robertbrigham-books
  • Home
  • About the author
  • Books by Robert
    • When Your Lover Dies
    • Math Is Murder
    • Murder by the Numbers
    • You're Almost There
    • Patriotism
  • Leave Feedback
  • Fluff & Tough(

Amazing Greats

2/23/2022

2 Comments

 
When I was a kid radio was an awesome entertainment adventure in most homes. There was talk about something called television, but it would be many years before it became a common household device. The original telephone system, with the aid of operators, routed calls using electromagnetic devices. It was decades before nonhuman computer-based control took over. In 1955 I saw my first electronic digital computer, but it wasn’t until the eighties such devices were common on everyone’s desk.
 
Conditions used to change slowly, with major developments spanning years or even decades. And each time a significant shift was greeted with astonishment. Those of you old enough to remember, do you recall how stunning it was to have your first tiny screen black and white TV or your first desktop computer with no internal hard drive? We were transfixed because they represented huge steps up in our daily lives that we had never imagined.
 
That has changed, because of the speed at which advances now occur. It’s normal to expect major shifts on an almost daily basis. Some upgrade their phones and computers every year or two because they want the “latest technology.” With some reason, because the technology has changed significantly in that short time period. Major advance is now typical, so we are no longer awed by it. The young know nothing else.
 
I think we’ve lost something when we cannot experience the thrill and excitement that come with the unexpected new. Because much of it still is truly remarkable. Here are a few things I think deserve amazement if we took the time to think about them. I’m sure I could come up with many more examples and you could add to the list. I’d love to hear about what stuns you.
 
I get annoying messages from my computer asking if I want an update to be installed during the night. I am sure millions of others receive the same message and many of our computers are updated at roughly, but not exactly, the same time, usually without mishap. What must it take to ensure we all get our update successfully?
 
What about speech recognition? Now when phoning a business or medical facility we can put the keypad away and simply state what we want in order to be misinterpreted and sent on the wrong path without human aid. Still as annoying as ever, but I find the execution brilliant. Apple lovers have Siri who once told me, after I had called her an idiot for not properly dealing with my request, “That’s not very nice.”
 
Google searches are almost unbelievable. In less than a second you get access to thousands or even millions of possible hits. Despite the fact most of them seem to elude your desires, it’s still an outstanding technical achievement.
 
Cell phones and untold other devices, including cars, use chips that in the tiniest of spaces hold millions, even billions, of components and allow us the digital life in which we seem to be embedded. How much time do we spend considering those breathtaking pieces of equipment?
 
We tend not to think about health care until we need it. But the advances, many life-saving, come fast and furious, much speedier than occurred during the centuries following the time when illness demanded the availability of leaches to carry out a bleeding that did more damage than good.
 
Not all advances are positive, but so many are amazing. I think it’s worthwhile to contemplate the brilliance of the ideas behind them instead of just being a placid user and expecting the innovations to keep rolling out.
 
Look around and be amazed, even if you don’t like what you see.
2 Comments

February 16th, 2022

2/16/2022

1 Comment

 
Florida believes the road to excellence in education has many paths. One of the most important is gutting the public school system. It has pursued this noble cause in several ways, beginning with spending ever increasing public funds on privately owned schools.
 
A major advantage of these schools, besides the low performance of many, is their contribution to solving the teacher shortage problem our state is experiencing. You see, workplace requirements open the door to instructors with nonstandard qualifications, making many more eligible for employment. Like ones not having a college degree. Like ones not having a high school diploma. Like ones having a checkered past.
 
Several further actions by our state leaders are either in place or being enacted in the Legislature.
 
A significant step in this educational awakening is the introduction of parental control over what books are allowed into school libraries. What a relief! There is, of course, the question of who would, or even could, make such decisions. Never fear. Turns out there are many willing to adopt this onerous task. They know what is best for their child—and what is best for your child.
 
And what’s best for your child is not to have contact with such disgusting tomes as F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, Alice Walker’s The Color Purple, James Joyce’s Ulysses, Toni Morrison’s Beloved, and William Golding’s The Lord of the Flies along with over 100 others.
 
Clearly our intrepid volunteers are adopting this cause to protect the well-being of your children. Or, maybe, it just could be they’re afraid their own kids may want to look at these dangerous books, not having the restraint of their stalwart parents.
 
The selections seem to focus on treatments of racial and, gasp, sexual issues. Definitely best not to have young minds dwell on such subjects, especially when racial tensions surround them on a daily basis and their bodies are doing enough to remind them of the changes occurring in them. Don’t want knowledge to get in the way of what those circumstances and bodies are demanding.
 
Going right along with this is the desire to protect children from feeling uncomfortable. A noble goal.
 
For example, we don’t want a white child made uncomfortable or feeling guilty by learning there might be white responsibility for slavery. Or that our founding fathers weren’t perfect. The solution? Don’t teach such trash and discipline or dismiss instructors who dare to. It appears as if it’s acceptable for Black children to be uncomfortable.
 
Especially we don’t want any discussion of nontraditional sexual orientation. No gender discussions will be allowed. If a gay child or one unsure of its identity needs a sympathetic ear, that ear better not be attached to a teacher. After all, the child should instead be speaking with its parents. And if the parents throw him or her out of the home, well, too bad. It appears as if it’s acceptable for gay children to be uncomfortable.
 
This concern for the comfort level of our children helps them avoid any threat of conversations on controversial subjects or of opening their eyes to alternative ideas. Excellent training for their future.
 
It’s a wonderful restricting concept, this saving of our darlings’ feelings, and it’s one that can be extended. For example, some have suggested Nazi parents could object to the teaching of democracy because it will raise emotional stress in their indoctrinated children. More realistically, perhaps, is parents demanding mathematics not be taught because of the widespread discomfort of having to face up to solving for x.
 
Yes, in many ways Florida is the leader of educational reform that will make us one of the best at being the worst.
1 Comment

A Rare Instance of Republican Consistency

2/9/2022

2 Comments

 
The Republicans take pride in not wearing masks, not pushing vaccine shots, and fighting mandates.
 
The Republicans love guns. The more the merrier. They oppose safe storage and they like arming teachers.
 
I’m not sure why, but some have questioned the consistency of these two arguments. It doesn’t surprise me they do. After all, consistency is not a trait found in most political exchanges from either side. The Republicans, though, have become experts in the double talk lying world.
 
They dare to accuse President Biden of playing politics and using the race card in making a Supreme Court nomination. Like their history of race relations is so great. How many non-whites did Trump appoint—or even consider?
 
They dare to say voting in Florida in 2020 was superbly run but we need to make it more difficult in order to eliminate any possible fraud in the future. Although the only fraud I’ve read about has been on the Republican side.
 
They dare to blast peaceful demonstrations against the police killing of a black man. Then they go on to describe the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the capitol as “legitimate political discourse.”
 
Yes, there is nothing unusual about the hypocritical inconsistent stands taken by the immoral Republicans. The list of examples can be extended seemingly indefinitely.
 
However, I think it’s incorrect to apply the appellation of inconsistency to the Republican opposition to masks and their love of guns. To me they aren’t opposites at all, but rather are two pages from the same sorry book.
 
After all, it seems the Republicans don’t care about human life. And that’s especially true when it comes to children.
 
It is obvious masks and vaccines save lives.
 
It is obvious guns take lives.
 
So being against masks means more lives are lost.
 
Being for guns means more lives are lost.
 
As was noted, the Republicans are against masks and are in favor of ever-increasing gun ownership.
 
Seems consistent to me. Both lead to lost lives. And children are all too often the victims.
 
No matter.
 
They’ve got the proper ideological stand in place to appeal to that minority of voters who feed on their disgusting rhetoric.
 
And they’ve got the backs of the National Rifle Association and thus are assured of continuous monetary support.
 
What more could they want? After all, lives don’t matter.
2 Comments

The Hierarchy of Big

2/2/2022

4 Comments

 
Have you ever had a low-level job in a large organization? By low level here, what I’m talking about are the people who create the output for which the organization is known. It could be a production line worker, a nurse at a hospital, a faculty member at a university.
 
If you did, you probably were aware of another level in the organizational chart whose entries were far, far distant from your own. They’d go by names such as President, CEO, CFO, and Vice-President. Oh, and they made a lot more money than the first group.
 
By the very nature of the human beast, conflict between the groups is bound to occur, at least if the organization is large enough. Like a defense contractor, a hospital system, or a university.
 
And it’s not just because of the enormous difference in income.
 
I think a major problem is that, while the two levels work for the same organization and may have the same ultimate goals, their jobs are vastly different and not always appreciated by the other group.
 
After all, the organization makes its money off the efforts of the low-level workers. If a company is known for missiles, they are designed by engineers and built by a production team. Hospitals are created to make the sick well and they achieve that with the efforts of doctors, nurses, social workers, and other patient-oriented staff. Universities are supposed to teach and do basic research and it’s the front-line faculty who are responsible for that. Most of this group wants nothing more than a good work environment, adequate facilities, and fair pay. Many don’t have any desire to promote their way out of jobs they love. They have little knowledge or understanding of what goes on at the highest levels.
 
But a lot goes on there. I can’t speak with great knowledge about the work requirements since I never dwelled in such lofty towers. Nevertheless, I’m sure there are many concerns about cash flow, obtaining contracts or grants, building adequate facilities so the work can move forward, dealing with taxes, and doing the political schmoozing that seems to be so necessary. I believe these folks have little knowledge of the details of the lower-level work. Could a vice-president mill a part, insert an IV, or guide a student through a crisis?
 
Perhaps, but the odds are low. Maybe at one time it was more likely, when it was common for a person to start a company and, as it grew, found he or she was at the top of a large organization. During the startup time the founder did mill the part or build the computer. But it seems these days that happens less and less. Now the way to reach the top is to get an MBA and hire out to some organization where immediately the work is oriented more to that at the top levels than to that at the bottom. Now executives hop from one organization to another seemingly largely independent of knowledge of the organization’s product. These people are lifetime managers with little or no experience of the low-level doers.
 
I think any resentment this dichotomy builds might be eased by more communication between top and bottom, something I rarely observed although my experience at a university was better than in industry. I think that’s because most university leaders have indeed risen through the ranks, starting with teaching and researching. Unless they’re politicians using their power to take top university jobs.
 
People who do advance through the ranks rise level by level, and at each jump leave behind tasks with which they started and assume new ones not required of the low levels. At some point in the rise they reach “middle” management where they have to be aware of both those below and those above. I believe that might be a difficult position to be in. At a university I think deans are in this unenviable situation (although I don’t think I’ve known more than one dean who felt uncomfortable in that position). From then on, advances take one into the realm of upper levels where little time is devoted to the actual work for which the organization is known.
                                                  
I don’t have problems with this. It’s just the way it is, and I’ve found it interesting to ponder that similar situations exist over a large range of organizations.

4 Comments

    Author

    Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.

    Archives

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed