controlled and uncontrolled experiment is a very crucial step in project testing.
for example, in my project regarding information harvesting from atm machine, we have to set afew experiment to fully test the function.
controlled environment : attempt to harvest information with planned time frame. for example, every5 seconds.
uncontrolled environment : random pattern to attempt harvesting.
uncontrolled environment 2: randomly pick a colleague who know nothing about this project to perform the action without telling what he should expect .sometimes by doing this, we could accidentally found out other loophole that we've overlooked.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Saturday, April 21, 2012
problem solving
being a project manager, the most critical skill is problem solving. not only the problem musty be solved flawlessly, we must solve it on schedule in order to not deejay the whole project.
one day, my project was hit by a critical issue just before the project its about to launch. i immediately called for emergency meeting and announce an all hands down situation. which means no matter you have ajob on hand, you must attend the meeting. when officer in charge from all departments attend, the meeting delivers faster. firstly iaddress the issue and how did it happen. after the description, everyone give their view on what cold possibly went wrong. as time is not on our side, we recognise the few most possible caused, green dedicate afew unit to start investigating. these units are called to dismiss and start working immediately. the rest of us how ever continue to discuss contingency plan. we understand our current problem is the need to launch the project, so isuggest that each unit proppose the major items to be proceed with launching first, and to find out the rest if they ate depending on the unsolved issue. once we recognize the item to be launched, the launching proceed.
that day, the project has took us 3phase to complete the launching, and everyone work extra mile until mid night. but fortunately, everything went well and the product is successfully implemented before the next day.
one day, my project was hit by a critical issue just before the project its about to launch. i immediately called for emergency meeting and announce an all hands down situation. which means no matter you have ajob on hand, you must attend the meeting. when officer in charge from all departments attend, the meeting delivers faster. firstly iaddress the issue and how did it happen. after the description, everyone give their view on what cold possibly went wrong. as time is not on our side, we recognise the few most possible caused, green dedicate afew unit to start investigating. these units are called to dismiss and start working immediately. the rest of us how ever continue to discuss contingency plan. we understand our current problem is the need to launch the project, so isuggest that each unit proppose the major items to be proceed with launching first, and to find out the rest if they ate depending on the unsolved issue. once we recognize the item to be launched, the launching proceed.
that day, the project has took us 3phase to complete the launching, and everyone work extra mile until mid night. but fortunately, everything went well and the product is successfully implemented before the next day.
Down player
down player is aword out phrase that mobile the significance of aclaim.
one day, iwent to mall looking for a mifi router. it's anew technology in malaysia so it's quite hard to get it in the mall.
finally icame across a shop that has this router, but the price was rm300. so iasked for adiscount. after afew round of price war, the seller finally agree to give me 250
he told me "250 only! the cheapest in town if you able to find acheaper one, let me know i will buy back from you. " so i thought it's agreat price and bought it.
the moment iwalk out of the shop, isaw something similar on the shelf of a shop few shops away. when iwalked over, it's the same thing, just the price different. the price tag is only rm220
one day, iwent to mall looking for a mifi router. it's anew technology in malaysia so it's quite hard to get it in the mall.
finally icame across a shop that has this router, but the price was rm300. so iasked for adiscount. after afew round of price war, the seller finally agree to give me 250
he told me "250 only! the cheapest in town if you able to find acheaper one, let me know i will buy back from you. " so i thought it's agreat price and bought it.
the moment iwalk out of the shop, isaw something similar on the shelf of a shop few shops away. when iwalked over, it's the same thing, just the price different. the price tag is only rm220
Friday, April 20, 2012
Analogy (again)
"ad hominem circumstantial" attacks usually arise from a person having an irrational attachment to their beliefs. this lack of objective detachment causes them to become irrationally denounce of their beliefs.
i'm aclassic car lover. myself owns afew classic cars. and i meet quite afew owners too
classic cars are very special. even though they are as of same model, there are certain bit and piece that are different than the other same car. to maintain acar to its original state, it requires alot of read up, research and of course, money.
every year there's anannual classic car fest. owners of these classic cars would gather and convoy together to the event, get their cars polished meet new friends and ultimately, hope that their car will win them some prize after all the hard work.
one year, my friend was so very confident that his car will win the most original award. he had spent dozen of thousands on it and he thinks that no other car can be better than his. but at the end of the event, he did not win the category that he hoped for, but he won the best maintained classic car. to many, this is avery honorable prize, but to him, he's not happy with it. he argued with the judges for not getting the best original. the judge told him that his car can never be best original, because all his parts are new, and the new parts are not from origin country but mostly from china our taiwan. in that case, the car ids not original.
my friend gone mad and said that all his parts were purchased from legit seller and if the sellers are legit then the parts should be deemed as original. how ever, the judges decision are final. there's nothing he can do. after that, whenever there's such event and the judge are from the same group, he will tell everyone to not take part and claimed that those judge take bribe.
i'm aclassic car lover. myself owns afew classic cars. and i meet quite afew owners too
classic cars are very special. even though they are as of same model, there are certain bit and piece that are different than the other same car. to maintain acar to its original state, it requires alot of read up, research and of course, money.
every year there's anannual classic car fest. owners of these classic cars would gather and convoy together to the event, get their cars polished meet new friends and ultimately, hope that their car will win them some prize after all the hard work.
one year, my friend was so very confident that his car will win the most original award. he had spent dozen of thousands on it and he thinks that no other car can be better than his. but at the end of the event, he did not win the category that he hoped for, but he won the best maintained classic car. to many, this is avery honorable prize, but to him, he's not happy with it. he argued with the judges for not getting the best original. the judge told him that his car can never be best original, because all his parts are new, and the new parts are not from origin country but mostly from china our taiwan. in that case, the car ids not original.
my friend gone mad and said that all his parts were purchased from legit seller and if the sellers are legit then the parts should be deemed as original. how ever, the judges decision are final. there's nothing he can do. after that, whenever there's such event and the judge are from the same group, he will tell everyone to not take part and claimed that those judge take bribe.
Generalization
This week, there's a new car launched by Proton. Model named Preve.
While the usual topic to discuss the price and quality start heating up among forums, there're photos started to circulate on the net too.
1st photo is showing the centre console, where the buttons for power window and radio were slipped into the console of the showroom car. And day after that, another photo of a preve broke down on the road, with it's front right wheel arm broken.
These two photos got the internet user to what we called "forward frenzy". Many are forwarding these photos to friends, with the title "Do you still dare to buy?" as a critic about the quality.
We're also able to see comments flooding these topics that Proton is making bad car, and that the Preve is not quality at all.
At this point, these comments are all "Generalization", because they commented the quality of the car based on two circulated photos. Not only the sample size is too small, yet the cause and effect of the photos were untold for the first photo (Maybe some kids accidentally pushed the buttons too hard?), while Proton claimed that the cause for the broken wheel arm is due to an accident.
Conclusion, the comments from public are "Bad Generalization".
While the usual topic to discuss the price and quality start heating up among forums, there're photos started to circulate on the net too.
1st photo is showing the centre console, where the buttons for power window and radio were slipped into the console of the showroom car. And day after that, another photo of a preve broke down on the road, with it's front right wheel arm broken.
These two photos got the internet user to what we called "forward frenzy". Many are forwarding these photos to friends, with the title "Do you still dare to buy?" as a critic about the quality.
We're also able to see comments flooding these topics that Proton is making bad car, and that the Preve is not quality at all.
At this point, these comments are all "Generalization", because they commented the quality of the car based on two circulated photos. Not only the sample size is too small, yet the cause and effect of the photos were untold for the first photo (Maybe some kids accidentally pushed the buttons too hard?), while Proton claimed that the cause for the broken wheel arm is due to an accident.
Conclusion, the comments from public are "Bad Generalization".
Cause and Effect
Few days ago,i had a gathering with my friends, we all have a common interest which is photography.
Besides, we are still using film and digital single lens reflex (DSLR).
For film user, the current hot topic is the fall of once the big photography giant -- Kodak.
We all talked about the bankruptcy filed by Kodak, and what seemed to be the cause and effect.
Everyone knows that Kodak is specialized in producing films, but not many know that it produces good quality camera and lenses too! At least for Malaysians, we are not really aware of it because we simply use more Japanese cameras.
Anyway, we've mentioned that films are now going to be obsolete as digital cameras are getting more and more famous, and the price is very affordable. Due to this, someone jump into conclusion that, the reason for Kodak to fall, is because the shift from analogue medium to digital medium.
Cause and effect statement : Because digital medium is getting famous, so film companies are no longer famous.
Analogy : Kodak produces film, so Kodak bankrupt because films are no longer famous.
The cause and effect argument, is however invalid, and is considered as "Post hoc fallacy"
Why is it a pos hoc fallacy? Because the cause does preceded the effect, but that does not mean that the even alone establishes a causal relationship.
Facts :
1. Up til to-date, film industry, including Kodak, is generating profit; It's slowing down, but it's still making profit. In fact, Kodak clearly stated that due to the bankruptcy, it closes some line of business, but the film units are to be remained.
2. Kodak reported major losses on R&D. They've researched very good digital cameras, but the sales are not able to recover the costs.
3. Kodak losses money on wrong investment as well, eg: Printing industry -- one of the industry that produces high grade photographic paper for poster, banner, photos etc. People these days just don't use these as much as before, digital media is much more efficient due to its ability to circulate around the world swiftly.
Besides, we are still using film and digital single lens reflex (DSLR).
For film user, the current hot topic is the fall of once the big photography giant -- Kodak.
We all talked about the bankruptcy filed by Kodak, and what seemed to be the cause and effect.
Everyone knows that Kodak is specialized in producing films, but not many know that it produces good quality camera and lenses too! At least for Malaysians, we are not really aware of it because we simply use more Japanese cameras.
Anyway, we've mentioned that films are now going to be obsolete as digital cameras are getting more and more famous, and the price is very affordable. Due to this, someone jump into conclusion that, the reason for Kodak to fall, is because the shift from analogue medium to digital medium.
Cause and effect statement : Because digital medium is getting famous, so film companies are no longer famous.
Analogy : Kodak produces film, so Kodak bankrupt because films are no longer famous.
The cause and effect argument, is however invalid, and is considered as "Post hoc fallacy"
Why is it a pos hoc fallacy? Because the cause does preceded the effect, but that does not mean that the even alone establishes a causal relationship.
Facts :
1. Up til to-date, film industry, including Kodak, is generating profit; It's slowing down, but it's still making profit. In fact, Kodak clearly stated that due to the bankruptcy, it closes some line of business, but the film units are to be remained.
2. Kodak reported major losses on R&D. They've researched very good digital cameras, but the sales are not able to recover the costs.
3. Kodak losses money on wrong investment as well, eg: Printing industry -- one of the industry that produces high grade photographic paper for poster, banner, photos etc. People these days just don't use these as much as before, digital media is much more efficient due to its ability to circulate around the world swiftly.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Fallacy
Bersih 3.0 rally is coming soon. The 2.0 rally is still fresh in mind.
The amount of people, the way the police handle the situation, and how the authorities handle the crowd, are all documented in the database of world wide web.
While we can see the amount of people that are involved in the rally from the youtube and pictures circulating the net which could've been some 10,000-30,000 of participants and above; the government have claimed to the mainstream media that the protestors are only merely 5,000 to 6,000. Obviously, the media could've known the real number, but they just simply could not publish the truth for the fear of license suspension as what had happened to Sin Chew Daily in 1987. For this, we know that it is "Ad populum appeal to force"
During the rally took place, our Prime Minister was having some politics function with many local citizens, and the party's supporters. During a speech that he had given to the participant, this is what he mentioned (translated into English) "Just now, the Deputy PM showed me youtube clips about the (Bersih 2.0) rally, that leader of the opposition party (Anwar), he was just being choked with a weeeeeeee bit of tear gas, and he was showing that pitiful face and being sent to the hospital." In the speech, he stressed the word "a weeeeeee bit of tear gas" (hanya kena sikiiiiiiiiiit tear gas), why did he do that? He's applying "Ad populum appeal to shame". In this case, he's trying to make the crowd believe that the amount of tear gas involved is only very minimal, and it is shameful that how Anwar has reacted (and is shameful that if the audience believe that Anwar is in pain).
In the post mortem press conference, the Bukit Aman Chief Police Officer mentioned, that the police operations in response to the rallies, are a huge success. When the press inquire the reason for using tear gas or water gun towards the peaceful gathering protestors, his reply is that "This is the standard procedure for dismissing a protest." And then he claimed that "We did not fire the tear gas towards the crowd nor hospital, they just happen to fall towards their direction/compound." and again, he claimed "Every country does the same for handling a protest, this is the standard procedure." At this point of time, he's creating a sense of dilemma that when there's a protest happening, shooting tear gas and poisonous water gun is the only option for the police. Clearly he did not mention about the level of nervousness of a protest in order to use the above items. A peaceful protest where protestant only sit on the street can not be treated with tear gas, which are the item to control protestant with armed weapons. And the use of water gun must be announced with at least 2 warnings before shooting it to the protestant, which we can all see in the youtube clips, the police have not send any warnings at all. Hence, in this situation, the speaker was using "Ad populum appeal to false dilemma"
The amount of people, the way the police handle the situation, and how the authorities handle the crowd, are all documented in the database of world wide web.
While we can see the amount of people that are involved in the rally from the youtube and pictures circulating the net which could've been some 10,000-30,000 of participants and above; the government have claimed to the mainstream media that the protestors are only merely 5,000 to 6,000. Obviously, the media could've known the real number, but they just simply could not publish the truth for the fear of license suspension as what had happened to Sin Chew Daily in 1987. For this, we know that it is "Ad populum appeal to force"
During the rally took place, our Prime Minister was having some politics function with many local citizens, and the party's supporters. During a speech that he had given to the participant, this is what he mentioned (translated into English) "Just now, the Deputy PM showed me youtube clips about the (Bersih 2.0) rally, that leader of the opposition party (Anwar), he was just being choked with a weeeeeeee bit of tear gas, and he was showing that pitiful face and being sent to the hospital." In the speech, he stressed the word "a weeeeeee bit of tear gas" (hanya kena sikiiiiiiiiiit tear gas), why did he do that? He's applying "Ad populum appeal to shame". In this case, he's trying to make the crowd believe that the amount of tear gas involved is only very minimal, and it is shameful that how Anwar has reacted (and is shameful that if the audience believe that Anwar is in pain).
In the post mortem press conference, the Bukit Aman Chief Police Officer mentioned, that the police operations in response to the rallies, are a huge success. When the press inquire the reason for using tear gas or water gun towards the peaceful gathering protestors, his reply is that "This is the standard procedure for dismissing a protest." And then he claimed that "We did not fire the tear gas towards the crowd nor hospital, they just happen to fall towards their direction/compound." and again, he claimed "Every country does the same for handling a protest, this is the standard procedure." At this point of time, he's creating a sense of dilemma that when there's a protest happening, shooting tear gas and poisonous water gun is the only option for the police. Clearly he did not mention about the level of nervousness of a protest in order to use the above items. A peaceful protest where protestant only sit on the street can not be treated with tear gas, which are the item to control protestant with armed weapons. And the use of water gun must be announced with at least 2 warnings before shooting it to the protestant, which we can all see in the youtube clips, the police have not send any warnings at all. Hence, in this situation, the speaker was using "Ad populum appeal to false dilemma"
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)