Brian Clegg's Blog, page 113

Why we're in the financial mess we are

One nice side effect of my encounter with the BBC's Robert Peston the other day was that he kindly gave me a copy of his latest book, How Do We Fix This Mess - and I am very grateful that he did.

Like, I suspect a lot of people, I have struggled to understand just how the banks got into the mess they did, what is happening to try to untangle it, what is going on in the Eurozone and more. And thanks to this book I now have a much better feel for what it's all about. It's the sort of thing that is very difficult to put across on the TV news, requiring a more detailed, sprawling approach possible in a book, and Peston really does make things a whole lot clearer. He also makes it clear that there hasn't been enough done to prevent this happening again - the regulatory system still encourages the bankers to dream up byzantine mechanisms to get around the rules and increase their bonuses.

What's more as a bonus (the acceptable face of the bonus) there's an explanation of the whole LIBOR scandal business - and an in-depth analysis of China's finances and why there is a lot of potential for problems there too. Of course, you have to have an interest in current affairs/business and finance to find this as fascinating as I did, but it is important reading if you want to get on top of this crucial world situation affecting all our livelihoods.

One thing Robert Peston is famous for is his rather strange, drawling intonation (oddly this was less obvious when we were discussing quantum physics) and the book does have an equivalent in a habit of far too often saying 'In other words' or 'Put simply this means' or something similar. Time and again he will make a statement and then re-state it in simple terms. (He actually does this twice in a single paragraph at one point.) Usually the restatement is valuable, and sometimes having both versions helps because one uses the terminology you often hear but don't understand and the other clarifies - but it does happen far too often. I also ought to mention Laurence Knight who appears in very small letters on the front - he presumably co-wrote the book, so part of the acknowledgement for an excellent bit of work should go to him.

If you were baffled by the credit crunch, banking behaviour, the Eurozone crisis or any combination thereof and want to know more, this is definitely the book for you. You can see it at Amazon.co.uk.

Peston physics

After the shootA couple of weeks ago I had the very enjoyable experience of spending a couple of hours in the company of the BBC's business editor, Robert Peston. In a series of five short pieces, Robert has been finding out more about a number of things that have fascinated him but eluded him over the years. He has learned to do Punch and Judy, to paint a landscape and to order his Chinese takeaway in Mandarin. And I had a go at teaching him quantum physics. We met at the Science Museum Library at Wroughton near Swindon, a location I had suggested as a good sciencey backdrop.

Although it was a bit slow going as anything with a camera involved tends to be - and I'm rather sad at just how much as ended up on the cutting room floor - I think it went pretty well. See what you think:

Loving Youview

I have long been an enthusiast for Freeview+, the Freeview equivalent of Sky+ without the unseemly act of putting cash in the pocket of Rupert Murdoch, but to be honest, the first generation of Freeview PVRs was usable but a bit poor on user interface. However we have just upgraded to a Youview box and it is absolutely brilliant.

What do you get for those hard earned pennies? Of course there are the usual PVR features - pause live TV, record two programmes at the same time, record a whole series with one click... But that's just for beginners. Firstly, the Youview box has a beautiful user interface. Clear, crisp text, good structure and an attractive, intuitive remote. Second you get the main 4 channels in HD. And then the biggies. You have the catchup services of all 5 main channels (plus Dave) on tap on a proper TV. (If you really can't resist giving money to Rupert you also access Sky's Now TV sport/movie service.) 
But most delightful of all, the electronic programme guide goes back a week as well as forward. Of course you can still use the iPlayer (say) interface if you want catch up on a whole series, but to watch something you missed yesterday or at the weekend you can simply flip back on the guide and press play and it magically digs the show up for you. Brilliant. And as icing on the cake there's an iPhone app where you can set a programme to record wherever you are if, for instance, you hear about an interesting new show while at work. 
And every time you watch you can think I'm not paying to see this. The box I got was the 1Tb Humax although the 500 Gb equivalent is a particular bargain on Amazon.co.uk at the moment. There are other Youview boxes, but this struck me as the best balance of cost and capacity. 

Who knows cellulose?

Cellulose acetate, anyone? Ever wonder why old movies were dangerous? Not so much for the content of the storyline, but because they were made from a substance that was highly inflammable. Originally they were based on nitrocellulose - guncotton. Not exactly something you want to run through a hot projector with an arc lamp. But a much safer version of film would keep projectionists happy for many years: cellulose acetate.And there's a lot more to this early naturally based plastic, from the original Lego bricks to gas mask eyepieces.Time for a touch of plasticity: hurry over to the RSC compounds site to see more on this clear winner. If you'd like to listen straight away, just click here.

Found in translation

It's interesting that in the Clegg household, we have never watched so many subtitled programmes in languages other than English than we are at the moment. Common enough in continental Europe, broadcasting this way in the UK has always been seen as a non-starter. The natives will be restless, thought the broadcasters.

I think what made the change was the Danish series The Killing (originally Forbrydelsen). We love our murder mysteries over here, but The Killing broke the mould. Where a UK show would feature one or more murders in each one hour or two hour programme, the first series of The Killing took a leisurely 20 hours of programming to examine the impact of a single murder. We saw vastly more of how ordinary lives were changed by what had happened. And we also saw in Sarah Lund a police officer main character who frankly made rather a lot of mistakes. Add in the parallel track of political intrigue and the slightly exotic, familiar-yet-not-familiar nature of Denmark and it was a surprise winner.

The success of this programme in the UK made programmers sit up and take notice. And it made audiences - at least in the chattering classes, who perhaps had dipped their toes into foreign language films (who doesn't love Amelie?) - realise that it was worth the investment of concentration. Because, of course, subtitles kill the ability to do other things while you watch. It's difficult to fiddle with Facebook, because as soon as you miss the screen you lose all meaning (unless it's one of those strange sudden bursts of Danish that sound almost entirely like their English equivalent).

So, at the moment, we are getting our doses of foreign (as it were) from the second series of The Killing, avidly watched from Netflix, and the hugely atmospheric French drama The Returned about to reach its climax on Channel 4. What will be next, I wonder?

Image from Wikipedia

A different age

In my programme of scanning in old photos I have come across my first ever school photo.


Taken probably in 1960 it might as well be in the dark ages, it looks so ancient. I have no idea what happened to the others who were at Smithy Bridge Infant School in that photo - I am not in contact with any of them. Probably the usual mix of hopes fulfilled and dreams shattered.

I love that we've got several ties and a couple of sets of braces amongst the boys. And that the poses are anything but formal. That's the firm but fair Mrs Fielding in charge. And if you're interested, I'm the one with the seriously curly hair on the right hand end of the middle row.

Overripe cherries

The real forbidden fruit - don't pick me!In science, one of the worst sins is cherry picking. I don't mean it's a bad move for scientists to get themselves some of the fleshy drupes of Prunus avium. They are delicious. The cherry picking in question refers to picking out bits of data that support your hypothesis and ignoring the rest.

A really bad example of cherry picking would be something like an experiment to measure the wibblability of cheese strings. (I can't be bothered to think up a real experiment.) Let's say they are expected to have a wibblability of 12 on the Kraft scale. A series of measurements come up as 8, 12, 7, 7, 13, 6, 8. Not encouraging... unless you only report data points 2 and 5. Naughty - but it happens. It doesn't have to be as explicit as that, though.

Let's imagine you are doing a psychology test that requires considerable concentration. Half way through there is a loud bang in the street. Everyone rushes to the window to see what happened. After a little while they get back to the test and continue. Let's say the current theory suggests outcome A for the test, but it could also have outcome B. So the psychos (sorry, psychologists) mark the test and they get outcome A. Clearly the incident didn't disrupt the test, so they record the data. But now imagine on marking the test they got outcome B. That wasn't expected. So it was probably the disruption that invalidated the test, because the subjects lost concentration. So they discard the data. See what they did then? Subtle cherry picking - keeping data that supported the theory, throwing away data that didn't - but it didn't seem so bad, because they had an excuse.

In politics, the usual approach is far less subtle. Politicians cherry pick all the time, presenting data that supports their case, ignoring data that doesn't. Or in the case of UK government advisor Professor David Nutt back in 2009, firing the scientist if they don't like the data. We almost expect this with politicians - but why? They shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

However, I would say that we are much more tolerant of cherry picking when it is employed by activists and charities, and we shouldn't be. I'm afraid they too resort to cherry picking, but we tend to just get their message without any attempt to see whether they are only giving us a part of the data. This is true, for instance, of almost all campaigns for and against different forms of power, whether it's wind power or nuclear. But the example that made me write this post is the anti-globalisation movement.

While most of probably don't support the means sometimes used, many people have a sneaking regard for the message of anti-globalisation. We know those big companies (and especially banks) are rapacious uncaring monsters. And some certainly are. We know that poor people in third world countries are being exploited so we can get cheap clothes and electronics and so on. And they are. This is important stuff that needs consideration. However, I really don't think the anti-globalisation people do themselves any favours by the rampant cherry picking they employ. The picture is more complicated.

I'm currently reading a book on the global crisis by the excellent (if sometimes strangely intoning) Robert Peston, the BBC's business editor. (I'll be reviewing it when I've finished.) And he points out what a huge benefit globalisation has been to many, many millions of poor people. The fact is that living standards in the likes of China and India have been improved on a massive scale by globalisation. Frankly most of the population in places that are on the 'sweatshop' end of globalisation had totally terrible lives beforehand. Now what we mustn't do is cherry pick in the opposite direction. There are still those bad sides of globalisation. But what this says to me is that globalisation is not a bad thing - it does a vast amount of good - but that we need to do it better.

This is a message those protestors really ought to learn. Otherwise what they are campaigning for is put over a billion people back into intense poverty. And that's not really what they have in mind, I think.

Image from Wikipedia

Four questions to transform your business

I was reading a typical business guru post on Linkedin in the other day. It was telling companies how to make the best of their social media presence, and it was a load of typical worthless business-speak. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but this tosh makes my blood boil.

It was all about defining your goals, clarifying your vision, making sure you had a strategy roadmap, and god forbid you forgot your governance and guidelines. Does someone actually remove these people's brains and replace them with mush? Do human beings really speak like this? It was interesting to put this alongside the TV show Undercover Boss , where a senior executive from a company is secretly given a job on the shop floor (or equivalent) to see what it's really like to work there. Anyone who has a tendency to come out with business speak ought to have a go at the undercover boss game (clue - you don't need TV cameras to do this) and see if you still want to spout this garbage at the end of the process.

The sad thing in a way about Undercover Boss is how it is exactly the same lessons that get learned every time. The business processes get in the way of doing business well. The company doesn't treat its lowest paid employees as human beings. The people on the shop floor know how to improve things, but you don't talk to them. (Clue: don't think a suggestion scheme is the answer.) Running a business with employees is more about understanding people and helping them do things better to achieve your aims than it is about budgets and goals and visions and mission statements. Of course you need to know what you are trying to do and to keep an eye on the finances - but as soon as you start communicating in business speak you lose the plot.

If you are a senior executive in a company with employees, I think you need to ask yourself some serious questions - and do something about the answers:
Do you know from experience what working life is like for your lower paid workers? Try out (anonymously if you can) some low paid, customer facing (if available) jobs for several days.Do you personally talk one-to-one with people doing the lower paid and customer facing jobs, asking them how things could be done better? Do it. Regularly. Don't rely on feedback forms and management reporting. These are people. Talk to them. And if you promise them change, make sure it happens.Do you find yourself spouting management speak? This is no way to talk to ordinary human beings. Try explaining your business to a ten-year-old. What you say to them is what your business is all about, not your vision and your mission statement.Do you personally talk to your customers on a regular basis? Feedback forms and customer response systems give you an anodyne and misleading picture. At least once a week personally talk to some real customers about their experience. What went well, what you could do better, what they would like to see.It's not rocket science - and this is the main problem. If you listen to management gurus like my friend with the strategy roadmap to good governance (or whatever it was), they have to come out with this complex and meaningless rubbish, because you aren't going to pay them $5,000 a day for them to tell you to talk to your staff and your customers and to make things better as a result of what you hear. And yet that will do so much more for your business than any recommendation you might get from your friendly neighbourhood guru.
So what are you waiting for? Are you taking action on those four questions? Get started today.

Taking a peer at piers

I've been sent for review a delightful little book called Piering Around Britain by John Choopani. It's not exactly my usual reading fare, but it certainly makes a change from quantum physics. I was really pleased to have a chance to look at it because I love piers - a stroll down the pier really makes a seaside visit for me.

The author clearly has his preferences, but I'm happy with both the extravagantly camp pleasure pier, crammed with entertainments and penny arcades, and the more old fashioned Victorian splendour of some of our 59 surviving piers. 'Surviving', it has to be said, is a close call with some of the sad specimens Choopani visits, though many others are still worth a visit.

The format is a very leisurely tour with visits to piers happening as and when they fitted in with the Choopani family holiday schedule. The result is a very haphazard structure - in some ways I would rather it were either alphabetical or a sequential visit around Britain's coast, but at least it fits with the casual and often entertaining storytelling style of the text which takes in any characters or cream teas encountered along the way.

Boca Raton pier - not in the book, which sticks to the UK.
The Boca wildlife is more exotic, but you can't beat a
British pier for the genuine period experience.There are plenty of colour photographs, some a little low in contrast (particularly the under-the-pier pillar shots), but giving a good visual record. I was less enthusiastic about the 'arty' way the shots are printed at strange angles and don't always clearly relate to the text, but I could live with that.

Overall this is a gentle, easy tour of these fascinating, often Victorian or Edwardian remnants of a past age. It won't take long to read it, but you may well then use it as inspiration to visit a few piers yourself - and at least with Choopani as your guide, you will know which to select for the best experience. There is also a very sad list at the back of piers that are no longer standing, at least one of which (in Morecambe) I remember fondly from childhood.

The front labels the book as a 'not-for-anoraks' photographic tour, and I can see what the author means. This isn't something for the real pier buffs, but for us ordinary folk who appreciate a stroll over the ocean waves and a brisk puff of sea air in the face.

You can, of course, get a copy from Amazon.co.uk and it is also listed on Amazon.com, though at the time of writing there were no copies available.

Vigilante speed traps or concerned locals?

The other day I passed a speed trap clearly operated by amateurs rather than the police, so I stopped and went back to take a look at what they were up to.

There seemed rather a lot of them to operate a speed camera - I don't know if it was for self-defence in case they were attacked by irritated motorists, though I suspect it's more likely they were the kind of people who enjoy wearing day-glo vests and appearing official. I rather expected they would object when I took their picture, but they were quite happy about it.

Now I've lived in a village where people drove through too fast, and I would mouth rude things at them as they did so - but I am really not ecstatic about this kind of action. I don't think amateurs should be handling complex equipment, especially if they are going to do anything more than take a survey.

There were several things that worried me about the way they were operating. I clearly have no idea if the speed camera was well calibrated - but would they either? More to the point, the operator in the left of the photo was shouting out speeds. So she was going '32, 35, 31, 35, 36' while the guy at least three metres behind her was noting these down. Two things worried me here. I don't know enough about radar guns to know their recovery time/how long they need to monitor a car before they have an accurate speed reading, but she was reeling off these numbers at faster than one a second. That sounded too frequent.

If they were just doing a survey, my second issue isn't important - but if they were also noting car registrations, there is a big issue with the way these were being recorded, as the guy with the clipboard was well separated from the speed gun, and was having to guess which cars the operator was shouting speeds for. She gave no other information, so there was no clear link between speed and car. It would have been very easy to get out of synch.

As I mentioned, I do think we need to keep speeds at safe levels - but I'm really not sure that speed trap vigilantes are the answer.