Here we go again

Gosh, every time Boeing managers come out with their talks of things being right on par, we need to remember this, it'll be followed with some revelation that is troublesome. Why troublesome? Well, talk is cheap, as they say. These guys, Jim M is one, ought to let the engineers speak. That has been said before.

And, where the heck is the technical fellowship? Let's see who started that? Condit? The idea is that managers talk crap by necessity. That is, just about the majority of the problems with the economy comes from people listening to these idiots.

But, what the heck are we to do? Just not listen to anyone? Well, the cynic would say yes. I say no. There are people who talk truth; many times these ones are hidden or sat on to squelch their speech.

Is it possible that the new media will overcome some of those age old dynamics, that led essentially to fat-cat-ism and the world being run thereby.

Now, the message here. Many factors are at play, but we can start with 5 that will be discussed at length with further post (and, former mentions will be linked).

1. Earned value -- it's been said before, folks, that you can't expect magic and get a product. Nor can you know a priori when something is complete. Heck, it's difficult even to know when something is complete ex post facto (see point 5 below). Now, change things along all axes in both the process and product spaces and what have you? A potentially big mess (perfect storm?).
2. Parameterized model -- sheesh, the manager used this example in many telecons about the 787. Oh, it was within the parameteric bound. Is that idiotic (except he probably has advanced degrees)? One can lift out control variables as parameters, yes. But, just like non-monotonic logic has the problem of qualification so too will process control. Don't get me started about the idiocies of designs and parameters. Oh wait, I will go on about that later.
3. Hype/Hypothesis -- look, managers, until you get something together and it performs, do not hype the thing. Oh, that genie was let out of the bottle long ago, alas. Needless to say, business seems to want to run itself in a mode that assumes we're all idiots. Ought things be that way (why the heck is Carson still in his position? mute the guy, please!!!).
4. Misused mathematics -- just because we're in 2009 and have almost miraculous computational prowess is no excuse to assume that some age-old problems are resolved. Au contraire. But, how do we get the message across here? Well, we'll keep trying. The litany of misuses would be very long indeed if we had the energy to attempt the enumeration. Let's instead revisit the basic issues and hope that those who can will adapt whatever is required for them to perform more wisely (ah, how much mischief comes from the relenting focus on efficiency - why thanks, managers, yes it is you to whom we'll all point as the main enablers of the problems).
5. Underdetermination -- oh no, what the heck does that mean? Well, did we not hear some discussion about unknown unknowns at one briefing? Was that meant in jest? Or, was it a half-hearted attempt at cheap philosophizing? In either case, any of those who work with earned value ought to consider this item, even is just briefly. Oh yes, there are other ways to express this notion; that, too, will be covered.

It's a short list but casts a wide net.

Anyone think that this last problem will be it and that things will just fall into place for magical delivery? Yes indeed, hope does spring eternal goes the saying.

Coming issues:
-- we need to discuss other types of issues, such as new media's use of private information. How does this happen without recourse? Too, is new media just a pawn? ...
-- was the program too focused on proving composite technology?

Remarks:

05/19/2014 -- This post is one of the most popular, even given its age (June 2009), but a post-note is necessary. The post was written during times where the unknowns seemed to outweigh knowns (nod to our old friend Carson). Of course, thing changed after that. Does what happened later change the context of the posts or demand a content change? Not in my mind. In fact, the blog is still here as oops abound more than we would like to believe. And, in many cases, engineering has it easier, as there are means to test available. Computing, though, has a whole other set of issues. See modern programmers (this blog) and formally truthful (related blog) for continuing discussions.

01/01/2011 -- This theme? We're done. Engineering is a shining example of human effort. Finance? Ah, cannot be said by a civilized tongue!

09/14/2010 -- Must and may. Two important concepts.

09/02/2009 -- Lets face it, folks, undecidability needs to be discussed and adopted in any complex situational setting, especially if computers are involved. Only hubris pushes us to make loud exclamations about what we're going to do in the future.

08/31/2009 -- Scott is riding off to the sunset.

07/14/2009 -- Somehow, the confounding continues.

07/05/2009 -- We can now get serious.

Modified: 05/19/2014

Class acts IV

Gosh, this will take an undirected turn which is not unexpected when underdetermination is considered. Consider that we can make the 'boomers' to be the example this time (see II and III). Yes, they who turned 60 not too long ago.

Well, there are too many people to mention, but we can start to list a few.

• -- Milken. Did he really believe that risk could be wished away (see item #3, what say you, silly games)?
• -- Stein. Relates to Milken in an interesting way. Haven't read the book. May do so.
• -- A whole nameless cadre (Mike, this is here to juxtapose your take) who worked hard, helped within their community, raised their family, looked forward to the future and who were then screwed over by their government (laxity, belief - almost to the point of foolishness - in 'the' market (hah!), pure greed, ...), business (mostly stinky from the get go), and the fat cats (ah, not included with business?). To these is dedicated in part the efforts at depicting how a supposedly well-educated and smart generation went awry.
  
• -- Yes, the hippies of whom we can choose many an example, ..., at some later point.
  
• -- Those who took more than probably warranted.
  
• -- ...
• -- Those who apologized? Or those who did not (WSJ, 9/19/2009, "This Boomer Isn't Going To Apologize")?
• -- Any who did not let the pollution of money to undermine their excellence as human beings: Yes, rent can go to labor (new look at capitalism), and finance can have a higher calling. It's amazing that President Obama spent time in Chicago (lots of it) and did not fall into the ways of the CBOE (Buffet is now siren'ed it seems).
  

We could add a few more of those who represent something about the generation but will not for the everyone's sake.

Remarks:

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash.

10/22/2010 -- We need more like Perelman in order to have a fair economy.

Modified: 04/03/2011

Rent seeking

Too bad, we don't see heroes (oops, wrong, see Remarks below about Michael Milken. I'll, most likely, find more on proper search.) in finance. We get a lot of negativity with a little back-slapping (enough to bring on hubris, such as this graphic depicts).

The Economist, recently, had a special report on business in America which included some discussion of the future for the financial types that we have all come to just love so much, of late. Figure 6 above shows the big pay increase that was associated with the madness before the crash.

But, we need finance as a means to facilitate the flows of the economy (several aspects to this that will be re-addressed). But, this discipline need not think that they are it (rather, they're mechanics). Gosh, where did that type of hubris arise?

So, as an opinion in the WSJ ("There Is No Upside to a Down Economy") discusses, we have progress when people strive whether they do it in a mature way or in the adrenaline enhancing manner. Progress can be described, partly, by wealth creation which makes the game non-zero sum, yet, closer to near-zero [to be updated]. Supposedly, everyone benefits in this game.

Why near-zero? With a nod to Adam Smith, we can describe it as some partaking in 'rent seeking' which tends (it will be shown) to have the Minsky property which leads to states of undue speculation and ponzi/madoff, almost as if by necessity. There are ways to measure this, such as the efficacy of moving monies into the pockets of the few from scores of hapless.

Consider that this concept will be added to the basics on money and truth.

Remarks:


02/05/2012 -- Time to update the theme of the best and brightest.

11/27/2011 -- Labor, and those who do it, have much more value than has been allowed.

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash.

12/02/2010 -- Banking is a utility (but we also need plumbers - a few, not an army).

11/30/2010 -- Finance and pay, always problematic.

12/01/2009 -- Some rent is okay.

11/08/2009 -- The gigantic chimera needs proper attention.

09/24/2009 -- Things looking up for those who churn.

08/10/2009 -- As promised, FEDaerated is here.

07/22/2009 -- We need to look at economic causes and their consequences.

06/17/2009 -- We may not have heroes in a general sense, but we have people who are idolized (and more), such as Milken whom we'll use as a focal point to discuss several things. Milken, evidently, is not a fan of Modigliani's opinion. Mike says that structure counts (see WSJ article). By the way, Mike's comments on myths about him will be part of the discussion. His comment #13 makes him out almost to be stockholders' Robin Hood.

Remember, the theme here is that a lot of securitization is bunk, many times. Sheesh, talk about a perpetual motion machine, always moving monies from the pockets of the hapless to that of the fat cats. We need a fresh look.

Modified: 02/05/2012

Coffin corner

Since the AF447 incident which puzzles many, there have been lots of discussions about what happened and the possible causes. The opinions have run the mill, so to speak, yet none have any more credence than any other (mind you, not saying here that some of these are not mostly pure bunk).

However, one thread of discussion led to a 'say what?' state. That is, there is an issue that has FAA's concern up (Operations above 25,000 Feet). Hey, isn't that what we see routinely with commercial airflights?

Well, these types of planes have flown for years in an almost uncountable number of flights (very large number, okay). So what gives? Of course, we've seen some accidents. These are studied for lessons to be learned (unfortunately, ex post facto). Test programs for new airplanes are organized to ensure some margin of safety with regard to known mix at the time of program delivery.

We are assured many times that design meets any extreme requirement (plus), that things are tested against these, that there is training sufficient to safely operate within problematic margins, and so forth. Yet, recent discussions remind us that a plane hitting turbulence at too much speed can break up (just how needs to be looked at further).

ABC had an expert on this am (Sunday, Miles O'Brien) who mentioned a very small gap being involved, like 30 mph. The industry has used 'coffin corner' to label the area on the flight envelope which relates to a critical region. Evidently, this margin of error is small enough to get special attention from FAA.

Ought there be some way for the flying public to know about this issue? It's great for us to trust the makers and the flyers; we have a right to know more, though, would not one think? Not that a passenger needs to know aerodynamics; there ought to be more visibility into technical issues, especially as the general populace becomes more educated.

And, delays due to weather would have more of a technical basis for explaining why; the past few months has had many examples. The list of contributing factors is very interesting, indeed.

Remarks:

05/28/2011 -- The black box was recovered, via technology. Now, analysis shows that the air speed indicator did freeze causing a state of mis-readings which didn't allow proper control actions on part of the crew. There are a lot of lessons here which we'll get into. However, that computational frameworks and their executional events can get similarly into this type of state, and vertigo is not inappropriate to use here. This bears much discussion.

07/02/2009 -- No black box yet, but analysis can be done on found pieces of the plane and on autopsy findings on the deceased. The plane hit the water while intact and with a 'strong vertical acceleration' according to this analysis. There is no need to retract the coffin corner information, as its suggestion generated a 'say what?' reaction and as there are conditions under which it can occur that the flying public ought to know about.

06/09/2009 -- A pilot's thoughts.

Modified: 05/28/2011

Uncertainty

First, a rhetorical introduction.

Success can breed hubris, as we all know. Granted, one of our goals is to increase our certainty, yet no amount of success reduces uncertainty.

Engineers know this and get some comfort from their lab efforts, namely testing. Managers? Well, we have to guard against their paths to perdition (of several types, but an example is not knowing about near-zero).

Second, the message.

Fortunately, people have thought about the technical aspects of these things for some time, yet some of the more important views are considered as unnecessary and as being outside of practical importance. But, their consideration keeps us honest.

Any engineering view that would take computational output (we'll elaborate more on this) as equivalent to some natural event (observation and measurement thereof, okay?) has a very problematic basis, and we are talking much more than just quasi-empirical issues here. That this might come into acceptance is a natural result of advanced computing, its successes, and misunderstanding of what the successes (more luck than not) mean.

We'll be addressing these things more regularly, hopefully with real-world events to point to.

Class acts III

The listing started on the down side. Let's look at the other side, as balance is what the house of cards that recently fell did not have.

The judge's view of capitalism's failures is a class act and an example of blogging by the legal community. There are many others which could be used to describe some type of ethical code for this rapidly growing set of spaces (web-log, tweet-ville, ....).

Remarks:

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash.

10/22/2010 -- We need more like Perelman in order to have a fair economy.

06/17/2009 -- Class acts IV.

Modified: 04/03/2011

Class acts II

Foreword: Class acts III.

To commemorate his ideas, and to just keep old George in mind, we'll have a string of class acts to enumerate. Who else to start with than banks (see the rogue table)?

In their special report last week, the Economist covered what is needed to get the banks back in business. This report is very good and ought to be generally read.

Two types of banks are identified in one discussion: utility and casino. You see, many of us see the side of banks that is supposed to be conservative, watch our money for us, and be there when we need them.

Unfortunately, that part of the bank was seduced, by many things, into thinking that capitalism is synonymous with casino gambling. Actually, Marx got it right talking about 'fictitious' capital.

Well, we need to add another type: scavenger (as in, like the hyena, vulture, and others). Today, the WSJ reports that "Banks Use Life Insurance to Pay Bonuses" and suggests that this has been shown to be legal. Well, no matter, as it stinks to the max. Unfortunately, the article is not open to general reading, so here is another link (don't know how long it'll be there).

What this thing entails is that the bank covers an employee's life with a huge policy and collects upon death. Supposedly, the employee consents. Ah, but do they get the whole picture?

In one case (Amegy bank), a guy was fired before dying (41 years old of cancer), and the family (Irma Johnson and two young children) got nothing; did the bank laugh all the way to its own vault?

The amount of money in this pile, rank and smelling to high heaven, is just mind-boggling.

What has happened to basic human decency? This thing is definitely immoral; why is it not unethical? And, where are the law makers who ought to know better than to allow this type of thing to happen let alone become acceptable?

And, insurance companies, where is your say in the matter? You must be hurting to pay out on some of these policies in that you fell into the same casino pit as the banks.

Remarks:

05/17/2011 -- Golden sacks (leftmost mug), by Rolling Stone and Daily Ticker.

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash.

01/01/2011 -- The bank settled.

10/22/2010 -- We need more like Perelman in order to have a fair economy.

12/19/2009 -- Dead peasant, indeed.

08/10/2009 -- As promised, FEDaerated is here.

07/31/2009 -- Let's see, 5,000 got over $1M for services rendered. Well, that's probably a sign of being a best-and-brightest, at least to certain eyes; it's called rolling-in-the-dough.

Now, this can be used to illustrate how the game it to fill the pockets of a small set to an exorbitant amount. Does the game need to be that way? Hell no. We'll look at that some more.

06/29/2009 -- The Economist's article on a related subject may suggest the next bubble.

06/02/2009 -- Class acts III.

05/21/2009 -- Amegy is owned by Zions. Mormon and family values? Should they not have squelched this long ago by paying up?

Modified: 05/17/2011

Class acts I

Foreword: So, George had it right about class; we can commemorate this 25th year look back by collecting various class acts.

Well, we're 25 years beyond the concerns about 1984 (the book and its predictions, if that brief reference doesn't cause a recall) which brought us lots of ideas to think about. 1984 passed, as did 2000, without much of the todos that had been expected.

Oh, in other posts were we not talking about expectations versus fruition and the psychology of a business?

Recently, the New Yorker ("A Fine Rage") had a review of George Orwell's life and times, including his ideas about class. Of course, George is of the Eton class, but he didn't go on to Cambridge or Oxford. What's of interest is that in George's time, the concept of corporal punishment was still in vogue.

Anyway, since he had to go an unusual route, his opinions were able to mature, somewhat differently than they would have in the university club.

So, how does this relate to the themes of the blog. Ah, good question. Like Tolstoy, and many others, who did not let their riches control their lives, we can use old George as a point of juxtaposition to look at those who are running after their new riches. Too, having gone beyond the greed, which business seems to think is their calling to wallow in (thankfully, we have a new day), people like George can give us some insight into the failings.

Humans seem to have these perennial problems. G-d, please save us from the immaturity of the supposed best-and-brightest, one could very well pray.

Even engineers, who get much appreciation here, are not without fault (quasi-empiricism has not been seen in its importance and has really been given nary a glance), but then who is. It's an open question whether an engineer at the top is better than one from finance. The former did solve real problems and has appreciation for reality; the latter? Ah, so many ways to look at that.

But, back to 1984, as it is interesting that business is more of a big-brother (and, with the negative connotations) than not, stomping on its employees (many times, with black-booted bully-ness), peering into their lives, controlling their human resources as if those entities were born to the subjugation of the business, and a lot more.

Remarks:

10/12/2022 -- Put pointer here, from Quora, ... A Brit's view of Orwellian issues that's astoundingly on target. ... How is this? ... Too, here and in truth engineering, "AIn't can't Kant" needs attention. 

07/03/2014 -- The Magna Charta is a wonderful example for us to apply to provider (king)/user (baron) issues. 

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash.

10/22/2010 -- We need more like Perelman in order to have a fair economy.

06/17/2009 -- A fresh look will be needed.

05/21/2009 -- WSJ book review mentions George's views. Every generation has its strivers and slackers. Slacking from something can be in vogue; slacking from nothing is problematic. Similarly, striving from something can be other than flattering; striving from nothing (especially, when successful) is the American way.

Modified: 10/12/2022

Testing, again

A question, or two (also, see bet2give), has been asked about the new plan (asked May 3rd) and about the new enthusiasm (or one might say, certainty) for getting the plane delivered given the experience of two years ago.

Well, as an aside, isn't it great how the new media allows such unencumbered discussion? Or does it?

Suppose one could use some of the psychological insights for related events, as humans are at the core of an organization and its accomplishments, then we could use positive psychology. That is, for whatever the organic whole that a company is, it's sole goal is to thrive.

To continue, a positive outlook has a futuristic bent; we could use a more technical parlance and say that it's like a long extrapolation at an edge. And, as those who have dealt with geometry know, one has to be really careful about moving off what is known into the grand unknown, which would include projections toward the future. Yet, we do this all the time and assume 20-20 foresight. Actually, it's a syndrome which expects that declarations lead to results, by some type of necessity, if the right process is followed.

That a program can lose its sight may be due to several factors, such as the exhilaration with the potential (and changes on all fronts) almost to the extent of megalomania (assume that we would want maturity for the organization?) such that the uncertainty related to process change is overlooked.

We really must remember the other side which is the negative outlook and which is more driven by what's happening; that this is driven by data around the current position is important. Consider, did we not see a serious mismatch a couple of years ago between expectations (assumed earned value) and what was actually the case? Did we also not see that a planned event was held as if there were no wrinkles or as if no one would care that there were problems being broad-brushed over?

The mathematical metaphors (geometry) are being used as the program pushed use of abstraction-phile techniques to the max from the beginning. We'll be looking at that in much detail (or as much as we are allowed to see). Just the other day, this blogger heard a modeler exclaiming about how finely he can predict with his computer. Well, nature has it own ways; unfortunately, failures are mostly subtle and allow many possible explanations; yet, it'll come about that we need humans in the loop - as borgs and more. And, computational results are not reality, though humans are fooled thereby (see flight simulation - actually, everything could probably be approximated close enough except for this - going from point a to point b).

A company would want to balance these outlooks (the positive and negative). Guess what? It's not easy. In fact, somehow those at the top seem to think that they're the only ones who can handle the future and relegate the underlings to the supposedly more mundane aspects of the operation.

Then, these guys/gals may act like rogues (some, many?, don't). Tsk, Tsk. Wise up people to the newer way of doing things that is unfolding under your noses.

Of course, you need the big picture, goals, and strategy. But, those at the top seem to fall into some type of rhetorical blindness. Ah yes, let's execute the plan. Unfortunately, the only 'E' in the title is for the chief guy/gal who can be so far removed from the nitty-gritty of reality to be essentially more of a bane than a boon. That is 'executive' evidently trumps 'execution' for some reason that seems to be more grounded in the past (long history of class issues) than in what is really needed for the future.

What are some impacts of the current imbalance? Engineers can be pushed to the side; rhetoric, and selling, become the prime focus; we all have to be more paranoid just to protect ourselves from the manipulations whose results can border, many times, on the barely legal. Ah, the litany could be long (this blog and truth engineering will continue to enumerate and describe these).

Fortunately, test flight events are real and sound. So, expect that the engineering view will have more prominence.

This ought to be very interesting.

Remarks:

07/22/2015 -- Some of these are, now, poster boys.

01/20/2013 -- Change link to bet2give.

05/17/2011 -- Golden sacks (leftmost mug), by Rolling Stone and Daily Ticker.

09/13/2009 -- More on sandbox, the economics testing facility. Need to pause for a bit, to look at Bookstaber's work.

07/14/2009 -- Nope, confounding continues.

05/19/2009 -- Positive psychology seems to focus on the optimal which for an organization (business) may mean sub-optimal for all involved but a few. Seems that for some businesses it's the very few. And, the 'sub' is way down to being just a resource chewed up and cast off when worn out.

The trouble is that companies talk as if they want people to feel fully utilized, but the reality is that one has to work to the plan and to the process. That latter, especially in the context of 6-sigma, is both tedious and arduous. And, those who put their noses to the grindstones are not always rewarded. Those at the top? Oh, 'golden' safety apparatuses galore. Yes, we know what is maximized in many cases (link to examples of extractions, Grasso, et al).

Modified: 07/22/2015