Must try harder...

I did a piece for ITV Channel News yesterday in response to an item the appeared on the Bailiwick Express site.   I believe it wasn't used.

The original piece was childcare recruitment jersey has serious image problem

I do not doubt they are having problems recruiting, but I am sceptical to say the least about the reason given.  We know other caring professions - nursing and teaching come to mind- where recruitment is also a problem. That indicates to me there is a systemic problem.  Further, I have seen no evidence of a properly conducted survey on the reasons recruitment is so difficult  in social work, let alone the results of any such survey.  

I have one other reason  why I am doubtful.  It is the nature of vocational work  like childcare.  People who have a vocation want to make a difference .  You do that by going where there is a problem or a need, as long as you feel you can change or improve things.  Well Jersey has a need, and any quick online search would confirm that.  It isn't a deterrent, if anything the opposite.

But my real anger is the  use of that tired  meme  the 'Image of Jersey'.   It has been used all along by those who wanted to refute the evidence of abuse in our care system, and by those who wanted to deny having a Committee of Inquiry. And it is the mindset that is at the heart of the problem.,  The moment someone in authority -a manger or a politician decides himself, or instructs a junior to prioritise the Image of Jersey there is a problem. The idea that it would be better to keep this quiet, not make an issue or a fuss, because it would look bad of the island, that is where the canker festers and the cover ups begin. It is the most rotten of mindsets.

I was reminded of a quote of Gandhi - first they ignore you , then they laugh at you , then they fight you , then you win.  Survivors in Jersey were ignored, their claims were ridiculed, they have continued to fight, so the next step....  It may take a long time.  You only have to look at  time it took for campaigners at Hillsborough or North Wales to see justice (http://jerseytoday.blogspot.com/2012/11/jerseys-coming-30-year-war-what-we.html) Indeed I am coming to the conclusion it will take the passing of a generation of vested interests before the real truth gets out.  Too late for far too many who suffered so much, and denying justice to many.

The piece that ITV did show:  http://www.itv.com/news/channel/2016-07-28/jersey-social-worker-shortage-blamed-on-historical-abuse-claims/

A consultation offer from the Borg.

If you have a mind to you can read the grand plans for the digital takeover of Jersey .  See  Digital Policy Framework  Helpfully they even tell you what questions you should consider and respond to.  My advice - dont' bother. There are much bigger better questions and issues then those you are invited to consider.

You might also wonder if it is worth your time.  As this press released item digital jersey and population office  demonstrates it has already been agreed that 30 licenses will be given to the digital sector ahead of any outcome of  the consultation. As they say in politics: never ask in public a question to which you do not already know the answer.   Where I would like to know is the research to demonstrate we do not have the skills and knowledge locally?  How does Digital Jersey  and the Population Office account for having highly skilled and experienced local software developers in the island working in other sectors ?  Why cannot it attract them (hint: it isn't about the money).

The policy document reminds me of the sort of think I used to read in the '90's working on AI systems and research.  Lots of overblown and politically unacceptable stuff from business and tech heads on what is possible, lots of big claims economically about transformation etc, but almost nothing on societal impact, ethics or principles. More of a sales and marketing pitch than a policy discussion  and certainly not a well rounded integrated piece.

How about a few quotes from the draft.

'Where will Jersey be in another 10 years?'  That is the only time frame I can see in the document.  It is not inappropriate to have a 10 year view, but tricky  - I'll come on to some the technological changes others expect to happen in the next ten years another day. See if you think some of these other quotes make sense on a ten year view, if  they are in fact acceptable at all.

 

“Digital technology will be the backbone of Jersey's economic activity”.   Bye-bye finance?

“Digital will be the default format for all economic activity”. Yes by default Jersey Royals will be exported digitally.  3D print your own Royals on demand , perhaps.   

How about page 7 " Government has responsibility to ensure every Islander has the skills they need to thrive in a digital economy."  Sound sensible to you?  How about if I rewrote it as Government has responsibility to ensure every Islander has the skills they need to thrive in a finance based economy  or Government has responsibility to ensure every Islander has the skills they need to thrive in a car based society." NO.

The centrally planned economy dictated from our authoritarian overlords doesn't stop at telling us what jobs we may work at.   Under government digital transformation we have 9. Develop and implement an effective Digital ID for all Islanders.

Yes under the new totally digital economy you will be uniquely identified.  Every move interaction and location will have the potential to be tracked, logged  and preserved by the government for what means?     You think they wont?  Not our nice friendly cuddly Government, surely! 

Try this then, they are thinking to collect your personal data to sell to private companies.  Truly.  

Make better use of government data for the benefit of the public and private sector: Alongside the direct advantages of moving government services online, Islanders will also benefit indirectly from the wealth of data these services will provide. This data will enable public officials to make better policy decisions, based on more detailed and up-to-date evidence. Furthermore, if this data could be made available to the private sector, the benefits could be multiplied. The public sector – both government and state owned companies – in Jersey collects a wealth of data that, if disseminated appropriately, has the potential to be a useful raw material for digital businesses in the Island.

I like the throw away comment, cited as a challenge " A small minority of Islanders still do not have access to the internet".  They will be complaining that using cash  undermines the digital economy next.  That is the choice people must have in an open society.  It may be very inconvenient  to Ministers perception of the Island as a business , but we are not all slaves or State employees. 

I have a different way of looking at these things.  I see computers/ IT /digital to be the servant of people, not the tools to trap, ensnare  and control them.  I think Government should be a tool of the people....

If you give up your freedom to really choose for a few paper token of fiat currency , you will end up with no individual identity, no personal choice beyond which part you would like to be in the great machine.  

We can have our say , sort of.

There's a lot more to the arguments both ways over this if we're being serious.  But with so many constitutional issues  around we really ought to give some thought to this Facebook posting.


"There is an impish thought that came to me while I was directing traffic for the Sunset Concert yesterday. It just wont go away, so I'm going to put it on paper and see if that helps.


Quite a few people in Jersey were pretty peeved that we didn't have a vote in the recent referendum. Logical of course as we have never been in the EC/EU we cannot have a referendum to leave . The only way we could have a vote would be to have a referendum to join the EU ! What constitutional merriment that would be for the UK trying to leave. 

The main obstacle to us being in would be open borders. We are already densely populated. But the States population policy is such a dire failure even on their own targets would it actually make any difference? Worried about VAT, why? - we already have it effectively called GST. If Luxembourg and Gibraltar can survive in we surely could too.


Membership would get rid of the discriminatory passport stamp for Islanders, would allow farmers to claim agriculture subsidies. We might even be able to get help for projects like rebuilding sea defences and putting in solar and tidal power. Our finance and local banks would keep passporting rights so they could trade around Europe when UK entities might not when they leave.


In effect we flip the whole relationship to retain a degree of distinctiveness and differentiation from the UK. Jersey and the other Crown dependencies have always thrived on being the same but different.


So there it is. The proposition - Jersey should seek formal membership of the European Union."

Such a small thing...

It raining now, so with the branchage preparations done  I'm going to try to write this piece again.  Every time something new comes up that seems to impinge upon it.  The latest locally at least was the handling of a report by the States, but of that perhaps later.

There is something in the political air.  It can be sensed all around. The election of Corbyn as Labour leader was an early sign.  The tidal wave of support for Bernie Sanders, unlikely as he is to actually win the US Democratic nomination, and even the popularity of Trump  in his party all seem to be connected. But it goes beyond political leadership and extends to many aspect of life.  Let me give you a list to get you going.

• Valeant
• Takata air bags;
• Tennis
• Toshiba's accounts
• Turing Pharmaceuticals / Martin Shkreli 
• Amateur Athletics
• FIFA
• Volkswagen  (& other car manufacturers)

I could have added a few heads of countries, and the odd UK  specific like the police actions in respect of the Birmingham 6 and Hillsborough, and MP's expenses scandal, and now election campaign expense limit breaches too.  And I deliberately left out the banks with their continuing list of fines for failings and fixes of just about everything from the price of gold to Fx.

In short trust.  Some of them outright cheated, others conspired to mislead, some just abused their position.  That's not really new or surprising, though the scale and breadth of it seems unprecedented. in modern times.  There is a sense that different rules are applied to those in exalted positions of influence and responsibility from ordinary citizens.


Where these problems meet the political agenda is that for ordinary mortals the only source of protection from these gigantic and often very well financed organisations lays with the legal and government functions.  If you have doubts or a lack of trust in those, what do you do?


My suspicion, and I have no evidence for it, is the reason Corbyn, Sanders, Trump are doing unexpectedly well is because they are somewhat outside of what you might term the circus.  They don't run to media spin doctors, they don't have to consult private polls and research before giving their opinion on something.   They give the sense that they might actually be telling you what they think (obnoxious as it might be in some cases) rather than what they are told the electorate wants to hear.  


Some might call that character - they each have something of that, even if you find it distasteful.  They none of them falls into the grey anonymous mold that so many technical political operators do.  And it is not new. Over 2,500 years ago Solon advised  to put more trust in nobility of character than in an oath. 



There is a quote attributed to Einstein that I am frequently reminded of when I read things locally : whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.


I'll leave it to readers to fill in their own list of where States members and especially Ministers have been rather careless with the truth.  Examples are not hard to recall.  I have no data to tell where Jersey would appear on a list such as the one below.  We might have some evidence when the current Shaping our Future survey results are published. (https://shapingourfuture.gov.je/the-survey/)




































If you think there isn't a problem to be addressed locally, perhaps you can explain to be the 0 rating  we had for civic engagement , taken from the official Figures in Jersey 2014.  Such a smal thing, so smal its not even there. I think that is somewhat indicative of a huge trust  issue. 

C2H6O rules

Apparently the petition against banning shops making discount offers on alcohol is the biggest we have ever seen in the Island.  I can grasp that people might sign simply as a mechanism to register a protest on the performance of the States.  But for it to be even bigger than the petition to remove GST on food seems odd to me.  Admittedly the population has increased a little since then, but even allowing for that, it seems to have been signed by a bigger fraction of the population.

The latest spending survey I can find was in 2009/10.  From that the average weekly spending can be derived:


Food & non-alcoholic drinks  £73.70   , of which   gst 3.51,  alcohol   £9.10  

The average household would have to be buying all its alcohol at a 40% reduction to be financially better of than removing the GST on food.  Of course there are some skewed factors in there - a proportion of households do not buy or consume alcohol, though I image almost all buy food.  

One to the key reasons for the pricing  prohibition is the detrimental health impacts of drinking.  That is clearly true in excess , but of course there are plenty of unhealthy foods too.  I am coming to the conclusion that collectively our lifestyles in the Island are outrageously unhealthy. I don't have figures to demonstrate that, but there is a study I came across from the USA that I think is indicative.

This study looked at  4,745 people across the USA and assessed them on four simple criteria of healthy lifestyle.

• 71 percent of adults didn't smoke
• 38 percent of adults ate a healthy diet
• 10 percent had a normal body fat percentage 
• 46 percent were sufficiently active 

However only 2.7%   meet all four !

The reaction to the  pricing proposal interests me from another angle too.  I think it demonstrates just how deskilled and dependent we have become.   It really isn't hard to ferment a drinkable wine - and some like gorse flower are nectar.  Cider can be made with nothing more than mashed apples if you want to, though you will get more reliable results if you use steriliser and yeast too.  Sure if you are a well paid fund manager or lawyer you might argue your time is more valuable spent earning  money that making wine, but then  you won't be material affected by the pricing policy.  


I shouldn't be surprised.  We've come to a state where there are people making money walking other people's dogs , and companies that put together flat pack furniture!   





https://www.gov.je/Government/Pages/StatesReports.aspx?ReportID=630

http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2016/03/only_27_percent_of_us_adults_l.html

http://www.cicra.gg/_files/CICRA%2014-06%20groceries%20final%20report.pdf

Athens regained?

Planting season is now in full swing, so it is far from certain I will be get to the BCS talk this week on AI.  That is a disappointment for me as I was working in AI in the 1990's and was an external supervisor for a couple of Ph.D. candidates.

The topic has been more prominent in the press the last year than it has for some time.  I have been collecting  articles and snippets.  It is not uncommon to see heightened press coverage of  paradigm changing technology when the economy is in difficulty.  It is the sort of jam tomorrow promise that those who are dazzled by the delights of growth cling to when recession  abounds.   But there is real potential here, it isn't just vapourware.


One of the reasons the various techniques of AI were very useful when I was working in the field still pertain.  It can quickly identify a good enough answer to an otherwise unsolvable problem.  That is often the case in scheduling and timetabling  where they may be no solution that satisfies all constraints.  It is certain the case in aspects of fluid mechanics (which is where I was applying AI) since the fundamental Navier-Stokes equation has not been solved mathematically.



Of course things have changed over a quarter of a century.  Certainly machine learning has advanced significantly.    Go is a game that has too many possibilities to be practically determinable, so the fact the Google's DeepMind AlphaGo recently could beat the world champion demonstrates that.  The machine learnt  by playing against itself.


I doubt anyone has much in the way of reservation about AI being used to solve such otherwise difficult to impossible problems. The worries come from a different branch of the discipline - autonomous behaviour and control systems.  This is where we have started to see human like presentation and behaviours from machines.  There is even an hotel in Japan effectively run by human like automata.  (I dislike calling them robots, because we've had robotics for many years on factory floors  - they are brilliant but they are not what most people imagine when referring to robots).


The issue is when we defer executive action to machines. In effect we surrender control. Some of the systems I worked on were presented quite deliberately as decision support systems.  There was no executive capability, simply information and advice to human  operators.  Hopefully faster and more reliable and condensed  information, but nonetheless  just advisory.  


As we approach the point where autonomous units can carry out mundane, repetitive  tasks reliably we have to ask some very serious political and ethical questions.  If we ignore the transition phase for now, it is possible to envisage a marvellous future.  Imagine a world without drudgery where production if delegated to autonomous entities.  Sounds good, but it is very dangerous.  How do the ordinary people then earn a living? If labour is insignificantly cheap (as it would be with efficient capable AI units), then the  only value is in control of resource or in artistic and intellectual endeavours.  


Humanity has been here before on occasions; just  substitute slaves for the AI entities. In ancient Athens, citizens (not women, slaves or foreigners) fought in the army and were expected to participate in policy formulation.  Citizens were paid to attend the forum, so even the poorest were not excluded.   There are other  models of slave based societies of course, like the Romans.  They were so dependent that when it was proposed they have a uniform in the city for slaves, it was defeated by pointing out that slave would realise how numerous they were and revolt would surely follow.


 
 https://www.eventbrite.com/e/artificial-intelligence-ai-dream-or-reality-tickets-21320057867


http://www.stoa.org/projects/demos/article_democracy_overview?page=5

It is 2008 all over again

Three meetings are on my radar for this month.  Each reminds me in some way of 2008. 

A number of groups have been invited to workshop sessions on Shaping our Future.  There is a report on this somewhere on the States web site and yes it is our old friend 2035 again.  I took part in the Imagine Jersey event  in 2008.  It was a travesty of consultation, a one dimensional view of the future looking solely at financial  impacts of a growing elderly population and social security and pensions.  It was a railroad to the pre-selected acceptable outcomes.  One of the points I made repeatedly in the subsequent elections was that we needed to do this exercise properly, looking at  how the world would change by 2035 and well beyond just the money.

So here we are over 7 years on and we have only just got to realising we need plans for all the other aspects of life in the future.   I know some of the people attending  these sessions.  If it is as badly handled as 2008 there will be uproar.

You my be aware I sometimes contribute to Rural magazine on local organic production and my stockless smallholding .  This talk is right up my street. Robin Page is an entertaining speaker though his politics and mine are poles apart.  He has stood for the UK and European parliaments a few times as a Conservative and in 2010 as a UKIP candidate.   I have put a link below to his experiences with the police, around 2008 eventually winning a four figure sum compensation payout .

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-560699/I-fought-law-I-won--How-Robin-Page-challenged-police.html

Lastly we have the AGM of the Jersey Climate Action Network.  This is the eighth one, so the origins are  in 2008.  You can read a bit of its nascence here  http://st-ouennais.livejournal.com/2090.html. 

http://www.gov.je/sitecollectiondocuments/government%20and%20administration/id%20imaginejerseyfinal%20report%2020100323.pdf