Brevity [1]

My essay is only complete when there is nothing left to delete

If you had a formal education in the UK during the past few decades, you will doubtless have been assigned essays with a stipulated minimum number of words. And you may well have been marked down for using bullet points, or for starting a sentence with ‘And’. Yet this still-favoured approach encourages quantity over quality, and style over substance.

We have all seen legal case documents wheeled into the Court on goods trolleys. Were so many words really necessary? Could the judge possibly find and read all that was relevant to the case? If not, did justice prevail?

How many documents about safety procedures go unread because they are too long? How many important tasks go unfulfilled because the relevant reports, written in formal sentences and paragraphs, lack structure and clarity?

If you are a teacher or lecturer, and you have any say in the matter, introduce your students to the concept of brevity and then put an upper-bound on their essays. Future generations will thank you for it, and you may be pleasantly surprised by the short-term results as well.

For problems to be solved, minutes and lives saved, and justice served, say what you mean, make it clear, and keep it brief.

Gary McKinnon [1]

Two possibilities:

1) The US government uses easy-to-hack decoy computers as a first line of defence.

2) Gary McKinnon really did break into Pentagon, NASA and US Navy computers, altering and deleting files, immobilising sensitive systems and causing $800,000 worth of damage. In which case the other NATO member nations should sue the US Government for running such insecure systems and putting us all at risk.

On the specific issue of extradition, the purpose of such a treaty is that nations which do not necessarily trust each other have a way of exchanging individuals suspected of a serious crime. There should be no need for such an agreement between the US and the UK. We all know that the much vaunted ’special relationship’ is rather one sided, but there should be sufficient confidence between our nations for the US to have faith in UK courts and vice versa.

See also: http://thebigotbasher.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/gary-mckinnon-a-plea-for-common-sense/

Standards [1]

[...] The tsunami that devastated South Eastern Asian countries and the north-eastern parts of Africa, is perhaps the most graphic, albeit unfortunate, demonstration of the need for global collaboration, and open ICT standards. The incalculable loss of life and damage to property was exacerbated by the fact that responding agencies and non-governmental groups were unable to share information vital to the rescue effort. Each was using different data and document formats. Relief was slowed, and coordination complicated. [...]

Mosibudi Mangena, Opening address of SATNAC 2005

Standards are important. Among other things they allow for interoperability — when you buy a new washing machine or a new TV you don’t have to have a new power socket installed, it just fits the old one. Sadly, in ICT, if you have such expectations you will soon be disappointed — all too often, if you change your software, your old files become unreadable.

Over the years there have been many successful attempts to create open, standard file formats. But producers of proprietary software don’t like this as it prevents them locking you in to their products. A couple of years ago, Microsoft found a way to break the standardization process: introduce a non-standard standard and then ‘persuade’ the ISO to ratify it.

Being unable to rely upon the impartiality of the World standards organization is of great concern.

Latest news on Microsoft, OOXML and the ISO
The noooxml.org petition lists the principal objections.
See also:
The Digital Standards Organization
The Hague Declaration — Human Rights aspect of Open Standards
Open Parliament — Petition for the European Parliament to adopt Open Standards
Petition for fair patents within the European Union — relevant to this article when one considers the threat posed by Software Patents

MPs’ expenses [1]

In general, the response by the British public to the MPs’ expenses affair is a chronic over-reaction in contrast to their attitude to, say, the Iraq war.

Iraq war

Hundreds of thousands of innocent people dead; hundreds of billions of pounds spent; perfect recruiting sergeant for terrorists

Current global financial crisis

Unknown human cost; financial cost in trillions of pounds

Usual incompetence (corruption?)^†

Millions and even billions of taxpayers pounds wasted

MPs’ expenses

No harm done to life or limb; total cost to the taxpayer perhaps a few million

It’s like a Doctor focussing on the splinter in the patient’s finger and largely ignoring the bullet in the patient’s chest.

^†eg politicians awarding contracts to large corporates that have proved their ineptitude many times before.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion [1]

This principle excuses people from thinking, which leads to bad government, bad decisions, and ruined lives. Unsupported opinions and beliefs are accepted by the majority when they are won-over by a good orator, or by someone who has previously gained their respect. Every time a politician (professional or amateur) expresses a view, someone should say “What is your reasoning?” and, if none is forthcoming or the reasoning is logically flawed, we should listen to someone else.

Recession [1]

Who should apologise for the economic mess?
Democracy is not just a right, it is also a responsibility; your right to vote entails your responsibility to understand what you are voting for. The voters who have elected profligate governments owe an apology to this generation’s children and grandchildren for the debt and diminished opportunity that they will inherit. No other apology should be demanded of anyone by anyone.

House of Lords reform [1]

Politics is perhaps the only profession for which no preparation is thought necessary. Robert Louis Stevenson

Democracy is necessary for a well-functioning society, but it is not sufficient. Would you elect your surgeon or a structural engineer from a bunch of untrained, inexperienced candidates?

The second chamber could (and often does) provide what the first chamber does not, that is people with years of relevant experience, knowledge and understanding. Indeed, if the second chamber was exclusively meritocratic, it might make sense for some debates to begin there.

During the Thatcher years the Lords provided much needed, and effective, opposition.
One chamber is not enough: when it goes wrong there’s nothing to stop it. With a first-past-the-post commons, a meritocratic second chamber provides opposition to a landslide ruling party; with proportional representation, the second chamber could rescue parliament from the occasional deadlock.

An elected second chamber of independent Senators might provide these benefits IF a mechanism could be found for meritocratic shortlisting. The last thing we need is more party politics and the barriers that brings to sensible decision making.

The case against is very well argued by David Steel:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/feb/05/comment.lords

[Originally posted here: http://www.nickclegg.com/2009/02/elected-parliament-campaign/#comment-3990]

Important decisions [1]

The fundamental principle of both science and engineering is logical reasoning. These disciplines advance faster and more reliably than other areas of human endeavour. Indeed, when errors are made it is always because the reasoning was flawed. Consequently all important decision making, including politics, should employ this principle above all.
See Why is logic relevant to everyday life?