Category: Theory vs Practice

A Nice Radio Programming Program

I recently purchased some handheld radios. Now it is time to program them. The vendor recommends RT Systems, Inc. for the programming software.

So far, the company, website, and program are impressive. There’s a huge list of radio brands their products will program. Their website has how-to videos and nice knowledge base section.

Although I’ll use the software to program the radios now, I’ll still take the time to familiarize myself with how to program them in the field. While listening to an ARRL On the Air podcast, they mentioned the importance of knowing this. Getting it programmed just right, at home, is great. But sometimes I’ll want to change that when I’m not at home. It’s better to know how to do that before I need it.

The Paradox of Specialization, Too Little and Too Much Are Both Fragile and Unusable

Handles: How Do Companies Decide On The Design?

I originally started thinking about this while contemplating handles. Handles are something we ignore when they fit our hands well, and hate when they don’t. Yet, I cannot find much information on study of handle design. There are specialty handles, like various grips for fencing weapons. There are ergonomic handles for specialty carpenter’s hammers.

But when it comes to the simple round handle on many hand tools, I don’t find much information on the design of those handles.

Then I realized this sort of makes sense. Yes, at one time it might have been possible to go to a local woodturner, explain what a person wanted in weight, balance, size, and so on, and get a good fit for their own preferences.

Now, most handles are mass produced. There’s the occasional shovel, broom, landscaping tool, or gardening tool with wooden handles. But I think they are becoming rarer.

Once a station is set up to mold handles out of resin or plastic, handles can be produced far faster than any woodturner could produce them.

Once that station is set up.

Getting to that point is a long process of decades of scientific and chemical research to create the resins and plastics. And decades of scientific, chemical, thermodynamic, and mechanical research to know how to create the molds, heat the plast or resin up to the correct temperature, inject it, take it out of the mold, and so on .

This is an example of overspecialization. It does what it does, very well. But it can’t be easily changed to anything else without a new mold being made. And there is a long supply chain between the natural precursors of resin or plastic being gathered, and the resin or plastic coming into existence.

On the far end of under specialization, there is a hunk of wood and a knife. Yes, a person probably could make a handle for an implement out of that. It would take quite a while, and probably be fairly crude.

Another example: Writing Programs

Another example is writing programs. Microsoft Word tries to be all things to all people. And it is amazingly annoying and bloated because of that. Scrivener is so specialized, I have tried to use it and like it several times. But it is just a bit too specialized for the more general purpose use I want to use it for. And LaTex is definitely too specialized.

Identify the Problem, Part 4: ADP Destroys Its Own Numbers.

My Irritation

Yes, I’ve been ranting for a while now about the need to identify the problem before going hell bent after a “solution”.

The examples keep showing up. Here is another example:

“ADP, for example, changed their methodology to try to produce a job number that would be more predictive of the NFP data. Why they would take their own unique payroll data (and manipulate it) to try to estimate the official government data is beyond me, but they did it. So, ADP isn’t really trying to analyze how many jobs were created, it is trying to produce data that helps people predict NFP (at least the Establishment Survey).”

Peter Tchir, “Sherlock Holmes on the Jobs Report“, Zerohedge, dated June 11 2023, last accessed June 29 2023. Emphasis in original.

ADP is a payroll company. Producing jobs numbers is not their main job. But their jobs report is often looked at as another indicator of employment trends in the U.S. economy.

Tchir’s whole article, “Sherlock Holmes on the Job Report” in Zerohedge, dated June 11 2023, was about trying to make sense out of numbers that didn’t always have as much sense as a person would hope for. The paragraph about ADP changing its own numbers was one of many.

But in a sea of weirdness, it stuck out to me as being particularly weird. What problem was ADP trying to solve?

  • If the attention to their payroll report was interfering with their business of providing payroll services for companies, why not say that and stop with the report entirely?
  • If they were doubting their own internal numbers . . . I can’t think of any reason why they’d doubt their own internal numbers. But if there was some reason for that, I’d expect them to put the report and almost everything else non-essential on hold until that doubt got resolved. If I doubted the numbers for a core part of my business, resolving that would be top priority.
  • So, what “problem” does that leave, that this would be a valid solution? They wanted to stop using their own numbers, while not making it obvious they were no longer using their own numbers?

How is this related to technology?

One of the primary uses of technology, of all types, is manipulating information. Gathering it, tracking it, saving it, collating it, sorting it, looking for patterns in it.

Computer software in particular is really good at manipulating information. In a way, that’s a definition of what computer software is and does: it manipulates information. It manipulates it far faster than humans can.

There’s the perennial problem of GIGO – Garbage In Garbage Out. If the software starts with data that is bad or wrong, it’s output will almost certainly be bad or wrong.

But there’s a less recognized problem: solving the wrong problem.

How To Make Your Technology Work For You? Don’t Trust Home Automation, Don’t Trust Tech Companies.

Out of all this, I’d recommend Brandon Jackson’s YouTube video (15 minutes 30 seconds long) at “The Customer’s Perspective in the Amazon Account Lock out” and his Medium post at “A Tale of Unwanted Disruption: My Week Without Amazon“. His video is dated June 14 2023 and his post is dated June 4 2023. (Both were last accessed on June 16 2023.)

Also, here’s an article by Thomas Claburn in The Register, dated June 15 2023: “Amazon confirms it locked Microsoft engineer out of his Echo gear over false claim“.

In case none of those links work at some unknown point in the future, here’s a summary: Amazon customer (Jackson) notices his Amazon Echo device is not responding. He contacts Amazon and is told an Amazon delivery driver heard someone in his house make a racist remark at the driver who was delivering a package. Jackson checks the date and time of delivery on footage from multiple cameras on his property. He has footage of the driver delivering the package, footage includes audio. There is no racist remark on the audio. He sends the footage to Amazon, it takes Amazon a full week to reinstate his account. During that time, multiple home automation devices which could be accessed by Amazon’s Echo and Alexa now cannot be accessed because he’s frozen out of his account.

In his post and video, Jackson goes into a bit of detail about his home setup. He wasn’t completely locked out of his home automation. He was only locked out of being able to access them with Amazon’s services. But as he points out, the average user would likely not have the skills and knowledge to set up multiple access systems the way he did. So the average user would have been stuck.

I am a bit more skeptical of home automation than Jackson. There is a whole ecosystem of certifications, codes, standards, statutory law, case law, and other requirements for home appliances. The same is true of the electrical distribution system to the home and inside the home. Those ecosystems arelargely unknown to the public because they generally works.

The software controlling those home appliances is still new enough it does not have that same regulatory and legal ecosystem. So it currently relies on consumers deciding where they will spend their money.

But as Jackson points out, most of these home automation systems are concentrated in two or three large companies. And those companies cover so many fields that a customer may have an expectation based on their experience in one area, which can be unrelated to what they’ll experience with the same company in another area.

So, while I am still skeptical of home automation in general, I agree with Jackson that if home automation is used, try to have it running locally.

And in general, don’t rely on big tech companies.

Identify the Problem Part 2

Here are the two articles I mentioned previously:

A quote from the second article, originally published in 2017:

In surveys of 106 C-suite executives who represented 91 private and public-sector companies in 17 countries, I found that a full 85% strongly agreed or agreed that their organizations were bad at problem diagnosis, and 87% strongly agreed or agreed that this flaw carried significant costs.

“Are You Solving the Right Problems” by Wedell-Wedellsborg, Thomas, in Harvard Business Review, from the January-February 2017 issue (site last visited June 15 2023)

I’m slowly sidling up to expressing my own views on this topic, I know. My initial reactions are very vocal and filled with disbelief and profanity.

I’ll try to calm down a bit and be more methodical in my critiques. What are managers, whether low level, mid level, or C-suite, paid for in these companies? What are the discussions when they are promoted?

This would be like a national non-profit, closing down multiple chapters per year, with an acknowledged problem in getting members to sign up for leadership positions in chapters which are still active. And the national officers of that non-profit being most concerned with getting enough personal information from members that they can better qualify for government grants.

The bigger the problem is, the more chance there’s something about it people don’t want to acknowledge. The longer the problem exists, the more chance it spawns its own side-effect problems which will have to be dealt with, before the underlying problem can be addressed.

Bureaucrats of all types are very adept at finding what will get them promoted, what will keep their job safe, and what will threaten their job. Not what should get them promoted, keep them safe, or threaten their job. What will.

If an organization promotes people on how eagerly they follow orders, and not whether they understand the orders they give and are given, the intent, the immediate effects, and the long term effects of those orders, then the more likely this will be the result. Organizations which are much better at solving problems than identifying problems.

Life changes. These organizations will not be able to handle the change, and will die.

Identify the Problem Part 1

This is a part I because I have some more reading to do.

In the last three days, I’ve seen three different articles and posts about the importance of identifying problems. One post was on an email list I’m on, the two articles are in the Harvard Business Review.

I’ll write more about the Harvard Business Review articles in my next post. The figure that really surprised me was a survey of over 100 C-suite business executives where 85% say their companies struggle with problem diagnosis.

The email list post was about copywriting, and it wasn’t a survey of how many people think other people can’t identify problems. It was a statement that an important part of sales and marketing is identifying what customer problem your product solves.

Time For Me To Get To Work

I write in this blog about different aspects of technology and different ways of looking at how to use technology. I post links to other sites, about technology, which interest me.

Honestly, I could have done that in a diary and skipped the whole process of setting up a website. Using pencil and paper to record thoughts is pretty old technology. It’s definitely stood the test of time.

I started a blog, which has multiple steps, to learn more about how to set up websites in the current year. I’ve decided it’s time to remember that and get back to work.

There’s lots of sources, I think it’s more important to pick one and get started. So I’m going to try Khan Academy. I took a look at their basic courses on websites the other day. It’s under the heading “Computer Programming,” which I didn’t expect. They advocate learning JS before learning HTML and CSS. I didn’t expect that. I’ll start there, and see how it goes.

Perspective: The Last 20% Which Is 50% of the Entire Project, Part II — Ongoing Projects

Last week I wrote about the last 20% of a project which usually takes 50% or more of a project.

What if it’s a situation like this blog? This blog doesn’t have a set end date or a defined end goal. What then?

My experience is it will be entirely too easy to get caught up in details. I’ve thought about it, read about it, listened to podcasts about it. After all that, I’ve come to the conclusion an ongoing project can’t be treated as an ongoing project. It has to be treated as a succession of a number of set goals with set timelines.

The purpose of the goals and timelines isn’t to create an impossible amount of work, and to then beat myself or someone else over the head with failure to meet that impossible standard. Rather, the purpose of the goals and timelines is to have a strategic plan. This is the only way I can see to avoid being caught in endless rounds of minutiae that is the end details of any project.

Perspective: The Last 20% Which Is 50% of the Entire Project, Part I

How Most Projects Start and Progress

Almost every project has a final portion which feels — not planned out or calculated, but rough ballpark estimate — like “about” 20% of the project. It’s the small details at the end.

A big idea was conceived, prototypes were tried, a plan was made. The plan was followed, somewhat. There were mistakes and do-overs. Unexpected obstacles came up and were dealt with. The end is in sight! Most of what remains is small fiddly stuff.

That Last Fiddly 20%

That small fiddly stuff, in most projects, solo and group, hobby and professional, “feels” like “about” 20% of the project. That’s the same impression and discussion I hear from almost everyone else I’ve talked to about this phenomena. It’s not even a quarter of the project, not even 25%. It’s probably only 20%.

And that 20% — the quilting and binding on a quilt, the editing and spell checking and format checking and fact checking on a document, the sanding and finishing and possibly staining on woodwork, the documentation and environmental testing and agency approvals on an electronic device, and a million other examples — will actually take about 50% of the time and energy of the entire project.

That last detailed portion will take about 50% because it is so detailed. Some parts can be automated, a bit. I can use spellcheck on a document, but I shouldn’t rely on it, I’ll still need to check again. There are powered sanders for wood, but I see most woodworkers use touch or sight for one last check. I know of no ways to automate weaving in yarn ends at the end of a crochet project.

I almost wrote about changing formatting in a document, but that would take a whole post in itself because Microsoft Word is so ubiquitous and so unhelpful. It’s unhelpful when I’ve tried to change document-wide formatting after a document is done. It’s unhelpful when I’m trying to tell it whether a list should be treated as a formal ordered or unordered list. Fighting with overly helpful word processors often takes an amazing amount of time.

Avoiding This (Maybe)

It’s better to budget the time for the end of the project, at the start. Saying “oh, it’s probably about 20% of the project” and then finding out it’s 50% is stressful for everyone involved.

Why Is This “Part I?”

Avoiding this is difficult enough when the project has a definite end in sight.

But when it’s a blog, like this, which is ongoing? Does the tendency to mentally assign 20% to details still occur? Even for someone like me, who tends to be more focused and tolerant of the fiddly details for most? I’m finding that yes, it does. I’ll write about that more in Part II.

Have You Decided What Your Intent Is?

I was looking at some purchased patterns today. None of them really fit the purpose I want to use them for.

I realized I’d look differently at the patterns depending on what I was trying to achieve:

  • Do I only want a pattern that looks nice, done and move on to something else?
  • Does my purpose require specific properties like right angles on two edges, or it looks nice when mirrored?
  • Do I want to look at the pattern as a starting point to make my own patterns in the same style? And that means I’m looking at aesthetics?
  • Or do I not really like the design, but I like the way it was constructed and I want to learn from that?

The first two points apply if it’s just a hobby project. But I ever want to look at that craft as a way to make money, I’ll need to think about the second two points too.