Author Archives: Eann Patterson

Immeasurable productivity?

Decorative image of a poppy flowerThis is the second in a series of ‘reprints’ from my archive of posts.  I will be back with new posts in a few weeks refreshed after my vacation.  This post was first published in November 2013 under the title ‘Productive cheating‘.

I cut out a Dilbert cartoon from the New York Times a few weeks ago that I found amusing and shared it with my new Head of School.  Dilbert informs his boss that he will be taking advantage of the new unlimited vacation policy by being away for 200 days in the coming year but will still double his productivity.  His boss replies that there is no way to measure productivity for engineers.

Of course, bosses are very interested in measuring productivity and marketing executives like to brag about the productivity or efficiency of whatever it is they are selling.  Engineers know that it is easy to cheat on measures of productivity and efficiency, for instance, by carefully drawing the boundaries of the system to exclude some inputs or some wasteful outputs [see my post on ‘Drawing Boundaries’ on December 19th, 2012 ].  So claims of productivity or efficiency that sound too good to be true probably aren’t what they seem.

Also in the New York Times [on October 15th, 2013] Mark Bittman discussed the productivity of the two food production systems found in the world, i.e. industrial agriculture and one based on small landholders, what the ETC group refers to as peasant food webs.  He reports that the industrial food chain uses 70% of agricultural resources to provide 30% of the world’s food while peasant farming produces the remaining 70% with 30% of the resources.  The issue is not that industrial agriculture’s claims for productivity in terms of yields per acre are wrong but that the industry measures the wrong quantity.  Efficiency is defined as desired output divided by required input [see my post entitled ‘National efficiency‘ on May 29th, 2013].  In this case the required output is people fed not crop yield and a huge percentage of the yield from industrial agriculture never makes to people’s mouths [see my post entitled ‘Food waste’ on January 23rd, 2013].

Sources:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/15/opinion/how-to-feed-the-world.html?ref=markbittman&_r=0

http://www.etcgroup.org/content/poster-who-will-feed-us-industrial-food-chain-or-peasant-food-webs

Entropy and junkies

I am on a deep vacation [see ‘Digital detox with a deep vacation‘ on August 10th, 2016] and so my posts for the next few weeks will be ‘reprints’ from my archive of more than 570 posts.  The one below first appeared in January 2013 under the title ‘Unavoidable junk‘.

The laws of thermodynamics are physical laws whose relevance extend beyond the study of engines and heat plants. We can restate the first law of thermodynamics (conservation of energy) as ‘the quantity of matter is constant and finite’. Matter changes both in nature and as it moves through the economic system; and as it does so, its intrinsic properties change rendering it less useful and usable, thus requiring more and more resources to make it useful again. This last sentence is a form of the second law of thermodynamics. Very useful (low entropy) goods, such as iron ore and fossil fuels, eventually produce less useful (high entropy) matter, such as piles of junk cars in scrap-metal yards and greenhouse gases, as they move through the economic system. In our current western life-style, we are all contributing to the generation of vast piles of junk; we are hooked on it; we are all ‘junkies’.

In the paragraph above, I have plagiarised the 2009 report entitled ‘The New Sustainable Frontier’. However, similar ideas were expressed by Handscombe and Patterson in their 2004 book entitled the ‘Entropy Vector’. They paraphrased the first and second laws of thermodynamics as ‘you can’t have something nothing’ and ‘you can’t have it just anyway you like it’.

Update on position of AI on hype curve: it cannot dream

Decorative image of a flowerIt would appear that I was wrong in 2020 when I suggested that artificial intelligence was near the top of its hype curve [see ‘Where is AI on the hype curve?‘ on August 12th, 2020].  In the past few months the hype has reached new levels.  Initially, there were warnings about the imminent takeover of global society by artificial intelligence; however, recently the pendulum has swung back towards a more measured concern that the nature of many jobs will be changed by artificial intelligence with some jobs disappearing and others being created.  I believe that the bottom-line is that while terrific advances have been made with large language models, such as ChatGPT, artificial intelligence is artificial but it is not intelligent [see ‘Inducing chatbots to write nonsense‘ on February 15th, 2023].  It cannot dream.  It is not creative or inventive, largely because it is very powerful applied statistics which needs data based on what has happened or been produced already.  So, if you are involved in solving mysteries (ill-defined, vague and indeterminate problems) rather than puzzles [see ‘Puzzles and mysteries‘ on November 25th, 2020] then you are unlikely to be replaced by artificial intelligence in the foreseeable future [see ‘When will you be replaced by a computer?‘ on November 20th, 2019].  Not that you should trust my predictions of the future! [see ‘Predicting the future through holistic awareness‘ on January 6th, 2021]

Enduring, authentic, ancient and modern

Decorative photograph across SevernTwo weeks ago, over a period of forty-eight hours, I visited four churches. An unusual event for me.  We travelled from Liverpool to Bristol one afternoon to attend a Thanksgiving Service the following morning for an extraordinary engineer and a lovely man, Eddie O’Brien.  The evening before the service, we stayed in a village pub in Oldbury-on-Severn and after dinner walked up the hill to the 13th century church dedicated to St Arilda.  It was locked so we strolled around the overgrown churchyard along a narrow mowed path and enjoyed the view across the Severn to Wales.  The following morning we drove into Bristol city centre to attend the Thanksgiving Service which was held in the Zetland Evangelical church.  The church was plain, unpretentious and packed.  The service was led by a retired pastor who preached with a gentle, thoughtful passion about Eddie’s life and its meaning.  I knew only one, possibly two, facets of his life: his professional life as an engineer and leading exponent of experimental mechanics; and his life as a student.  Eddie was twenty years my senior and thirty years ago I supervised his MPhil and PhD in experimental mechanics.  He was in his fifties and I was in my thirties – it was a challenge for both of us and we learnt from each other.  When he graduated he presented me with a copy of his PhD thesis that he had hand-bound in leather himself.  We left Bristol after the service and drove north across the Severn Bridge to Tintern Abbey where we stopped for lunch looking out over an empty cricket pitch across a green enclosed valley before exploring the ruins of the Cistercian abbey.  The abbey was founded in 1131 and in 1536 it was surrendered to Henry VIII during the dissolution of the monasteries.  The lead from the roof was removed and five hundred years of decay started creating the ruins you can wander around today.  Back in Liverpool, the following evening we went, with our neighbours, to a ‘Music at the Met’ concert at the Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral called ‘Music for a King’ and featuring uplifting pieces, including ‘Zadok the Priest’ and ‘Crown Imperial’.  The bold grandeur of the concrete structure, richly coloured stained glass, thunderous organ and combined choirs of the anglican and catholic cathedrals contrasted starkly with the simple service of Thanksgiving for Eddie O’Brien we had attended the previous day when we sang hymns recalled from childhood, including ‘The Lord’s My Shepherd’.

Image: view across River Severn to Wales from St Arilda’s churchyard.