The Economist has a stupid article, Managing the Facebookers which claims that the net generation will suffer int he recession:
Once again, the touchy-feely management fads that always spring up in years of plenty (remember the guff about “the search for meaning” and “the importance of brand me”) are being ditched in favour of more brutal command-and-control methods. Having grown up in good times, Net Geners have laboured under the illusion that the world owed them a living. But hopping between jobs to find one that meets your inner spiritual needs is not so easy when there are no jobs to hop to. And as for that sabbatical: here’s a permanent one, sunshine.
The article is unencumbered by evidence: it reads more like wishful thinking by some curmudgeonly old hack who resents the rise of younger, smarter, better connected and more self-confident rivals.
It is quite plausible that the exact opposite might happen and that the economic upheaval will accelerate trends in the workplace towards the tools and attitudes of the Net Generation. It seems to be the industry dinosaurs that are going bust (think General Motors and Woolworths) not the new economy (Amazon is doing well). At a time of belt-tightening and rapid change, there will be a premium for people who can collaborate effectively, are comfortable working in teams and multi-tasking, and able to adapt rapidly to new ways of working.
Maybe the cosh is actually hovering over the gnarly old bosses who have resisted change for the last decade, not the facebook generation?
Spare a thought for those of us trying to use the internet in Ethiopia.
It isn’t great at the best of times. When it went down during the rainy season I rang technical support and was told that “the firewall has flooded”. Apparently there is a single computer through which the entire nation’s traffic passes (or, that day, doesn’t pass). The authorities block some websites (including blogspot.com, nazret.com, and skype.com) though they say they don’t, and they block Skype. The bandwidth is always limited, but it is also frustrtingly unpredictable. Some days it will be OK, others terrible.
According to internet world statistics, there are just 300 broadband internet users (as of March 2008) in Ethiopia; and fewer than 300,000 internet subscribers in total.
Internet and telephone traffic between the Middle East and Europe will continue to be disrupted until Jan. 4 after a repaired submarine cable in the Mediterranean Sea suffered more damage, France Telecom SA said.
We’ve had very limited internet since December 19th, when the three underwater cables linking Egypt to Europe were cut by an ship’s anchor. Apparently it was working on December 24th and 25th (I was away from Addis) when it was damaged again by an underwater earthquake.
Let’s hope that things get better from January 4th.
Jeremy Gould, one of the few civil servants who “gets” the internet, is leaving to spend more time with his family.
I’ve been scouting around for a new challenge in Whitehall for a long time now but the truth is that beyond building and managing corporate websites, those roles don’t exist. There’s been a lot of talk over the last four years of how more senior strategic web roles are inevitable, but in that time its been just talk. So there was no next move for me.
It isn’t a good sign that people leave the civil service partly because it is so frustrating to be an advocate of change. On the positive side, things are starting to change – mainly in local government rather than central government – but the UK Government is miles behind where we could be. Jeremy also describes the way that he was discouraged from blogging, which is worrying.
Dave and Simon both highlight the significance of Jeremy’s departure.
The internet has been running very slowly in Ethiopia for most of the past week. This may be caused by congestion, or possibly by the cable that was severed near Egypt on Thursday.
But I’ve been able to get online this morning, so I took the opportunity to upgrade my website. I’m now using WordPress 2.7 for all the pages (instead of using PHP pages for static pages and WordPress for this blog). That means, for example, that it is possible to add comments to almost any page on the website, and that site-wide search works.
I’ve also changed the design of the site in the hope that it looks more modern. (I see now that the graphics which look good in Firefox look pretty ropey in Internet Explorer, so I’ll try to fix that later).
I encountered one technical problem during the updated. When I tried to log in to the upgraded site, I got this message:
You do not have sufficient permissions to access this page.
If you get this problem, the solution is below the fold.
Serious flaw in Internet Explorer not fixed yet (according to AP):
Users of all current versions of Microsoft Corp.’s Internet Explorer browser might be vulnerable to having their computers hijacked because of a serious security hole in the software that had yet to be fixed Monday.
Seriously, people: if you are still using internet explorer, please take a moment right now to install firefox instead, for your sake as well as all of ours.
One key problem with Microsoft Internet Explorer is that it is “closed” – only Microsoft employees can see the code. Firefox is open source – so any mistakes like these can be identified and fixed long before they do any harm.
Update (Tuesday afternoon): Microsoft, to its credit, is going to issue a patch tomorrow.
If you have Google Alerts for your own name, or your company or website, you can now get your alert by RSS not just email:
Until now, alerts have been delivered via email only, but those days are over. Now your News, Web, Blog, Video, and Groups alerts are more easily accessible than ever.
A deceptively small, but rather important, announcement.
I know a few people who would benefit from reading: David Pogue’s Tech Tips for the Basic Computer User.
As usual, don’t neglect the comments which include some other top tips.
Sadly, most of the people who would benefit from these tips don’t read blogs, so they won’t be reading this.
Dan Kimmerling on Techcrunch says that Facebook is the new Outlook for the younger generation
for young people, who really only care about functionality, Facebook succeeds because it is the killer web application for communications and personal information management. Facebook Mail is not without its problems, but the combination of Facebook Mail, Facebook Chat, and what is functionally an auto updating address book, makes Facebook into the new Outlook not only for those who are inside of Silicon Valley, but for anyone of the millions of people who use Facebook as either their sole or their primary digital identity.
What I find interesting is that I know plenty of older people (ie of my generation and older) who have never used Facebook or Myspace, and plenty of younger people (ie younger than me) who never use email.
For people leaving university today, email is like carbon paper – it was used by their parents, and perhaps it is still used in a quaint way by their bank or tax office.
Meanwhile the people who run government departments in the UK, and who run private firms, reckon they are hip and down with the kids if they answer their own emails.
The Cabinet Office has now published guidance for civil servants for blogging and participation in online sites.
How the Civil Service Code applies to online participation
The Civil Service Code applies to your participation online as a civil servant or when discussing government business. You should participate in the same way as you would with other media or public forums such as speaking at conferences.
Disclose your position as a representative of your department or agency unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as a potential threat to personal security. Never give out personal details like home address and phone numbers.
Always remember that participation online results in your comments being permanently available and open to being republished in other media. Stay within the legal framework and be aware that libel, defamation, copyright and data protection laws apply. This means that you should not disclose information, make commitments or engage in activities on behalf of Government unless you are authorised to do so. This authority may already be delegated or may be explicitly granted depending on your organisation.
Also be aware that this may attract media interest in you as an individual, so proceed with care whether you are participating in an official or a personal capacity. If you have any doubts, take advice from your line manager.
Good luck to civil servants as they try to implement this. I had rather a torrid time when the Mail on Sunday chose to attack me for my previous blog.
Simon Dickson has more.
G and I both ran the London Marathon yesterday, on a beautiful warm day. G had a good run – starting at a sensible pace, running even splits, and finishing in 3:28:01. I ran like an idiot – going off way too fast at the start, and (inevitably) hobbling home after my wheels came off at about 18 miles, for a total time of 3:04:09.
I learned some lessons again that I should have learned before:
- You can’t run a marathon well without training for it. G and I both relied on our background fitness. But really we needed a tailored combination of long runs, speedwork, aerobic fitness, and strength. Getting the right mixture is much more important than running in the park every day.
- If you go off too fast at the start, you will pay for it later. It is much better to go off slowly and then speed up. It is claimed that every 10 seconds a mile you run too fast in the first half will cost you a minute a mile in the second half. And it is much more fun to be overtaking people in the last ten miles than to be overtaken.
- You can’t run as fast when it is hot.
- You’ll go through some rough patches in any marathon. Don’t quit: they will pass. I had a stitch twice, and several segments when I had to walk, and I still ran fast enough to qualify for the Boston Marathon.
The head of evaluation at the World Bank writing in the Guardian blog about the effectiveness of aid:
For donors, this means going beyond the push for free-standing projects and the tracking of individual project successes, to supporting better coordination and linkages. For developing countries, it means being in the driver’s seat in recognizing and capitalizing on the most important synergies that additional financing from multiple donors can bring.
The Economist highlights the importance of improving the way aid is given:
Because the aid they receive is such a capricious, volatile commodity, governments dare not make full use of it. They could hire legions of extra teachers, clinicians and civil servants, but only if they are prepared to fire them when the aid spigot is closed. They could put AIDS-sufferers on anti-retroviral therapies, but only if they are willing to discontinue treatment once the money stops.
The article explains why the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness is such an important step towards reducing the costs of aid to beneficiaries and donors alike, and so greatly improving the effectiveness with which aid is used.
It is a rare pleasure to read this well-informed comment about the need for donors to align their aid with the systems they are trying to support, to make aid more predictable, less likely to undermined domestic accountability and to duplicate each other less.
US Presidential hopeful John Edwards has set out a plan for fighting global poverty:
As president, John Edwards will fundamentally transform America’s approach to the world. As part of his $5 billion initiative, he will bring high-level attention to help people in three priority areas: primary education, preventive health, and greater economic and political opportunity.
He proposes a Cabinet level post to tackle global poverty (which the UK introduced in 1997) and promises a new Global Development Act to consolidate and simplify the US foreign assistance system.
Comment: It would be good news for development if this becomes an issue in the US Presidential elections.
More at CGD.
Take a look at Clive writing about Food Miles:
Food miles are useless. There is no doubt that transport intensity in the food supply system has been increasing – driven by forces of globalisation, consolidation in retailing, larger shops with more choice meeting demand for year-round supply, car-based shopping etc. But “food miles” are barely useful in capturing or articulating any of this interesting complexity.
Absolutely.
I heard Des Smith on the BBC this morning. He said:
“I was literally hung out to dry by Tony Blair”
It seems he said the same to the Scotsman.
I find it hard to believe that he was literally hung out to dry. Metaphorically, perhaps?
You would think a former head teacher would know what ‘literally’ means.
Chris McGreal has a piece in the Guardian today about DFID's work in Africa. (Disclosure: I work for DFID). Chris McGreal says:
The result, say DFID officials in Africa, is that they are able to direct large amounts of money to areas of greatest need, including putting millions of pounds directly into government budgets. Speaking on a visit to Malawi, Mr Benn added that routing aid through African governments makes them more accountable to those it is supposed to benefit.
Tim Worstall agrees in part. He likes the direct payment to the poor, but dislikes paymens through government budgets:
Given my views on governments, this doesn't strike me as all that good an idea. Most especially given my view that most poor countires are in fact poor because they have grasping, venal and incompetent governments, this really doesn't strike me as a good idea. But I'm aware that there are those who hold different opinions on this matter.
There are indeed those who hold a different opinion on this. The main reasons that we give money in the form of Budget support are:
- all countries, rich and poor, need governments that are accountable, capable and responsive to their people. If services such as education and health are provided directly by other agencies – such as international donors – then there is no accountability of the providers to the intended beneficiaries; the results will be weak and marginalized governments, and unresponsive services;
- though there are short-term needs to get essential services to people, the only long run, sustainable solution for these countries is to run the services themselves; if we set up parallel systems that hire the trained people away from government, we delay, rather than accelerate, the day when these countries can build sufficiently strong and effective systems for themselves;
- the services can only be delivered cost-effectively as part of a joined-up system; you don't want an AIDS clinic separate from a vaccination centre in the same town: you want a single health centre; if you are building schools then you need to train teachers or procure text books. So a bunch of separate initiatives to provide specific services in particular places will be very inefficient compared to building an effective, joined up service.
- in the past, we have ignored and bypassed poor financial management (or even corruption) in governments in poor countries because we can work around them; we cannot do that if we are going to put British taxpayers' money into those systems, so giving budget support forces us – and everyone else – to tackle one of the long-term causes of poor government.
My view is not just speculation or ideology. Here is an independent, international review of Budget Support. There is a lot of evidence gathered there. The summary says:
when a developing country’s government has the political will to reduce poverty, budget support can be an effective way for donors to deliver aid. Overall, it has helped to strengthen the relationship between donors and developing country governments, and encouraged better coordination between different donors. It has helped to strengthen planning and budget systems, making them more transparent and therefore accountable. It has also helped to prioritise areas of expenditure that target the poor like health and education.The team of evaluators found no clear evidence that budget support funds were, in practice, more affected by corruption than other forms of aid.
I have a Speedtouch 780 router. Inside my network is a computer that acts as a media server within the house, and as a mail server (which I use for my personal email) for outside the house. Until now, I have not been able to access the web server from within the house using the external domain name – that gave me the Speedtouch's own configuration webserver. I had to use the local IP address, or the hostname of the computer. It also meant that I had to change the server name in my mail client (Thunderbird) depending on whether I was inside or outside the house.
I have found the solution. I needed an option called NAT Loopback which is apparently only available through the command line interface, not the web interface. From a Windows (or, in my case, Linux) command line, you need to telnet to the router. Then enter:ip config natloopback=enabled
saveall
I did not need to reboot.
Hat tip: Matt Buckett
The ODI blog uses the debate about BAE in Tanzania as a hook for the broader issue known in Whitehall as "Policy Coherence for Development" – that is, the extent to which our policies on issues other than aid – such as trade, arms exports, financial stability, corruption, climate change, migration, intellectual property – either support, or perhaps undermine, the prospects for developing countries.
In my view, getting these issues right is at least as important as aid for providing the circumstance in which poor countries can lift themselves out of poverty.
DFID will be publishing its first annual report to Parliament on policy coherence, following Tom Watson's Tom Clarke's Private Members Bill (International Development (Reporting and Transparency) Bill). This should help to build awareness across Government of the importance of these issues for promoting international development, which is in all our interests in the long run.
[Thanks to Richard for spotting that I had the wrong Tom]
Very funny parody of second life: www.getafirstlife.com.
I particularly enjoyed the recommendation to “fornicate using your actual genitals“.
I said in June that the national identity register should be a federation of connected computer systems, not a single database.
Very sensibly, that is what the Home Office has now announced in the Strategic Action Plan for the National Identity Register.
So far so good. There is one protection, however, that the government has not yet been persuaded to implement. Each citizen should be able to log in, see their own information, and see the names and job titles of every government official who has accessed that data.
Some rights reserved