So I Took Sweetie to Lunch Today (Part 2)

Willows, California, 31 January 2017.

First things first. I did buy a cartoon of smokes before the new California $2/pack additional tax goes into effect. Just like Cali residents to approve a tax that discriminates against a minority. Do you have any idea how stupid that makes the people of California look? Advocating universal rights and acceptance while penalizing a minority under the guise of doing what is good for them. Wow, what a bunch of con artists.

Second things second. Had the chicken mole washed down by a Bohemia. OMG, it was so good. Of course, I had a gigantic margarita before lunch arrived.

As is our custom, Ami and I read the Chico News and Review (CNR) while waiting for lunch to arrive. As most of you may know, Chico is the Nor Cal hotbed for the California counter-culture (counter to anything). Active drug scene, free sex, and all the other stuff embodied in the Millennial YOLO (You Only Live Once) war cry. Scanning the CNR it was obvious that they embrace the notions held by many on Wise blog. A couple of captures below.

<Sidebar>

<First paragraph or so of article>

Clearly the work of people with nothing better to do.  I have no issue with their sincerity. I have major issues with their intelligence. Do they really believe what they are saying? Apparently so. No mention of the fact that Hillary is a criminal. But hey, what can can you expect from Chico which is a satellite of the Bay Area shit hole. Benghazi and the email issue aside, both Clinton's were peddling access for profit. Not to mention totally outrageous speaking fees.

Clinton Foundation

In any case, Jeff Wise, has friends in Northern California. Chico has the well-deserved reputation as an anything goes party town. I try to avoid the place myself. Of course, voter turnout in Chico was about 30%.  They label themselves as progressives, not liberals. Apparently taking the time to whine is easier than taking the time to vote. Not that voting in California has any meaning except for local issues.

The cut-pastes above highlight some of the problems with journalists. The first problem, of course, is that they are not too bright. As the snippets above show, it is not news that is being reported. Everyone knows Trump was elected. Like Wise, the journalists above are telling you what to think which is not their mission in life. It probably comes as a shock to the Wise's of the world that I really don't care what they think. I can form my own conclusions. Accurately and objectively report the news for god's sake, and leave your spin on it to yourself. Of course, in the context of a blog it is quite alright to stick your opinion out there, but only if the opinions of others on the blog are uncensored and respected. Wise does not operate that way.

The second, and more serious problem, is that journalists can print whatever they like with impunity. Even stuff bordering on if not downright sedition, and actively encouraging sedition. JW's MH370 blog highlights a third issue. That is the clear intention to filter dissenting opinions any way you please. Under the guise of protecting the constitution? A clear violation of any sense of journalistic ethics (oxymoron?). In the case of the JW blog, why would anyone participate any longer unless they agree with JW?  That is not a popular option for most people, especially concerning the fate of MH370.

The reality is the rants about Trump, while not without some justification, ignore the underlying causality. The democrats reached into their rolodex and picked just about the only candidate that Trump could defeat. Their selection was damaged merchandize. The dems have only themselves to blame for a poor choice, and a poorly run campaign. The rioters and demonstrators should direct their anger in the proper direction, that is at the democratic party leadership.

Tangled Web

"Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

We have all heard it before. The above quote is often attributed to "the Bard", but it actually first appeared in a love triangle play, "Marmion", penned by Sir Walter Scott.

In the case of MH370, and the search for answers, it has never been more appropriate. In this case the deceived parties are the ATSB and other organizations involved in the search for the aircraft. They have deceived themselves.

In the last several days we have seen the search for MH370 abandoned (I use the terms abandoned and suspended interchangeably) by the tripartite group of nations - Malaysia, China, and Australia. What we have not heard is the honest reasons (the expense burden, and the realization that the logic and analytics supporting undertaking the underwater search were flawed) behind this decision. Quote below from Darren Chester, Australian Transport Minister.

But Mr Chester said the decision to suspend the search was not just about money.  “This is not primarily about cost at all, it’s about a whole range of factors — we certainly don’t want to raise false hope amongst the next of kin.”

Chester

Simply not a credible statement. It needs to be examined in the context of the search events to date.

The ATSB made a decision to commence an underwater search they knew full well would be costly based on the analytics of a search strategy working group, SSWG. This group consists of a bunch of very talented engineers and scientists from industries coupled to the missing aircraft and its electronic suite - Boeing, Inmarsat, Thales,... In parallel with the SSWG independent analysts tossed their hat in the ring. Perhaps the best known group of analysts calls themselves the IG (Independent Group). The SSWG and the IG (and others) all using similar methodologies concluded the aircraft terminated in the vicinity of 38S on the last AES ping ring. I could say a lot about how this conclusion was derived, but suffice to say it included notions such as "Occam's Razor" and "that is the way pilots like to fly airplanes".  In addition to questionable heuristics, the underlying physics of the hardware producing the ping rings and Doppler data, were not sufficiently well understood.

Despite the talents of the SSWG and the IG, the decision of the ATSB was poor both at the time  the decision was made and certainly in hindsight. It was like assembling a group of carpenters, plumbers, and electricians (all talented craftsmen in their own domains) to design and build a nuclear reactor. There was no overlap between the talents of the SSWG and IG and the problem statement. No one in the SSWG or IG had ever participated in an undertaking of the type they were attempting to evaluate - determine the location of a missing aircraft using electronic handshake data and other highly nuanced information.

So as a highly compensated manager of the ATSB you "circle the wagons" (assemble your trusted advisors), and make a decision relative to how to proceed. Mind you, at this time there was no aircraft debris to indicate that the plane had even terminated in the ocean much less at a latitude of 38S. As we all know, a decision was made to commence an underwater search that had gone on for more than two years without a trace of the aircraft being found.

So, now we have the tangled web. If the decision to start the search was justifiably correct, then the decision to abandon the search is logically incorrect. In addition to the data used to justify the original search we now have - debris findings and drift analytics, knowledge of a large area where the plane is not likely to have terminated, and additional information from ground truth derived by the Malay government (radar data, phone registration, pilot simulator data,...). In short, we have more and better information than was available at the time the original decision to start the search was made. There is no logical way the decision to start the search and the decision to abandon the search can both be correct. Mr. Chester would have us believe that both decisions were indeed correct, and that other "stuff" such as the NOK suffering enough and "a whole range of factors" which he neglected to enumerate led to the abandon decision. The reality is that someone needs to be tossed under the bus. 

What should have been done? You do not generally rise to a position of responsibility, and the associated spending authority, by stepping in the piles of crap inevitably situated along everyone's career path. You develop or should have developed a keen sense of self-preservation by balancing decisions with solid analytics and information. In this case there was a clear precedent, AF447. It is well known that this aircraft was found using the consulting services of Metron, an organization with a pedigree in solving problems of this sort. At the very least, spending a few dollars (maybe a $1M or two, I don't really know Metron's fee structure) to get a second opinion would have been prudent and well-advised. It actually does not matter whether Metron's involvement would have materially changed the decision to start the search or where to start the search. What would be changed is the ATSB would not be walking around with shit on their shoes today requiring the transport minister to make lame excuses. My best guess, however, is that Metron would have realized that the problem was under-constrained, and that an underwater search anywhere would entail significant risk.

A prudent manager would fast forward to the possible outcomes, one of which was that the aircraft would not be found in the search area specified. One could readily anticipate the difficulties associated with such a negative outcome, and take early steps to mitigate it. One such step (and retrospectively the correct step) would be not to commence an expensive underwater search based on the information available at the time. 

So I Take My Sweetie to a Mex Lunch Today...

As luck would have six guys from a local construction company walk in. I could not believe it. Picture below only has meaning for JW blog posters.

What a coincidence, and no, I not going to debate Gysbreght on what constitutes a coincidence.

No matter. The lunch and Margy were awesome.