Oops and types

We have seen how oops are related to 'oops and loops and are studied by various engineering foci, such as control, risk, etc. Oops can be small or large, with a wide range of consequences.

One problem that we face is that nothing is really a replay of the past; the PLM mindsets need to remember this. Too, those who look to Lean need to understand better what is behind this thing.

So, given that we're living a big 'experiment' in an unknown lab, we have to be careful, especially if our decisions affect others. It's like this, folks. Look, keep your oops (however motivated and whatever you might think is best for me) to yourself. If I want to do something stupid, I'll let you know.

Just this past week, I read several articles in many publications that deal with oops. We'll get into each of these; here is a brief listing.

• WSJ - Fed Insider Questions Programs Designed to Ease Credit Crunch --- oh no, we taxpayers are bailing out junk'ies. --- Yes, certain types seem to be favored by the Fed. Hey, Ben, your decisions have made my life miserable of late. Thanks. Oh, only slightly so, by the way, yet I'm not pleased with the decisions. Get your head out of the 30s, the dynamics are different.

• WSJ - Trying to Solve the Oil Puzzle - poor Congressman is trying to fathom the multiple layers of speculation driving the oil market and getting grief from fat cats who say that it is supply and demand --- We probably could use a lesson from mathematics here. Who has used any derivative (calculus, not financial gaming) beyond the 2nd on a regular basis (note the use of regular)? So, given that we humans always 'bubble' over, one way that the Fed (or whoever ought to play this role) could control things is by removing any layer of middle man beyond a certain level. It isn't that hard, folks. No, those who have fat pockets have been good at misusing what 'capitalism' is all about.

• IEEE Spectrum - The New Economics of Semiconductor Manufacturing -- mainly about applying Lean to the clean room making of chips and more --- Gosh, remember how the US management went to Japan with hats in hand and all agog about something that came out of the western ontology - then they found out that it wasn't a magic bullet from zen or something like that - turns out that much of Lean has to do with empiricism (which can only be quasi, guys, don't be stupid there) and experimentation. Yes, any program (787 or A350 [oh, we'll be on time!!!]) that makes grand claims years in advance is suspect by definition; and, looking to others doing the work as being able to pull off magic?? What can I say, but tsk tsk.
  

• IEEE Spectrum - The Hunt for the Kill Switch - about the possibility of outsourced work allowing too much power to someone else who can then come back and use it against you --- In this case, it's the real problem of chips being manipulated so as to allow malfeasance. But, it could apply everywhere. Globalization is a fat cat thing, folks. Gosh, are we to allow the idiots to ignore individuation and its use? Okay, everyone on the planet ought to be economically supported; but, globalization has been more about moving things around in order to reduce cost (more for the pockets of the few) than real development.
  

Oh, we could 'lean' the executive suite, come to think of it. They need to learn more science and less 'demigod-ness' for the sake of the rest of us.

Remarks:

06/15/2009 -- Globalization, and capitalism, now a dirty word, according to one in private equity.

11/20/2008 -- Boon and bust, the way of fairy dust.

Modified: 06/15/2009