always in the middle.

How To Avoid an Understaffed NHS and Logistics Industry Next Time

The next time there's a pandemic, or some other major incident, we cannot have a crucial proportion of the nurses, lorry drivers and other such key people upping and going home, never to return.

It's obvious we can't leave it to employers to be sensible about this. For the last couple of decades, at least, the NHS has preferred to use agencies to strip entire graduating classes out of third-world countries, instead of training UK-resident and rooted people. No adults in charge of recruitment and training there then.

The UK's time in the EU let UK employers get away with egregious recruitment and training policies. The last industry that messed-up that badly was banking, and that is now regulated to within an inch of its capacity for mis-behaviour.

Same thing has to happen with employment.

Bear with me for a moment.

The Employment Regulator would, on an industry-by-industry basis, review the roles and tasks within each industry, and separate them into essential and non-essential. A proportion of those roles judged 'essential' would have to be staffed by UK resident and rooted people, and the employer would need to demonstrate that they had training schemes in place to maintain that proportion. That proportion is the Essential Role Threshold (ERT). Expect it to be around 95%+ of the roles.

Non-essential roles can be staffed by anyone.

What's an essential role? One which is required to ensure the proper functioning of the society and economy. Lorry drivers. Nurses. Doctors. Firemen. Paramedics. Train and bus drivers. The guys who clean sewers. Telecoms engineers. Supermarket workers. Farmers. Policemen. Judges and other Court officials. Electricity, gas and water maintenance guys. Air traffic controllers. Pilots and aircrew. Plumbers. Builders of all trades. Armed Forces, MI5/6 and GCHQ (for which the ERT is 100%).

What's a non-essential role? Anything to do with marketing, sales, accounting, media, entertainment, fashion, cosmetics, restaurants, sports, and general management. Nurses and doctors are essential, but NHS bureaucrats are not. Neither are HMRC staff, journalists, lawyers, local and central government workers and any other bureaucrat.

It will get subtle. I'd say the people who run the BACS and other banking payment systems are essential, but the people who run the management information systems are not.

Anyone can do a non-essential job. Important to understand that point.

A company with essential roles would need to meet the ERT for those roles. Only legal UK residents with roots here would count towards a company's meeting its quota. The company can hire who it likes to do what roles it likes, but a multi-lingual renting bachelor who speaks three languages and has a readily transferrable skill doesn't count towards the 95%. Neither does anyone with dual (or more) nationalities or foreign partners. Or who has a property for personal use outside the UK. Outsourcing not allowed for essential roles. Onshore only. (Details to be clarified.)

Companies with over a certain number people in essential roles would need a training scheme in place for those roles. The NHS has to have training. A small firm of plumbers does not. People could do the training on spec and pay for it themselves, as lorry drivers do now, or companies could pay for someone to train, in a refund-or-work arrangement.

For these purposes "employing" includes "using subcontractors", so Pimlico Plumbers, which does not employ plumbers, would need to demonstrate that it has training scheme in place to replace its subcontractors as they leave. Swiping other people's staff does not count. (Details to be clarified on this one. Courier companies have the same problem.)

An organisation looking to make staff cuts would not be allowed to cut essential workers unless it could demonstrate that it had cut all the non-essential workers that it could.

Companies that could not reach the Essential Role Threshold within, say, five years of the Act coming into force, would be required to close down that part of their business.

The whole thing is monitored by the Employment Regulator.

The effect would be to restrict employment in essential roles to legal UK residents. People from other countries would still be able to work in market research, banking, advertising, women's fashion, non-food retail, manicure and personal care, restaurants, and a scad of other industries and roles.

It's a thought.

"Trait Conscientiousness"

I've been listening to Jordan B Peterson telling us that the people who do well in work have decent IQs and are high in "trait conscientiousness". 

I was working at the time, so I nodded along as it fitted my experience.

But not me.

Which I have noticed since retiring.

Conscientious people are supposed to miss working. So much that they go volunteer, or do something part-time. Or fall apart if they can't.

Not going to happen to me.

It's not that I don't give a toss about details. I do when it matters.

I didn't get my meaning from my employment. I called it my "day job" for heaven's sake.

I don't miss it one bit.

I'm not sure where I do get "meaning".

If I get any, and more to the point...

If I need any.

There are things I like to do.

There are things I need to do, such as regular exercise, and the usual slew of household and personal maintenance.

None of them are the kinds of things that conscientious people call "meaning" or "purpose".

Maybe I'm more chilled than I think I am.

Or to say the same thing another way: I am (very) low in "trait conscientiousness".

Pretentious Art Commentaries (More)

I don't usually link to someone else's work, but in this case, it's just so apposite to the recent Tate Modern post about BS commentaries accompanying art. It's a post by the legendary Dave Trott (okay, legendary if you know the UK advertising business) and it's about the same subject, but from a participant's point of view.

It's here.

Calling Bullshit - Bergstrom and West

I read Bergstrom and West's book Calling Bullshit recently. It's the latest in a long line of books about how various people attempt to confuse, mislead, mis-direct and otherwise bullshit us for their own nefarious ends. The line started with Darrell Huff's immortal How To Lie With Statistics and Bergstrom and West do a good job of updating it. They still believe in p-scores, but at least they describe p-hacking well enough that you likely won't trust p-scores again.

My inner analytic philosopher feels they fold too much into the idea of BS. Lying, deception, manipulation, gas-lighting, mis-direction, and numerous others, are distinct types of mis-communication, and we lose some insight by treating them all as aspects of one underlying thing.

Harry Frankfurt wrote his famous little book On Bullshit because he felt that bullshit was something new. He realised that all the hitherto forms of mis-communication were attempts to conceal the truth, and were deliberate, insofar as the liar knew they were telling a lie. The BS-merchant does not care whether what they say is true or false. They don't even care if it makes sense. Nor do they care whether you know the truth already. Their concern is to block the communication channels with their noise. This was what Frankfurt wanted to highlight: that our BS-filled media consists mostly of noise intended to keep other noise out, and that process corrupts the media, since it becomes concerned only with whose noise they transmit.

Recently a doctor in America claimed that it was within the scope of her Hippocratic Oath not to treat people who would not get vaccinated. Her claim that the Hippocratic oath is very science-based and that the "science" said being unvaccinated was a threat... this is not bullshit. It is either deeply cynical or deeply deranged, and it needs to be treated as such. The deliberate attempts to create an atmosphere of fear in Spring 2020 by almost every Government's PR agencies, were not bullshit. It was propaganda intended to dupe the citizenry, and that is not on the same moral plane as a PR campaign for soap.

However responsible and measured what Bergstrom and West say is, you and I don't have the time, and we don't have the resources of a pair of academics, to fact-find, investigate and provide evidence for our claim that today's report about, say and, a hot topic in the UK at the time of writing, how it is essential that the Government allow Eastern European truck drivers into the country to fill the alleged 100,000 shortfall in the number of drivers.

This example is special pleading with a helping of BS on the side. The BS is a) the estimate of the shortfall, and b) that it can only be filled by Eastern Europeans. How do I know these things? Am I an expert on the Logistics industry in the UK? No, and I don't need to be. I am familiar, as anyone over the age of forty is, with the attitudes and behaviour of the people who run the UK's larger businesses. They don't want to train anyone, they don't want to have to pay a market-clearing wage, and they don't want permanent employees. They have shown these behaviours for decades. So of course they want to import ready-made drivers who will work for less for all sorts of reasons.

Those are the kind of rules-of-thumb that ordinary people need. Here are some more of mine.

Any subject with the word 'Science' in its title, most likely isn't, and nor are any of its claims. Hence, any research about the benefits or faults of lifestyle-choices can be ignored. (Bacon is bad for you, red wine is good for you, you only have to walk three times a week...)

Anyone who says 'The Science is In' does not understand how science works. Newtonian physics was "in" right up to the day in 1905 when it wasn't.

Projections, forecasts, models and other forms of computerised number-generation are mostly hokum. The Met Office has been trying to forecast the weather since before I was born, and it's still mostly wrong.

If the cui who bono's from saying it, says it, nobody should be surprised. Hence, you can ignore all those reports from charities, NGOs or professional bodies showing that whatever it is they are trying to stop has got worse and they need more money.

Never trust any process that generates revenue as long as it doesn't solve the problem.

Real experts know how little they really know, and how inadequate that is. As a result they will never work for or advise a) Governments, b) big business, c) International NGOs. Those "experts" being quoted in the Press? Mostly they aren't.

Insiders are not going to explain what really goes on to outsiders, and most journalists, academics, civil servants, politicians and regulators are outsiders, so none of them have a clue.

Governments listen to the advisors whose advice backs up the desired policy. When the desired policy changes, so do the advisors.

Scientists and experts have very, very narrow fields of expertise. Once they start talking outside that, say, about public policy, they are likely as ignorant as you or me.

Percentages and other comparisons are meaningless without context. That context is carefully with-held in the publication and press release.

Watch for odd phrases and metaphors, as well as stock phrases, cliches, suddenly fashionable phrases, dog-whistles and other oddities of language.

The graphics are probably there to create an impression, not provide information. Best not look at all.

Anything that sounds too good or too bad to be true, probably is. (Props to Bergstrom and West for that one.)

Faced with profit claims by a company, check how much tax they are paying. If they aren't, the Inland Revenue doesn't think they are making a profit. (Props to Terry Smith for that one.)

If a Government knows something is Bad, it bans, restricts or protects against it tout de suite. Or it makes you take precautions, like wearing seatbelts. If all it does is fine or tax you for doing it, then the Government knows it is actually pretty harmless.

Never trust anyone whose advice will result in job losses and inconvenience for other people.

Only believe it after it has been officially denied.

The majority of press articles are advertising or PR of one form or another. Journalists do not leave the office now. They work with what comes to them - it wasn't a journalist who found the Panama Papers, or the Great MPs Expenses Scandal. Journalists re-cycle press releases, official announcements, and the Press Agencies.

The media does not care about content. It cares about clicks. The purpose of the media, including Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and the others, is to provide user / reader / viewer attention to advertisers. The "content" is there to draw in that attention, whether or not the content is true. So almost everything in the media is BS (that is, its truth or falsity is irrelevant to the editors). It was always a bit thus, but it is now almost all thus.

Finally, if you want to see a melt-down, ask Karl Popper's Question: "under what circumstances would you give up that belief / policy / law / judgement / theory / hypothesis?".

What do you do if someone pulls some egregious BS, gaslighting, manipulation or other such on you?

Friends don't BS friends. So whoever it is, they aren't a friend. Which means you act politely, change the subject, remember a pressing appointment, and otherwise leave. They won't miss you and you won't miss them. Fellow employees, however, BS each other all the time, but a lot of that is work, and you have to BS them back. It's expected. What you do when faced with a snowflake, I'm not sure, but the current consensus is: unplug your laptop and run to a safe space.

Why Some People Are Not Going Back To The Office

It seems that Civil Servants and the staff of retail banks, insurance companies and other large office-based employers are not rushing back to their offices.

The usually-cited reason they should is this, from a letter to the Daily Telegraph:

For the employee, interpersonal contact in the office promotes problem-solving, communication and the generation of ideas. It reduces isolation.

To which I say: BS. Or rather: that may be true in some places, but I haven't worked in any of them for the last twenty years.

Isolation is what you feel:

when you cannot talk, write, or even use a facial expression, without first estimating its reception by the audience

when you are surrounded by people who feel they can police what you say and how you say it

when there are corporate policies encouraging certain styles of communication, and penalties for failing to go along

when the decisions affecting you and your work are made by people you never meet for reasons that have nothing to do with any of your concerns

when you are in the middle of an over-crowded open-plan office, and for days on end, everyone you need to talk to is on a conference call, in a meeting, or just doesn't have any time to help you problem-solve and generate ideas

when the people you need help and replies from, can reject your request because they "don't have the resources"

when you cannot get a budget for the things you need to do your job

when you cannot get the support for the things you need to do your job

when you are the only person in your team using the skills you use and have the knowledge you have

This was the daily life of most of those Civil Servants and other Big Office workers in 2019

Why? How? 

A lot of employers spent much of the years between 2000-2019 making their offices less and less pleasant places by spending less and less on the buildings.

Where once there was a seat for everyone, now there is a seat for just over half of them.

Where once everyone had their own place, now nobody does.

Where once Directors and other Big Beasts had their own offices, safely away from us Little People, now they are scattered around the floor and we Little People can't relax, communicate and be creative, in case we're doing it in the wrong way.

Where once you sat with your team, now total strangers can perch amongst you for a day. They never introduce themselves and avoid eye contact, so nobody talks all day because it might be someone from HR, Audit, or some other internal policing group.

The quality of HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) got worse and worse, because the requirements are based on building size, not occupancy.

The offices smelled of food from 11:30 to 14:30 every day.

Don't even ask about the toilets.

This too was the daily life of those Civil Servants and other Big Office workers in 2019.

The horrible quality of office life in 2019 was the main reason people packed up their laptops and went home so willingly in March 2020.

Nobody is talking about this.

If "working in offices" was so beneficial, nobody would need to make people do it. But they do, so it isn't.