Category: Time

A Change of Direction. Is Longer and Less Often Better?

I found the site Create And Go. They have a very nice post about blogging in 2023.

One of their recommendations is longer and more in-depth posts. And to do that even if it results in less frequent posts.

I am happy to hear that. I like longer and in-depth writing more anyway.

I started this blog over a year ago. I’ve enjoyed writing it. I enjoy writing about the topic of people using technology. But I have struggled at times to meet my self-set goal of two posts a week.

I’m not sure if I’ll continue this particular blog on this domain, or change to a different domain. That will probably be the first long-form post for me to write, to really consider that question.

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.

It’s Old, But It’s Still the Best: Email Part 2

I listened to episode 699 of Pat Flynn’s Smart Passive Income podcast. He interviewed Matt Giovanisci. They talked about online businesses. At one point, Giovanisci said what he’d learned was “Content Is King and Email Is God”.

I wrote last week about going through bunches and bunches of old emails.

The one which were the most meaningful to me, in some cases several years after they were sent, were the text-only emails.

Email which sent images or video now had broken links. In many cases, the broken link was the entire content of the email. Those emails might have meant something in the moment (maybe). But now that the links no longer work, they were not much use.

I kept many of the text only emails. The emails I kept had context, are self-contained, and don’t depend on any server besides the email server. Email was king.

It gave me a lot to think about. It also gave me a lot to think about when it comes to any lists I might subscribe to.

Choices, Part 1: 15 dollars per hour Versus 150 dollars per hour

This is based on a speech I’ve seen Brian and Darren Hefty give multiple times at their farming and agronomy seminars. I’ve updated it for inflation, the original figures were $10/hour and $100/hour.

The Hefty brothers said their father would tell them to find the “$100/hour” jobs and focus on those. That most farmers would rather paint a fence themselves than pay someone else $10/hour to paint the fence. But that only saves at most $10 per hour.

It does not account for the opportunity cost, which might be much higher. So, the question becomes: can the farmer find something to do with that fence-painting time which would be worth more than $10/hour.

Can the farmer identify jobs which will make or save the farm $100/hour? If so, then someone else can be paid to do the $10/hour jobs. But likely no one else can do the $100/hours jobs.

A Good Idea Used as a Sales Pitch Is Still a Good Idea

Brian and Darren Hefty were using this speech as a sales pitch for their soil and tissue testing services. The logic is still valid. Their next part of the speech, to a room of farmers, would be to ask the audience members to consider how much they expected to spend on fertilizer over the next ten years? And if they could save even 10% of that number, how much would that be? If it took 20-30 hours of time to save that 10%, how many dollars per hour would that savings come out to be. Put that way, the figure was well over $100 per hour (this was over 10 years ago).

They went through this sales pitch because most farmers do not enjoy paperwork. Most farmers dislike paperwork. If someone enjoyed paperwork they’d get a simpler office job than the risk, complexities, and physical labor of running a farm.

So, to ask a farmer to spend the time to take multiple soil and tissue samples, keep a record of where the samples were taken from and when, and maybe what stage of the plant’s growth, to send it off to a lab for testing, then to take the results and spend another few days matching up the results to individual fields and figuring out where the soil needed to be amended and where it didn’t need to be amended, is a big request. But, is there even a chance that 10% of the current fertilizer program isn’t needed for the next five to ten years? If that answer is yes, then the savings could easily be in tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.

How This Relates to Using Technology

This seems unrelated to the question of how to make a person’s technology work for them, instead of the person working for their technology.

Yet, it has everything to do with that question. If the approach to technology, whether it’s a spreadsheet program, voice recorder, or anything else, is to fight with it every step of the way, that’s a lot of lost opportunity. If the person instead steps back and asks “what is the $150/hour job I am missing?” it’s likely they’ll realize there is an easier solution. Maybe the entire tool doesn’t have to be mastered, only one function. Perhaps there’s a much simpler tool which can be used. Or maybe it is the exact right tool for the exact right purpose, so it will be worth the time to spend two to three days learning the tool extensively.

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.

Viewing Formatting Marks, MS Word and LibreOffice Writer

This is a quick tip I’d wish I’d known earlier.

If I want to view the paragraph breaks, spaces, hard spaces, and so on in a word processor document, “Formatting Marks” is the setting.

In Microsoft Word, it’s Ctrl + *, or Ctrl + Shift + 8. In LibreOffice Writer it’s Ctrl + F10.

Years ago, I used to use Scrivener. I have no idea what key combination that program uses Formatting Marks.

Cattle or Pets? Hardware Maybe, Social Media Probably.

I sometimes see references to the question of “Cattle or Pets” when it comes to computer hardware. I first saw this in discussions about how server farms were administrated.

Hardware

“Pets” was the older practice: each server had its own purpose, some were unique, administrators often gave the servers names. They were cared for like pets, meaning they were treated with care and allowed to die of old age. So, there might be several different types and vintages of servers in the same location.

“Cattle” was the new hot idea. Cows don’t get named, their own personal quirks aren’t catered to. Cows don’t get babied, especially when a cow has clearly gone lame or outlived its purpose. It gets sold or put down and a new cow is brought in.* There’s a schedule and it’s better to clean out everything old and replace with new, on a schedule.

The Cattle mentality depends on a lot of assumptions. One of those assumptions is that whatever is brought in on the schedule will be at least as capable and reliable as the thing it replaces. Another assumption is computer hardware will be relatively cheap compared to the labor to administer that hardware. If labor is cheap than hardware, then it makes sense to keep whatever is still working and train people on how to work with different systems of different types.

I am not certain the “Cattle” viewpoint is as effiicient as it was portrayed. At least, it’s not as efficient when it comes to hardware and software that a business or household might depend on. “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it” is a rule most large software companies no longer follow, and some hardware manufacturers ignore it too.

Social Media

I think social media is in a mirror position. The social media companies want their users to see them as “Pets”: very individual, irreplaceable, dearly loved Pets.

Yet, the arc of most social media platforms seems to be the same. There’s an initial growth phase where the social media company is trying to find something which differentiates it. Growing users is more important than how the users are grown. There’s an intermediate phase, where the social media company starts trying to make some money off of their platform. If they don’t charge users a subscription fee, then it becomes trickier. Usually ads and the information harvesting for targeted ads are somewhere in the mix.

It’s also during this intermediate phase, if the social media company gets there, that “regular” users start showing up. After that there’s a long slow managed decline. Enough “regular” users are showing up that some of the quirkier things get a lot more scrutiny. Maybe the quirkier things get some legal and regulatory scrutiny too. Meanwhile, advertisers are paying more, but also expecting more responsiveness to their complaints. And the social media company will start copying rivals’ ideas.

At which point, a new social media company or two will show up with their own quirky thing which differentiates them. The die hard fans of the old social media company aren’t as loyal. Why be loyal when the old platform is no longer what it once was? The newer members of the old social media company are there because it’s useful. They will leave when it’s not; the large established social media companies all have similar features.

Conclusion: It’s All Backwards

So, social media companies are the “Cattle,” even though they are trying desperately not to be. And the hardware and programs which work and work well are the “Pets,” even though hardware and software companies desperately want them to be seen as Cattle which get replaced regularly and provide a revenue stream regularly.

The world runs on irony.

*Never mind that in the age-old tradition of the world running on irony, most of the people applying “Cattle” to various server management practices had never been on commercial ranches themselves. There are ways in which cattle are all treated the same, but there are also ways in which cattle have their own definite personalities. I’ve yet to meet a person who works with cows professionally who doesn’t acknowledge this, but I don’t think the computer programmers thought to ask.

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.