Psychophant's Rants
22.5.05
Dates and time travel
This will be quite uninteresting compared to the title, as I will just discuss the mechanics of my blog, and a few other related matters.
As I estimate I have some five readers (being optimistic), I feel I have to explain a few things, as if this was a friendly meeting around a table.
The observant will have noticed that the date of a post usually has nothing to do with the date it is published. Not to mention the use of Spanish time when the rest of the blog is in English. This date inconsistency also enables me to sneak posts, when there are two posts published one after the other , but with different dates. Considering my slow posting rate that would ensure that readers just read the latest if it is new, and skip any older posts, missing the post. Most of the time it is an accident while I try to profit from being in the mood to write but a few times it has been deliberate.
The fault is, indirectly, blogger's. The time that blogger stores is that when you start to write. Very often I start but cannot finish due to other time pressures. Or I am not sure if I should publish the piece. The rate of discards has improved the last six months but I still delete close to one third of the posts I write. So at times posts can spend days as a draft, waiting completion or a verdict.
I could edit the date, and I have used that a few times, specially when I do one of my tricks to force me to write. I write a title, and maybe a sentence or two, and then save it as a draft. The rest of the day that title serves as a rallying point for my thoughts, so I can sit down on the evening and write a couple of hundreds of words around it. Those I would date with the time I actually set down to write, not that earlier starting point.
All of this is because I have just published a post written last Tuesday, about a book. I was waiting for a copy of it to arrive as a present to a friend (who may read this) before blowing up the surprise. But thinking about it, what mattered about the gift was the book itself and why I do feel this impulse to get some particular friends a copy, not the surprise. The reasons to give it are mine, not his. And if I send it as a surprise, that will bring up all kinds of subtext, such as what have I done that he gives me this, should I give something in return (no, please), why have I been chosen (because I believe you will enjoy it, nothing more, nothing less).
If you are an usual reader of mine and you receive nothing from me, do not despair. I am giving away roughly one a year, so maybe next year it will be you. Or you can get the book and let me know what you think. I would appreciate that. But wait a few days yet. As it may be you after all. ¶ 10:53 AM 0 comments
This will be quite uninteresting compared to the title, as I will just discuss the mechanics of my blog, and a few other related matters.
As I estimate I have some five readers (being optimistic), I feel I have to explain a few things, as if this was a friendly meeting around a table.
The observant will have noticed that the date of a post usually has nothing to do with the date it is published. Not to mention the use of Spanish time when the rest of the blog is in English. This date inconsistency also enables me to sneak posts, when there are two posts published one after the other , but with different dates. Considering my slow posting rate that would ensure that readers just read the latest if it is new, and skip any older posts, missing the post. Most of the time it is an accident while I try to profit from being in the mood to write but a few times it has been deliberate.
The fault is, indirectly, blogger's. The time that blogger stores is that when you start to write. Very often I start but cannot finish due to other time pressures. Or I am not sure if I should publish the piece. The rate of discards has improved the last six months but I still delete close to one third of the posts I write. So at times posts can spend days as a draft, waiting completion or a verdict.
I could edit the date, and I have used that a few times, specially when I do one of my tricks to force me to write. I write a title, and maybe a sentence or two, and then save it as a draft. The rest of the day that title serves as a rallying point for my thoughts, so I can sit down on the evening and write a couple of hundreds of words around it. Those I would date with the time I actually set down to write, not that earlier starting point.
All of this is because I have just published a post written last Tuesday, about a book. I was waiting for a copy of it to arrive as a present to a friend (who may read this) before blowing up the surprise. But thinking about it, what mattered about the gift was the book itself and why I do feel this impulse to get some particular friends a copy, not the surprise. The reasons to give it are mine, not his. And if I send it as a surprise, that will bring up all kinds of subtext, such as what have I done that he gives me this, should I give something in return (no, please), why have I been chosen (because I believe you will enjoy it, nothing more, nothing less).
If you are an usual reader of mine and you receive nothing from me, do not despair. I am giving away roughly one a year, so maybe next year it will be you. Or you can get the book and let me know what you think. I would appreciate that. But wait a few days yet. As it may be you after all. ¶ 10:53 AM 0 comments
17.5.05
Favourite book, II
Earlier on I mentioned here my love for The Alexandria Quartet. Changing style completely, and yet a book that has probably influenced more than anything else I have read since turning thirty (quite long time ago).
It is classed as Science Fiction, even though it took place in the then present (late nineties) time. But it is really fiction about Science. How Science works, how it should work, and why it works. As well as a great insight in ourselves, and how introverted people face the world. Or don't face the world.
It is a simple, unassuming book, delightfully written. Its importance is more based on the effect it had on me, as it helped me decide what I was doing, why I was doing it, and what I wanted to do in the future. It certainly was not Connie Willis intention to change my world view, just to show how ridiculous and human we are.
It is also one of those books I reread every year, forced by a strange impulse that makes me give a copy of it as a present every year. I gift it to people in Science, and so far it has been well received.
Every year, when I ponder if I should give it as a present to someone, to check if it has suddenly become dated, if somehow it was just a fad that now is over, if it has lost meaning. It is also a book in that size I like best, read in two or three hours, so it does not take much to read again. And so far it has always pulled through, and I send someone a gift again.
The book is Bellwether. If you have not received a copy from me, read it anyway, and then tell me what you think.
[1st of July 2005 Edit: This year's gift was succesful, and the reader liked the book a lot. It is a great pleasure for me to share knowledge like this.] ¶ 1:42 PM 0 comments
Earlier on I mentioned here my love for The Alexandria Quartet. Changing style completely, and yet a book that has probably influenced more than anything else I have read since turning thirty (quite long time ago).
It is classed as Science Fiction, even though it took place in the then present (late nineties) time. But it is really fiction about Science. How Science works, how it should work, and why it works. As well as a great insight in ourselves, and how introverted people face the world. Or don't face the world.
It is a simple, unassuming book, delightfully written. Its importance is more based on the effect it had on me, as it helped me decide what I was doing, why I was doing it, and what I wanted to do in the future. It certainly was not Connie Willis intention to change my world view, just to show how ridiculous and human we are.
It is also one of those books I reread every year, forced by a strange impulse that makes me give a copy of it as a present every year. I gift it to people in Science, and so far it has been well received.
Every year, when I ponder if I should give it as a present to someone, to check if it has suddenly become dated, if somehow it was just a fad that now is over, if it has lost meaning. It is also a book in that size I like best, read in two or three hours, so it does not take much to read again. And so far it has always pulled through, and I send someone a gift again.
The book is Bellwether. If you have not received a copy from me, read it anyway, and then tell me what you think.
[1st of July 2005 Edit: This year's gift was succesful, and the reader liked the book a lot. It is a great pleasure for me to share knowledge like this.] ¶ 1:42 PM 0 comments
12.5.05
PostSecret
I have avoided linking other pages, mainly because this is after all a personal project. However I have felt the urge many times to just present something that resonates deeply in me. This is the first time the resonance has been strong enough to break through my own self-concern barriers.
I have already written about my ambivalent position concerning secrets. And I find I keep too many of them, specially for a sloppy keeper like me. And I even manage to lose them, make writing mistakes, give too much information...
This blog just feels like me, on a wider scale. And that comforting thought that I am not alone, but that there are many others gripped by their own secrets.
In certain respects this texts have been my ongoing "Post a Secret". And yet the deepest secrets remain untouched, unconcerned because I am just unable to put them into writing here. Well, maybe they will not pass through my fingers into the screen, or if they do pass my censoring editor hand. But I can write them by hand. And then find enough strength to post it. Cause and effect seems somehow weaker that way, so all my internal alarms are dulled.
And anyway, even if one of my secrets is out in the open, it is safe in the crowd. Because the owners cannot know it is mine, and even my friends will be confused, as there are many that could be mine, there are many that are mine, but written by another hand, told by another mouth.
A brief but joyful release. Like masturbation. And like masturbation I get back to it time after time, both that public secret that only I know is mine, and all those of my secrets that I share with others.
And, to be sincere, I wanted to try that "Blog this!" button. ¶ 12:28 PM 0 comments
I have avoided linking other pages, mainly because this is after all a personal project. However I have felt the urge many times to just present something that resonates deeply in me. This is the first time the resonance has been strong enough to break through my own self-concern barriers.
I have already written about my ambivalent position concerning secrets. And I find I keep too many of them, specially for a sloppy keeper like me. And I even manage to lose them, make writing mistakes, give too much information...
This blog just feels like me, on a wider scale. And that comforting thought that I am not alone, but that there are many others gripped by their own secrets.
In certain respects this texts have been my ongoing "Post a Secret". And yet the deepest secrets remain untouched, unconcerned because I am just unable to put them into writing here. Well, maybe they will not pass through my fingers into the screen, or if they do pass my censoring editor hand. But I can write them by hand. And then find enough strength to post it. Cause and effect seems somehow weaker that way, so all my internal alarms are dulled.
And anyway, even if one of my secrets is out in the open, it is safe in the crowd. Because the owners cannot know it is mine, and even my friends will be confused, as there are many that could be mine, there are many that are mine, but written by another hand, told by another mouth.
A brief but joyful release. Like masturbation. And like masturbation I get back to it time after time, both that public secret that only I know is mine, and all those of my secrets that I share with others.
And, to be sincere, I wanted to try that "Blog this!" button. ¶ 12:28 PM 0 comments
10.5.05
Outsourcing
The great corporate fashion, or the new corporate anorexia, leaving just the bare bones and an image that cannot survive on its own.
The problem I have with outsourcing is that it means a loss of control on the part of the company or the government in exchange of a supposed reduction in cost. And I say supposed because outsourcing is based in two fallacies.
The first is that the bigger and more specialized the company, the lower it costs to do things. Anyone who watches corporate structures know that only in very well led companies does the scale economies spread cost reductions through the structure. And specialization enables you to do harder and more complex things, but not to do it cheaply, if only because the equipment costs are much higher, and the specialist salaries are also much higher than unqualified personnel.
The second is that a short term benefit is better than a long term benefit. Actually, that is true but certain companies, those that are publicly traded with a low action capital , which means that a sharp decrease in stock value makes them vulnerable to acquisition at prices lower than the company assets value. That happened a lot in the eigties and nineties, and it has scarred management for years. Take a healthy manufacturing company, and when a small crisis or image problem (or stocks manipulation) makes it cheap, it is bought under its value, and then it is butchered and sold for parts. We still suffer the consequences of that burnt earth policy, as companies are willing to falsify reports, benefits and public information to diminish their vulnerability. And woe to the management that does not make the quarterly report better than the previous one.
It is mostly an accounting trick. Personnel is included as a fixed cost, while outside services are a variable cost. Just that small difference means a lot to boards and economic analysts. A company with high fixed costs is supposed to be slow and calcified, while low fixed costs mean a lean and mean machine (after all, is that variable cost sexy marketing campaigns or dull cleaning bills? It does not matter). And of course it is easier to deal with other companies to do creative number juggling.
Is an unqualified worker at minimum wage, changing every three months better than a specialist that knows her job inside and out for years? In some non-critical areas it may be. But once outsourcing starts, it spreads like a disease, taking out all kind of services.
Outsourcing started, and in my opinion should be limited to services where you really need a specialized service that you cannot provide in-house. But the current tendency is to outsource all non-essential services, and often some essential ones as well.
Doing so in a service area where there is strong competition and many choices is reasonable, such as courier and transportation. But doing so in services where only a few compete is risky.
Because all this services just make you dependent on an outside company to function. You become a hostage of your service companies. And now there are service companies reaching monopoly situation in a certain service for an area. This kind of monopoly is unregulated and enables them to eventually charge whatever they feel the market will bear. And going back to providing the service internally has so high start-up costs that few companies do so.
So you end up being serviced by low quality and low motivated IT experts, cleaners, maintenance people, security personnel, safety experts...
It is like driving a car with no insurance. All goes great while there is no trouble. But when things go wrong, they will get very wrong. ¶ 11:29 AM 0 comments
The great corporate fashion, or the new corporate anorexia, leaving just the bare bones and an image that cannot survive on its own.
The problem I have with outsourcing is that it means a loss of control on the part of the company or the government in exchange of a supposed reduction in cost. And I say supposed because outsourcing is based in two fallacies.
The first is that the bigger and more specialized the company, the lower it costs to do things. Anyone who watches corporate structures know that only in very well led companies does the scale economies spread cost reductions through the structure. And specialization enables you to do harder and more complex things, but not to do it cheaply, if only because the equipment costs are much higher, and the specialist salaries are also much higher than unqualified personnel.
The second is that a short term benefit is better than a long term benefit. Actually, that is true but certain companies, those that are publicly traded with a low action capital , which means that a sharp decrease in stock value makes them vulnerable to acquisition at prices lower than the company assets value. That happened a lot in the eigties and nineties, and it has scarred management for years. Take a healthy manufacturing company, and when a small crisis or image problem (or stocks manipulation) makes it cheap, it is bought under its value, and then it is butchered and sold for parts. We still suffer the consequences of that burnt earth policy, as companies are willing to falsify reports, benefits and public information to diminish their vulnerability. And woe to the management that does not make the quarterly report better than the previous one.
It is mostly an accounting trick. Personnel is included as a fixed cost, while outside services are a variable cost. Just that small difference means a lot to boards and economic analysts. A company with high fixed costs is supposed to be slow and calcified, while low fixed costs mean a lean and mean machine (after all, is that variable cost sexy marketing campaigns or dull cleaning bills? It does not matter). And of course it is easier to deal with other companies to do creative number juggling.
Is an unqualified worker at minimum wage, changing every three months better than a specialist that knows her job inside and out for years? In some non-critical areas it may be. But once outsourcing starts, it spreads like a disease, taking out all kind of services.
Outsourcing started, and in my opinion should be limited to services where you really need a specialized service that you cannot provide in-house. But the current tendency is to outsource all non-essential services, and often some essential ones as well.
Doing so in a service area where there is strong competition and many choices is reasonable, such as courier and transportation. But doing so in services where only a few compete is risky.
Because all this services just make you dependent on an outside company to function. You become a hostage of your service companies. And now there are service companies reaching monopoly situation in a certain service for an area. This kind of monopoly is unregulated and enables them to eventually charge whatever they feel the market will bear. And going back to providing the service internally has so high start-up costs that few companies do so.
So you end up being serviced by low quality and low motivated IT experts, cleaners, maintenance people, security personnel, safety experts...
It is like driving a car with no insurance. All goes great while there is no trouble. But when things go wrong, they will get very wrong. ¶ 11:29 AM 0 comments
5.5.05
Preserving Ruins
Last year one of the regions most impressive castles received a serious face-lift, courtesy of Hollywood's dream machine. The shooting of Ridley Scott's Kingdom in Heaven.
The owners of the site were quite satisfied not only with the income, but also the possibility to see how the castle may have looked in actual use, with all the woodwork that has not survived replaced, and the neighbouring buildings and inner structures recreated. As one of the many that profited from the opportunity to see how a living castle would look, it is clearly different from the cold stone usually seen in the current ruins. And some things are not felt till you walk the walls and feel the wind and the snow.
As a History buff, I have visited many Medieval quarters, reconstructed city walls and preserved towns. But they cannot help a certain Disneyesque atmosphere. They are made for drawing money out of tourists, so places like Rothemburg or Carcassonne, even when trying to bring back a semblance of the past, just manage to seem unreal. A modern atmosphere that dispels the ancient, or ancient looking, setting.
The film crew, however, had managed to give the feeling of age, and of freshness at the same time. So they have done, from what I saw then, a good work when seeing it close and personal. I am really looking forward to see how it has been translated into film.
All this is great, one of those things that give my strangely wired brain pleasure. What makes me rant, and even foam a bit at the mouth, is the attitude of the local government. When they accepted the filming, the contract, as usual, indicated that the monument would be left in the same condition that it was before the building crew arrived. However, as the seriousness and quality of the work came to public notice, first the society that manages the castle, the Medieval History professor at University, and of course interest groups in the area thinking of tourism profits, all proposed to allow the structures to be kept and maintained in the same condition (a serious need in the harsh Pyrennees winters). The filmmakers were willing to cede all the props, as dismounting the sets would take a couple of months.
Enter the local government, that decided that a signed contract could not be modified. All public demands, demonstrations and historical advice was ignored. To avoid trouble, the producers speeded up the unmounting. The only reason, besides the contract, was that the governor "liked how it looked before, looking old and derelict".
Considering that a good part of its look comes from a misdirected restoration effort in the XIXth century (and it is amazing how many things those people got wrong about the Middle Ages) and the castle anyway is a hodge-podge of buildings and styles from the Xth to the XVth century, getting a unified appearance and even only for all the missing woodwork, that part of castles that does not fit our ruins concept in Spain (where the French troops blew up almost all the castles, to avoid them serving as guerilla bases).
It is similar to the sober, unadorned appearance of most Spanish churches. Churches were gaudily painted and decorated, till the XIXth century. When the state seized most of the Church's holdings, they could not upkeep the buildings, so rather than having deteriorating frescoes and paintings, they were scrapped.
Now the last five generations are used to plain churches, so when they show a church as it was when it was built, people are horrified. Religious minimalism, but a minimum historical, or even artistical knowledge.
And few things make my blood boil as deliberate ignorance. ¶ 11:13 AM 0 comments
Last year one of the regions most impressive castles received a serious face-lift, courtesy of Hollywood's dream machine. The shooting of Ridley Scott's Kingdom in Heaven.
The owners of the site were quite satisfied not only with the income, but also the possibility to see how the castle may have looked in actual use, with all the woodwork that has not survived replaced, and the neighbouring buildings and inner structures recreated. As one of the many that profited from the opportunity to see how a living castle would look, it is clearly different from the cold stone usually seen in the current ruins. And some things are not felt till you walk the walls and feel the wind and the snow.
As a History buff, I have visited many Medieval quarters, reconstructed city walls and preserved towns. But they cannot help a certain Disneyesque atmosphere. They are made for drawing money out of tourists, so places like Rothemburg or Carcassonne, even when trying to bring back a semblance of the past, just manage to seem unreal. A modern atmosphere that dispels the ancient, or ancient looking, setting.
The film crew, however, had managed to give the feeling of age, and of freshness at the same time. So they have done, from what I saw then, a good work when seeing it close and personal. I am really looking forward to see how it has been translated into film.
All this is great, one of those things that give my strangely wired brain pleasure. What makes me rant, and even foam a bit at the mouth, is the attitude of the local government. When they accepted the filming, the contract, as usual, indicated that the monument would be left in the same condition that it was before the building crew arrived. However, as the seriousness and quality of the work came to public notice, first the society that manages the castle, the Medieval History professor at University, and of course interest groups in the area thinking of tourism profits, all proposed to allow the structures to be kept and maintained in the same condition (a serious need in the harsh Pyrennees winters). The filmmakers were willing to cede all the props, as dismounting the sets would take a couple of months.
Enter the local government, that decided that a signed contract could not be modified. All public demands, demonstrations and historical advice was ignored. To avoid trouble, the producers speeded up the unmounting. The only reason, besides the contract, was that the governor "liked how it looked before, looking old and derelict".
Considering that a good part of its look comes from a misdirected restoration effort in the XIXth century (and it is amazing how many things those people got wrong about the Middle Ages) and the castle anyway is a hodge-podge of buildings and styles from the Xth to the XVth century, getting a unified appearance and even only for all the missing woodwork, that part of castles that does not fit our ruins concept in Spain (where the French troops blew up almost all the castles, to avoid them serving as guerilla bases).
It is similar to the sober, unadorned appearance of most Spanish churches. Churches were gaudily painted and decorated, till the XIXth century. When the state seized most of the Church's holdings, they could not upkeep the buildings, so rather than having deteriorating frescoes and paintings, they were scrapped.
Now the last five generations are used to plain churches, so when they show a church as it was when it was built, people are horrified. Religious minimalism, but a minimum historical, or even artistical knowledge.
And few things make my blood boil as deliberate ignorance. ¶ 11:13 AM 0 comments
