Planet Debian

Subscribe to Planet Debian feed
Planet Debian - http://planet.debian.org/
Updated: 1 hour 6 min ago

Petter Reinholdtsen: Some notes on fault tolerant storage systems

1 November, 2017 - 21:35

If you care about how fault tolerant your storage is, you might find these articles and papers interesting. They have formed how I think of when designing a storage system.

Several of these research papers are based on data collected from hundred thousands or millions of disk, and their findings are eye opening. The short story is simply do not implicitly trust RAID or redundant storage systems. Details matter. And unfortunately there are few options on Linux addressing all the identified issues. Both ZFS and Btrfs are doing a fairly good job, but have legal and practical issues on their own. I wonder how cluster file systems like Ceph do in this regard. After all, there is an old saying, you know you have a distributed system when the crash of a compyter you have never heard of stops you from getting any work done. The same holds true if fault tolerance do not work.

Just remember, in the end, it do not matter how redundant, or how fault tolerant your storage is, if you do not continuously monitor its status to detect and replace failed disks.

Bernd Zeimetz: Connecting your 3D printer to OctoPrint automatically

1 November, 2017 - 21:35
Recently I joined the group of 3d printer owners and OctoPrint users. After some days I got annoyed by the fact that so far nobody seems to have thought about automatically connecting a printer to OctoPrint after turning the printer on. If you start OctoPrint after your printer, everything works fine. But here OctoPrint runs 24⁄7 but I turn off the printer when it is done with printing. My solution of the problem is based on udev and systemd and should work on most recent Linux installations.

James McCoy: Monthly FLOSS activity - 2017/10 edition

1 November, 2017 - 09:09
Debian subversion
  • Continued work on updating the packaging
    • Thanks to some hints from Daniel Shahaf, realized the entire build was running from the binary target, thus as root. This was the cause for the test failures I had been seeing last month.
  • Pushed some long standing patches upstream
vim
  • Uploaded version 2:8.0.1226-1
    • Improved syntax highlighting for debian/control files. Thanks to Mattia Rizzolo for reminding me to look at deb-src-control(5).
    • Updated debsources and debchangelog syntax highlighting for new/unsupported releases in Debian and Ubuntu. Josh Triplett spotted a syntax error which will be fixed in the next upload.
  • Reported upstream that a particular test was failing on many of our buildds.
    • Upstream released a fix to sleep longer before moving on in the test.
    • I proposed that it may be better to check for the actual desired state instead.
libvterm
  • Proposed an API for reporting focus events, which was merged. (r713)
pangoterm
  • Proposed a change to use libvterm's new API, which was merged. (r598)
vim-gnupg
  • Fixed an issue that prevented saving the encrypted buffer if the file was opened with a relative path and the user had subsequently changed the working directory. (vim-gnupg#81)
neovim
  • Added tests and merged my PR to ignore leading modifier commands (e.g., :silent, :keeppatterns) when using 'inccommand'. (neovim#6967)
  • Potentially root-caused a Neovim hang as being caused by a Debian-specific patch to libuv.
vim
  • During a discussion in a Neovim issue, I was reminded that :lockmarks doesn't affect Vim's '[ and '] marks. I had previously worked around this in vim-gnupg, but seeing someone else run into the issue spurred me to look into it more.

    Unlike many other marks, Vim doesn't distinctly track these "last change/yank" marks. They're tracked the same way that the range of the current "operation" are -- the b_op_start and b_op_end items in the buf_T struct. This makes the problem a little more touchy, since those are changed in many places.

    After I had a working prototype, I decided to take a step back and see if there were tests related to what I was going to be changing. Unfortunately, there weren't many and none that dealt with autocmds.

    These marks are especially relevant for Vim's autocmds because many of those provide the plugin author with information through the '[ and '] marks. That means :lockmarks needs to preserve the state of the marks for the user, but still communicate the relevant information for the autocmds.

    To that end, I submitted a pull request to test how these marks are affected by autocmds. Once that's merged, I'll feel more comfortable with proposing the existing prototype, which only covers :write, :read, the :diff* commands, and filtering.

Paul Wise: FLOSS Activities October 2017

1 November, 2017 - 06:39
Changes Issues Review Administration
  • Debian: respond to mail debug request, redirect hardware access seeker to guest account, redirect hardware donors to porters, redirect interview seeker to DPL, reboot system with dead service
  • Debian mentors: security updates, reboot
  • Debian wiki: upgrade search db format, remove incorrect bans, whitelist email addresses, disable accounts with bouncing email, update email for accounts with bouncing email
  • Debian website: remove need for a website rebuild
  • Openmoko: restart web server, set web server process limits, install monitoring tool
Sponsors

The talloc/cmocka uploads and the remmina issue were sponsored by my employer. All other work was done on a volunteer basis.

Daniel Leidert: Troubleshoot

1 November, 2017 - 04:34

I have no idea, what these errors mean. $searchengine and manual pages didn't reveal anything.

That's the first one. It occurs during boot time. Might be a bug somewhere, recently introduced in Debian Sid.


kernel: [ ... ] cgroup: cgroup2: unknown option "nsdelegate"

And that's the second one. It simply occurred. No real issue with NFS though.


kernel: [ ... ] nfs: RPC call returned error 22
kernel: [ ... ] NFS: state manager: check lease failed on NFSv4 server XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX with error 5

Any explanation is appreciated.

Chris Lamb: Free software activities in October 2017

1 November, 2017 - 04:22

Here is my monthly update covering what I have been doing in the free software world in October 2017 (previous month):

Reproducible builds

Whilst anyone can inspect the source code of free software for malicious flaws, most software is distributed pre-compiled to end users.

The motivation behind the Reproducible Builds effort is to allow verification that no flaws have been introduced — either maliciously or accidentally — during this compilation process by promising identical results are always generated from a given source, thus allowing multiple third-parties to come to a consensus on whether a build was compromised.

I have generously been awarded a grant from the Core Infrastructure Initiative to fund my work in this area.

This month I:



I also made the following changes to our tooling:

diffoscope

diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues.

  • Improve names in output of "internal" binwalk members. (#877525).
  • Don't crash on malformed md5sums files. (#877473).
  • Omit misleading "any of" prefix when only complaining about a single module on import. [...]
  • Adjust tests as ps2ascii now varies its output on timezone. [...]

strip-nondeterminism

strip-nondeterminism is our tool to remove specific non-deterministic results from a completed build.

  • Clojure considers .class file to be stale if it shares the same timestamp of the .clj. We thus adjust the timestamps of the .clj to always be younger. (#877418).
  • Print a message in --verbose mode if no canonical time was specified. [...]

buildinfo.debian.net

buildinfo.debian.net is my experiment into how to process, store and distribute .buildinfo files after the Debian archive software has processed them.

  • Always show SHA-256 checksums, regardless of the browser viewport size. [...]
  • Add an API endpoint to fetch specific .buildinfo files for a certain package/version/architecture. [...]


Debian

My activities as the current Debian Project Leader are covered in my "Bits from the DPL" email to the debian-devel-announce mailing list.

Patches contributed
  • devscripts: Please print the actual arguments debuild makes to Lintian. (#880124)
  • hw-detect: Drop reference to floppy disks; it's almost 2018. (#880122)
  • debci:
    • Use deb.debian.org over http.debian.net. (#879654)
    • Document how to use an alternative mirror. (#879655)
Debian LTS

This month I have been paid to work 18 hours on Debian Long Term Support (LTS). In that time I did the following:

  • "Frontdesk" duties, triaging CVEs, etc.
  • Followed up on a large number of upstream "pings" that have been left dormant.
  • Issued DLA 1121-1 to fix an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in curl where a malicious FTP server could abuse this to prevent clients from interacting with it.
  • Issued DLA 1123-1 for the "Go" programming language where an attacker could generate a MIME request such that the server ran out of file descriptors.
  • Issued DLA 1126-1 for the libxfont font selection and rasterisation library, correcting two vulnerabilities, both involving the library being tricked into reading invalid/random memory.
  • Issued DLA 1134-1 for sdl-image1.2, an image loading library. A maliciously-crafted .xcf file could cause a stack-based buffer overflow resulting in potential code execution.
Uploads
  • python-django:
    • 2.0~beta1-1 — New upstream 2.x release.
    • 1.11.6-1 — New upstream bugfix release.
  • gunicorn (19.6.0-10+deb9u1) — Prepared a release for stable to avoid a runtime dependency on a compiler. (#877722)
  • redis:
    • 4:4.0.2-3:
      • Drop the Debian-specific /etc/redis/redis-server.pre-up.d (etc.) hooks and remove them if unchanged.
      • Include systemd redis-server@.service and redis-sentinel@.service template files to easily run multiple Redis instances. (#877702)
      • Patch redis.conf and sentinel.conf with quilt instead of maintaining our own versions under debian/.
    • 4:4.0.2-4:
      • Add input validity checking to cluster config slot numbers to fix CVE-2017-15047. (#878076)
      • Drop debian/bin/generate-parts now we aren't calling it.
      • Correct Bash-ism in NEWS file.
    • 4:4.0.2-5: Replace the existing patch for CVE-2017-15047 with an upstream-blessed version that covers another case.
  • redisearch (0.21.3-5) — Initial release.
  • docbook2man (2.0.0-40) — Correct spelling mistakes in binaries and other misc packaging tidying.
  • python-redis (2.10.6-1) — New upstream release.
  • bfs (1.1.3-1) — New upstream release.
FTP Team

As a Debian FTP assistant I ACCEPTed 103 packages: amcheck, argagg, binutils, blockui, bro-pkg, chkservice, citus, django-axes, docker-containerd, doctest, dtkwidget, duktape, feed2exec, fontforge, fonttools, gcc-8, gcc-8-cross, generator-scripting-language, gitgraph.js, haskell-uri-encode, hoel, iniparser, its, jquery-areyousure, kodi, libcatmandu-mods-perl, libcatmandu-template-perl, libcatmandu-xml-perl, libcatmandu-xsd-perl, libcode-tidyall-plugin-sortlines-naturally-perl, libgdamm5.0, libinfinity, libmods-record-perl, libreoffice-dictionaries, libset-intervaltree-perl, libsodium, linux, linux-grsec, ltsp-manager, lxqt-themes, mailman3-core, measurement-kit, mini-buildd, musescore, node-babel, node-babel-eslint, node-babel-loader, node-babel-plugin-add-module-exports, node-babel-plugin-transform-define, node-gulp-newer, node-regenerate-unicode-properties, node-regexpu-core, node-regjsparser, node-unicode-data, node-unicode-loose-match, openjdk-9, orafce, pgaudit, pgsql-ogr-fdw, pk4, postgresql-mysql-fdw, powa-archivist, python-azure-devtools, python-colormap, python-darkslide, python-dotenv, python-karborclient, python-logfury, python-lupa, python-marshmallow, python-murano-pkg-check, python-octaviaclient, python-pathspec, python-pgpy, python-pydub, python-randomize, python-sabyenc, python-searchlightclient, python-stestr, python-subunit2sql, python-twitter, python-utils, python-wsgilog, r-cran-bindr, r-cran-desc, r-cran-hms, r-cran-readstata13, r-cran-rprojroot, r-cran-wikidatar, r-cran-wikipedir, r-cran-wikitaxa, repmgr, requests-file, resteasy3.0, sdl-kitchensink, stardicter, systemd-el, thunderbird, tomcat8.0, uwsgi-plugin-luajit, uwsgi-plugin-mongo, uwsgi-plugin-php & uwsgi-plugin-v8.

I additionally filed 3 RC bugs against packages that had incomplete debian/copyright files against: fonttools, generator-scripting-language & libsodium.

Petter Reinholdtsen: Web services for writing academic LaTeX papers as a team

1 November, 2017 - 03:00

I was surprised today to learn that a friend in academia did not know there are easily available web services available for writing LaTeX documents as a team. I thought it was common knowledge, but to make sure at least my readers are aware of it, I would like to mention these useful services for writing LaTeX documents. Some of them even provide a WYSIWYG editor to ease writing even further.

There are two commercial services available, ShareLaTeX and Overleaf. They are very easy to use. Just start a new document, select which publisher to write for (ie which LaTeX style to use), and start writing. Note, these two have announced their intention to join forces, so soon it will only be one joint service. I've used both for different documents, and they work just fine. While ShareLaTeX is free software, while the latter is not. According to a announcement from Overleaf, they plan to keep the ShareLaTeX code base maintained as free software.

But these two are not the only alternatives. Fidus Writer is another free software solution with the source available on github. I have not used it myself. Several others can be found on the nice alterntiveTo web service.

If you like Google Docs or Etherpad, but would like to write documents in LaTeX, you should check out these services. You can even host your own, if you want to. :)

Dirk Eddelbuettel: linl 0.0.2: Couple improvements

31 October, 2017 - 19:34

Following up on the initial 0.0.1 release of linl, Aaron and I are happy to announce release 0.0.2 which reached the CRAN network on Sunday in a smooth 'CRAN-pretest-publish' auto-admittance. linl provides a simple-yet-powerful Markdown---and RMarkdown---wrapper around the venerable LaTeX letter class; see below for an expanded example also included as the package vignette.

This versions sets a few sensible default values for font, font size, margins, signature (non-)indentation and more; it also expands the documentation.

The NEWS entry follows:

Changes in tint version 0.0.2 (2017-10-29)
  • Set a few defaults for a decent-looking skeleton and template: font, fontsize, margins, left-justify closing (#3)

  • Blockquote display is now a default as well (#4).

  • Updated skeleton.Rmd and vignette source accordingly

  • Documented new default options (#5 and #6).

  • Links are now by default printed as footnotes (#9).

Courtesy of CRANberries, there is a comparison to the previous release. More information is on the tint page. For questions or comments use the issue tracker off the GitHub repo.

For questions or comments use the issue tracker off the GitHub repo.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

Norbert Preining: Debian/TeX Live 2017.20171031-1

31 October, 2017 - 14:20

Halloween is here, time to upload a new set of scary packages of TeX Live. About a month has passed, so there is the usual big stream up updates. There was actually an intermediate release to get out some urgent fixes, but I never reported the news here. So here are the accumulated changes and updates.

My favorite this time is wallcalendar, a great class to design all kind of calendars, it looks really well done. I immediately will start putting one together.

On the font side there is the new addition coelacanth. To quote from the README: “Coelacanth is inspired by the classic Centaur type design of Bruce Rogers, described by some as the most beautiful typeface ever designed. It aims to be a professional quality type family for general book typesetting.” And indeed it is beautiful!

Other noteworthy addition is the Spark font that allows creating sparklines in the running text with LaTeX.

Enjoy.

New packages

algobox, amscls-doc, beilstein, bib2gls, coelacanth, crossreftools, dejavu-otf, dijkstra, ducksay, dynkin-diagrams, eqnnumwarn, fetchcls, fixjfm, glossaries-finnish, hagenberg-thesis, hecthese, ifxptex, isopt, istgame, ku-template, limecv, mensa-tex, musicography, na-position, notestex, outlining, pdfreview, spark-otf, spark-otf-fonts, theatre, unitn-bimrep, upzhkinsoku, wallcalendar, xltabular.

Updated packages

acmart, amsmath, animate, arabluatex, arara, babel, babel-french, bangorexam, baskervillef, beebe, biblatex-philosophy, biblatex-source-division, bibletext, bidi, bxjaprnind, bxjscls, bxpapersize, bytefield, classicthesis, cochineal, complexity, cooking-units, curves, datetime2-german, dccpaper, doclicense, docsurvey, eledmac, epstopdf, eqparbox, esami, etoc, fbb, fei, fithesis, fmtcount, fnspe, fonts-tlwg, fontspec, genealogytree, glossaries, glossaries-extra, hecthese, hepthesis, hvfloat, ifplatform, ifptex, inconsolata, jfmutil, jsclasses, ketcindy, knowledge, koma-script, l3build, l3experimental, l3kernel, l3packages, langsci, latex2man, latexbug, lato, leadsheets, libertinust1math, listofitems, luatexja, luatexko, luatodonotes, lwarp, markdown, mcf2graph, media9, newtx, novel, numspell, ocgx2, overpic, philokalia, phonenumbers, platex, poemscol, pst-exa, pst-geometrictools, pst-ovl, pst-plot, pst-pulley, pst-tools, pst-vehicle, pst2pdf, pstool, pstricks, pstricks-add, pxchfon, pxjahyper, quran, randomlist, rec-thy, reledmac, robustindex, scratch, skrapport, spectralsequences, tcolorbox, tetex, tex4ht, texcount, texdoc, tikzducks, tikzsymbols, toptesi, translation-biblatex-de, unicode-math, updmap-map, uplatex, widetable, xcharter, xepersian, xetexko, xetexref, xsim, zhlipsum.

Dirk Eddelbuettel: pinp 0.0.3: More docs, more features

31 October, 2017 - 08:31

Our pinp package for snazzier one or two column vignette received it second update. Now at version 0.0.3, it arrived on CRAN on Saturday with minimal fuzz as an 'CRAN-pretest-publish' transition.

We added more frontmatter options, documented more, and streamlined some internals of the LaTeX class borrowed from PNAS. A screenshot of the (updated) vignette can be seen below. Additional screenshots of are at the pinp page.

The NEWS entry for this release follows.

Changes in tint version 0.0.3 (2017-10-28)
  • Section 'Acknowledgements' now conditional on a frontmatter setting, section 'Matmethods' has been removed, pnasbreak no longer used which stabilizes LaTeX float formatting. References are now shown in the column just like other content (Dirk in #36).

  • Vignette now uses new numbered sections frontmatter switch which improves the pdf outline.

  • New front-matter options for title/section header colors, and link colors (Dirk in #39).

  • YAML frontmater options are now documented in the help page for pinp as well (Dirk in #41).

  • Some typos were fixed (Michael in #42 and #43).

Courtesy of CRANberries, there is a comparison to the previous release. More information is on the tint page. For questions or comments use the issue tracker off the GitHub repo.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

Russell Coker: Logic of Zombies

30 October, 2017 - 20:03

Most zombie movies feature shuffling hordes which prefer to eat brains but also generally eat any human flesh available. Because in most movies (pretty much everything but the 28 Days Later series [1]) zombies move slowly they rely on flocking to be dangerous.

Generally the main way of killing zombies is severe head injury, so any time zombies succeed in their aim of eating brains they won’t get a new recruit for their horde. The TV series iZombie [2] has zombies that are mostly like normal humans as long as they get enough brains and are smart enough to plan to increase their horde. But most zombies don’t have much intelligence and show no signs of restraint so can’t plan to recruit new zombies. In 28 Days Later the zombies aren’t smart enough to avoid starving to death, in contrast to most zombie movies where the zombies aren’t smart enough to find food other than brains but seem to survive on magic.

For a human to become a member of a shuffling horde of zombies they need to be bitten but not killed. They then need to either decide to refrain from a method of suicide that precludes becoming a zombie (gunshot to the head or jumping off a building) or unable to go through with it. Most zombie movies (I think everything other than 28 Days Later) has the transition process taking some hours so there’s plenty of time for an infected person to kill themself or be killed by others. Then they need to avoid having other humans notice that they are infected and kill them before they turn into a zombie. This doesn’t seem likely to be a common occurrence. It doesn’t seem likely that shuffling zombies (as opposed to the zombies in 28 Days Later or iZombie) would be able to form a horde.

In the unlikely event that shuffling zombies managed to form a horde that police couldn’t deal with I expect that earth-moving machinery could deal with them quickly. The fact that people don’t improvise armoured vehicles capable of squashing zombies is almost as ridiculous as all the sci-fi movies that feature infantry.

It’s obvious that logic isn’t involved in the choice of shuffling zombies. It’s more of a choice of whether to have the jump-scare aspect of 18 Days Later, the human-drama aspect of zombies that pass for human in iZombie, or the terror of a slowly approaching horrible fate that you can’t escape in most zombie movies.

I wonder if any of the music streaming services have a horror-movie playlist that has screechy music to set your nerves on edge without the poor plot of a horror movie. Could listening to scary music in the dark become a thing?

Related posts:

  1. Logic and Pants I just read an interesting post about proposed new laws...
  2. Water Dogs – Good for Uplift? Update: I am now convinced that the Aquatic Ape theory...

Norbert Preining: Inconsistent version numbers in subversion

30 October, 2017 - 08:29

The TeX Live project uses Subversion as its main repository. Reasons for that there are many, see my blog post on svn and git. But today I realized that subversion is broken, badly broken, because one can easily end up with inconsistent version numbers.

To understand why this is a problem, I restart from the already linked blog: “…Our packages have revision numbers based on the latest change revision of all the contained files. Since subversion has a linear history and central repository, this guarantees that – in contrast to version numbers provided by authors – the revision numbers are strictly increasing…”.

Well, it turned out that this assumption was wrong. Because it is easy to trick subversion to have wrong revision numbers for files. Consider the following flow:

  • revision A: file xxx is changed
  • revision A+n: file xxx is changed again
  • revision A+n+m: file xxx is changed back to the state at revision A

In our case we have files listing other packages, and they are getting moved around at times. In this case one package was moved from one collection to another and back.

Now, if user A does svn up between revision A+n and A+n+m, then the final revision in his checkout of file xxx will be A+n+m. But a user B that does NOT do svn up between A+n and A+n+m will end up with a final revision of A for file xxx in his checkout. And boooom, revisions are different, although the files are in sync with the server.

I cannot grasp what the developers of subversion thought about here, but I consider it deeply broken by design. One more reason the rewrite all our distribution scripts to work with git instead of subversion.

Niels Thykier: Building packages without (fake)root

29 October, 2017 - 15:12

Turns out that it is surprisingly easy to build most packages without (fake)root.  You just need to basic changes:

  1. A way to set ownership to “root:root” of paths when dpkg-deb –build constructs the binary.
  2. A way to have debhelper not do a bunch of (now) pointless chowns to “root:root”.

The above is sufficient for dpkg, debhelper, lintian, apt-file, mscgen, pbuilder and a long list of other packages that only provide paths owned by “root:root”. Obviously, packages differ and yours might need more tweaks than this (e.g. dh_usrlocal had to change behaviour to support this).

But for me, the best part is that the above is not just some random prototype stuck in two git repos on alioth:

Unfortunately, if you are working with games or core packages like shadow with need for static ownership different from “root:root” (usually with a setuid or setgid bit), then our first implementation does not support your needs at the moment[1].  We are working on a separate way to solve static ownership in a declarative way.

 

[1] Note regarding “/usr/local”: If your package needs to provide directories there owned by “root:staff” with mode 02775, then dh_usrlocal can handle that. The non-“root:root” ownership here works because the directories are created in a maintainer script run as root during installation.  Unfortunately, it cannot provide different ownership or modes with “R³ != binary-targets” at the moment.

 


Filed under: Debhelper, Debian

Russ Allbery: Review: Why We Sleep

29 October, 2017 - 10:31

Review: Why We Sleep, by Matthew Walker

Publisher: Scribner Copyright: October 2017 ISBN: 1-5011-4433-2 Format: Kindle Pages: 341

The world is full of theories, and corresponding books, about things that will make you healthier or prevent disease. Nearly all of them are scams, either intentional or created through the placebo effect and the human tendency to see patterns that don't exist. The rare ones that aren't have a certain pattern: they're grounded in our best understanding of biology, align with what our body wants to do anyway, have been thoroughly studied using proper testing methodology, and don't make money for powerful corporations.

I'm fairly sure this is one of those rare ones that isn't a scam. And, if so, it's rather important and worth your attention.

Matthew Walker is a professor of neuroscience and biology at the University of California at Berkeley, where he's the founder of the Center for Human Sleep Science. He's not a doctor; he started medical training, but (as he says in the book) found himself more attracted to questions than answers. He's a professional academic researcher who has been studying sleep for decades. This book is a combination of summary of the current state of knowledge of academic sleep research and a plea: get more sleep, because we're literally killing ourselves with the lack of it.

Walker opens the book with a discussion of the mechanisms of sleep: how we biologically fall asleep and why, how this has changed over time, and how it changes with age. Along with that, he defines sleep: the REM and NREM sleep cycle that you may have already heard of, how it manifests itself in most people, and where dreams fit in. The second part then discusses what happens when you sleep, with a focus on what goes wrong when you don't. (Spoiler: A lot. Study after study, all cited and footnoted, has found connections between sleep and just about every aspect of mental and physical health.) The third part does the same for dreams, fitting them into the picture along with a scientific discussion of just what's going on during dreams. The fourth and final part tackles the problem: why don't we get enough sleep, and what can we do about it?

I will warn in advance that this book will make you paranoid about your sleeping patterns. Walker has the missionary zeal of an academic who has sunk his teeth into something really important that society needs to take into account and will try to drown you in data, analysis, analogies, and sheer earnestness until you will believe him. He wants you to get at least seven, and preferably eight, hours of sleep a night. Every night, with as little variation as you can manage. Everyone, even if you think you're someone who doesn't need as much sleep (you're probably not). There's a ton of science here, a great popularization of a whole field of research, but this is also a book that's trying to get you to do something.

Normally, that sort of book raises my shields. I'm not much of a believer in any book of the general genre of "most people are doing this basic part of life wrong, and should do it my way instead." But the hallmarks of good science are here: very widespread medical consensus, no corporate interest or obvious path to profit, and lots of studies (footnoted here, with some discussions of methodology — although not the statistical details, which will require looking up the underlying studies — and careful caveats where studies indicate correlation but may not find causes). And Walker makes the very telling point early in the book that nearly every form of life on the planet sleeps in one way or another (defined as a daily recurring period of time during which it doesn't respond to outside stimulus), which is a strong indicator of universal necessity. Given the vulnerability and loss of useful hours that come with sleep, one would expect some species to find an evolutionary path away from it if it were dispensable. But except for extremely short-lived species, we've never found a living creature that didn't sleep.

Walker's argument for duration is also backed up by repeated studies on human capability before and after various quantities of sleep, and on studies of the sleep phases in various parts of the night. Study after study used six hours as the cutoff point and showed substantial deterioration in physical and mental capabilities even after only one night of short sleeping. (Reducing sleep to four hours is nearly catastrophic.) And, more worrisomely, that degradation is still measurable after "catching up" on sleep on subsequent nights. Sleeping in on weekends doesn't appear to fully compensate for the damage done by short-sleeping during the week.

When Walker gets into the biological reasons for sleep, one starts to understand why it's so important. I think the part I found the most fascinating was the detailed analysis of what the brain is doing while you sleep. It's not inactive at all, even outside of REM sleep. Walker and other sleep researchers have done intriguing experiments showing how different parts of the sleep cycle transfer memories from short to long term storage, transfer physical skills into subconscious parts of the brain, discard short term memories that the conscious brain has tagged as being unwanted, and free up space for new knowledge acquisition. REM sleep appears to attempt to connect otherwise unrelated memories and bits of knowledge, inverting the association normally works in the brain, thus providing some concrete explanation for sleep's role in creativity. And (this research is fairly new), deep NREM sleep causes temporary physical changes in the brain that appear to be involved in flushing metabolic waste products away, including the plaque involved in Alzheimer's.

The last part of the book is probably the most concretely useful: what can one practically do to get more sleep? There is quite a lot that's proven effective, but Walker starts with something else: sleeping pills.

Here, you can almost see the lines drawn by a lawyer around what Walker should say. He stresses that he's not a medical doctor while laying out study after study that all point in the same direction: sleeping pills are a highly dangerous medical fraud that will shorten your lifespan for negligible benefit in helping you fall asleep, while limiting your brain's ability to enter true sleep. They're sedation, sedation is not sleep, and the four billion dollar sleeping pill market is literally making everything worse.

The good news is there is an effective treatment for insomnia that works for many people; the better news is that it's completely free (although Walker does suggest some degree of medical supervision for serious insomnia so that some parts of it can be tailored to you). He walks through CBT-I (cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia), which is now the medically recommended primary treatment for insomnia, and takes apart the pieces to show how they line up with the results of sleep research studies. Alongside that are recommendations for improving sleep for people who don't have clinical insomnia but who aren't regularly getting the recommended amount of sleep. There are a lot of interesting bits here (and he of course talks about blue LED light and its relationship to melatonin cycles), but I think the most interesting for me was that you have to lower your core body temperature by a couple of degrees (Fahrenheit) to enter sleep. The temperature of your sleeping environment is therefore doubly important: temperature changes are one of the signals your body uses to regulate circadian rhythms (cold being a signal of night), and a colder sleeping area helps you lower your core body temperature so that you can fall asleep. (The average person does best with a sleeping room temperature of 65F, 18C.)

There's even more in here: I haven't touched on Walker's attack on the US tendency to push high school start times earlier and earlier in the day (particularly devastating for teenagers, whose circadian rhythms move two hours later in the day than adults before slowly returning to an adult cycle). Or the serious problems of waking to an alarm clock, and the important benefits of the sleep that comes at the end of a full night's cycle. Or the benefits of dreams in dealing with trauma and some theories for how PTSD may interfere with that process. Or the effect of sleep on the immune system.

Walker's writing style throughout Why We Sleep is engaging and clear, although sometimes too earnest. He really wants the reader to believe him and to get more sleep, and sometimes that leaks around the edges. One can also see the effort he's putting into not reading too much into research studies, but if there's a flaw in the science here, it's that I think Walker takes a few tentative conclusions a bit too far. (I'm sure these studies have the standard research problem of being frequently done on readily-available grad students rather than representative samples of the population, although the universality of sleep works in science's favor here.) Some of the recitations of research studies can get rather dry, and I once again discovered how boring I find most discussion of dreams, but for a first book written by an academic, this is quite readable.

This is one of those books that I want everyone to read mostly so that they can get the information in it, not as much for the enjoyment of reading the book itself. I've been paying closer attention to my own sleep patterns for the last few years, and my personal experience lines up neatly with the book in both techniques to get better sleep and the benefits of that sleep. I'd already reached the point where I was cringing when people talk about regularly going on four or five hours of sleep; this is an entire book full of researched reasons to not do that. (Walker points out that both Reagan and Thatcher, who bragged about not requiring much sleep, developed Alzheimer's, and calls out Trump for making the same brag.) The whole book may not be of interest to everyone, but I think everyone should at least understand why the World Heath Organization recommends eight hours a night and labels shift work a probable carcinogen. And, as Walker points out, we should be teaching some of this stuff in school health classes alongside nutrition and sex education.

Alas, Walker can't provide much advice on what I think is the largest robber of sleep: the constant time pressure of modern life, in which an uninterrupted nine hour sleep opportunity feels like an unaffordable luxury.

Rating: 9 out of 10

Steinar H. Gunderson: Introducing Narabu, part 4: Decoding

28 October, 2017 - 18:45

Narabu is a new intraframe video codec. You probably want to read part 1, part 2 and part 3 first.

So we're at the stage where the structure is in place. How do we decode? Once we have the structure, it's actually fairly straightforward:

First of all, we need to figure out where each slice starts and ends. This is done on the CPU, but it's mostly just setting up pointers, so it's super-cheap. It doesn't see any pixels at all, just lengths and some probability distributions (those are decoded on the CPU, but they're only a few hundred values and no FP math is involved).

Then, we set up local groups of size 64 (8x8) with 512 floats of shared memory. Each group will be used for decoding one slice (320 blocks), all coefficients. Each thread starts off doing rANS decoding (this involves a lookup into a small LUT, and of course some arithmetic) and dequantization of 8 blocks (for its coefficient); this means we now have 512 coefficients, so we add a barrier, do 64 horizontal IDCTs (one 8-point IDCT per thread), add a new barrier, do 64 vertical IDCTs, and then finally write out the data. We can then do the next 8 coefficients the same way (we kept the rANS decoding state), and so on.

Note how the parallelism changes during the decoding; it's a bit counterintuitive at first, and barriers are not for free, but it avoids saving the coefficients to global memory (which is costly). First, the parallelism is over coefficients, then over horizontal DCT blocks, then over vertical DCT blocks, and then we start all over again. In CPU multithreading, this would be very tricky, and probably not worth it at all, but on the GPU, it gives us tons of parallelism.

One problem is that the rANS work is going to be unbalanced within each warp. There's a lot more data (and thus more calculation and loading of compressed data from memory) in the lower-frequency coefficients, which means the other threads in the warp are wasting time doing nothing when they do more work. I tried various schemes to balance it better (like making even larger thread groups to get e.g. more coefficient 0s that could work together, or reordering the threads' coefficients in a zizag), but seemingly it didn't help any. Again, the lack of a profiler here is hampering effective performance investigations. In any case, the performance is reasonably good (my GTX 950 does 1280x720 luma-only in a little under 0.4 ms, which equates to ~1400 fps for full 4:2:2).

As a side note, GoPro open-sourced their CineForm HD implementation the other day, and I guess it only goes to show that these kind of things really belong on the GPU; they claim similar performance numbers to what I get on my low-end NVIDIA GPU (923.6 fps for 1080p 4:2:2, which would be roughtly 1800 fps on 720p60), but that's on a 4GHz 8-core Broadwell-E, which is basically taking the most expensive enthusiast desktop CPU you can get your hands on and then overclocking it. Kudos to GoPro for freeing it, though (even under a very useful license), even though FFmpeg already had a working reverse-engineered implementation. :-)

Next time, we'll look at the encoder, which is a bit more complicated. After that, we'll do some performance tests and probably wrap up the series. Stay tuned.

Russ Allbery: Review: Provenance

28 October, 2017 - 10:31

Review: Provenance, by Ann Leckie

Publisher: Orbit Copyright: September 2017 ISBN: 0-316-38863-7 Format: Kindle Pages: 448

In a rather desperate attempt to please her mother, Ingray has spent every resource she has on extracting the son of a political enemy from Compassionate Removal (think life imprisonment with really good marketing). The reason: vestiges, a cultural touchstone for Ingray's native planet of Hwae. These are invitation cards, floor tiles, wall panels, or just about anything that can be confirmed to have been physically present at an important or historical moment, or in the presence of a famous figure. The person Ingray is retrieving supposedly pulled off the biggest theft of vestiges in history. If she can locate them, it would be a huge coup for her highly-placed politician mother, and the one time she would be victorious in her forced rivalry with her brother.

About the best thing that could be said for this plan is that it's audacious. The first obstacle is the arrival of the Geck on the station for a Conclave for renegotiation of the treaty with the Presger, possibly the most important thing going on in the galaxy at the moment, which strands here there without money for food. The second is that the person she has paid so much to extract from Compassionate Removal says they aren't the person she was looking for at all, and are not particularly interested in going with her to Hwae. Only a bit of creative thinking in the face of a visit from the local authorities, and the unexpected kindness of the captain from whom she booked travel, might get her home with the tatters of her plan intact. But she's clearly far out of her depth.

Provenance is set in the same universe as Ancillary Justice and its sequels, but it is not set in the empire of the Radchaai. This is another human world entirely, one with smaller and more provincial concerns. The aftermath of Ancillary Mercy is playing out in the background (so do not, on risk of serious spoilers, read the start of this book without having read the previous trilogy), but this is in no way a sequel. Neither the characters nor the plot are involved in that aftermath. It's a story told at a much smaller scale, about two political families, cut-throat maneuvering, horrible parenting, the inexplicable importance of social artifacts, the weirdness of human/alien relations, and the merits of some very unlikely allies.

Provenance is a very different type of story than Ancillary Justice, and Ingray is a very different protagonist. The shape of the plot reminded me of one of Lois McMaster Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan stories: hair-brained ideas, improvisation, and unlikely allies. But Ingray couldn't be more different than Miles. She starts the book overwhelmed, despairing, and not at all manic, and one spends the first part of the story feeling sorry for her and becoming quite certain that everything will go horribly wrong. The heart of this book is the parallel path Leckie takes the reader and the characters along as they discover just what Ingray's true talents and capabilities are. It's a book about being hopelessly bad at things one was pressured towards being good at, while being quietly and subtly good at the skills that let one survive a deeply dysfunctional family.

There are lots of books with very active protagonists, and a depressing number of books with passive protagonists pushed around by the plot. There are very few books that pull off the delicate characterization that Leckie manages here: a protagonist who is rather hopeless at taking charge of the plot in the way everyone wants (but doesn't particularly expect) her to, but who charts her own path through the plot in an entirely unexpected way. It's a story that grows on you. The plot rhythm never works in quite the way one expects from other books, but it builds its own logic and its own rhythm, and reached a very emotionally satisfying conclusion.

The Radchaai, or at least one Radchaai citizen, do show up eventually, providing a glimmer of outside view at the Ancillary Justice world. Even better, the Geck play a significant role. I adore Leckie's aliens: they're strange and confusing, but in a refreshingly blunt way rather than abusing gnomic utterances and incomprehensible intelligence. And the foot-stomping of the spider bot made me laugh every time.

The stakes are a lot lower here than in Ancillary Justice, and Ingray isn't the sort of character who's going to change the world. But that's okay; indeed, one of the points of this book is why and how that's okay. I won't lie: I'd love more Breq, and I hope we eventually get an exploration of the larger consequences of her story. But this is a delightful story that made me happy and has defter character work than most SF being written. Recommended, but read the Ancillary trilogy first.

One minor closing complaint, which didn't change my experience of the book but which I can't help quibbling about: I'm completely onboard with the three-gender system that Leckie uses for the Hwae (I wish more SF authors would play with social as well as technological ideas), and I think she wove it deftly into the story, but I wish she hadn't used Spivak pronouns for the third gender. (e/em/eir, for those who aren't familiar.) Any of the other gender-neutral pronouns look better to me and cause fewer problems for my involuntary proofreader. I prefer zie/zir for personal reasons, but sie/hir, zhe/zhim/zher, or even thon or per would read more smoothly. Eir is fine, but em looks like 'em and throws my brain into dialect mode and forces a re-parse, and e just looks like a typo. I know from lots of Usenet discussions of pronouns that I'm not the only one who has that reaction to Spivak. But it's a very minor nit.

Rating: 8 out of 10

Sam Hartman: How Can Debian Turn Disagreement into Something that Makes us Stronger

28 October, 2017 - 06:04
Recently, when asked to engage with the Debian Technical Committee, a maintainer chose to orphan their package rather than discuss the issue brought before the committee. In another decision earlier this year, a maintainer orphaned their package indicating a lack of respect for the approach being taken and the process. Unfortunately, this joins an ever longer set of issues where people walk away from the TC process disheartened and upset.

For me personally the situations where maintainers walked away from the process were hard. People I respect and admire were telling me that they were unwilling to participate in our dispute resolution process. In one case the maintainer explicitly did not respect a process I had been heavily involved in. As someone who values understanding and build a team, I feel disappointed and hurt thinking about this.

Unfortunately, I don't feel much better when I consider several of the other issues brought before the TC. In a number of cases, the process has concluded, but it feels like a pyrrhic victory. We have an answer, but often we never reached an understanding of one of the key stakeholder's positions. People are sufficiently disappointed or frustrated that they reduce their involvement. That is, the answer is not one they can live with. Sometimes, I'm not even sure that answering the question was worth the cost.

My initial suspicion as I begin to consider issues that have come before the TC in the last few years is that as a necessary consequence of how the TC operates, we will drive a significant chunk of those who come to us away from our community. I will not be part of that. If I end up eventually agreeing with this suspicion, I will either work to improve the TC process or find a different way to contribute to the project that is more aligned with my goals.


Our Community is More Important than Technical Correctness I firmly believe that Debian's strength is its community. Distributions, upstreams, free-software advocates, corporate interests, and everything in between work together. Because we are working on a concrete product,we actually have to understand how our needs conflict and compliment each other. Also, like any organization, our ability to get things done is dependent on our contributors and the time we all put in.

I cannot think of anything more harmful we can do than drive away a constructive contributor. Technical quality is important: many of us will eventually go away if quality drops too much. However, Debian itself can be improved incrementally. Yes, new people do join Debian. However, it takes a lot of new people to make up for a situation where everyone involved is frustrated, and some leave and tell their friends to stay away from Debian.

When a Disagreement Reaches the TC When a disagreement reaches the TC, we know a few things. First, people have not have not been able to resolve it on their own. Second, the disagreement is important enough to at least one of the parties to ask for outside help.

If the TC were to simply announce a decision, it is very likely that at least one party would feel frustrated and disappointed. If the decision is important to someone it almost always means that they care about the outcome. If previous efforts have not reached agreement then there is an outcome that is undesired. While it's possible under the constitution that two parties could bring an issue to the TC mutually where the dynamics could be different, this does not happen in practice.

When we "lose" When a decision making process decides to select one of my undesired outcomes, I have strong negative feelings. First, there is the technical result itself. Because of an adverse decision it is generally harder for me to do my technical work, or some ethical position or group I care about is disadvantaged. However, the strongest feelings are related to needs about my place in the community, not a direct response to the technical decision. I worry about whether issues I care about will be valued in the future; I would likely feel weary or scared thinking of contributing in an environment where issues that matter to me aren't going to be considered. I tend to feel frustrated if my position was not adequately considered this time around.

Often, the strongest feelings do not stem from how I am impacted by the decision itself. Thus, if my more general needs are addressed, I will feel a lot better about not having my preferred outcome selected. Confidence that my position was understood is the single biggest factor in being able to accept the result. If the community took the time to understand me, then I have confidence that I am valued. I can advocate for change and be part of the ongoing discussion. If I understand the other positions then I can understand that the position was not arbitrary. Understanding the other positions is also a prerequisite to seeing how things I value were considered, especially when the tradeoff did not ultimately favor these values.

My conversations with others about their experience with conflict suggest my feelings and needs are common.


However, the TC focuses almost exclusively on the technical matter before it. I don't think the TC has done a good job of actually understanding maintainers or the people bringing issues to us. Especially when we're fairly sure we understand what the ultimate decision will be, we focus on getting to that decision. Of course part of actually understanding someone is considering what they have to say. Even when you have high confidence in an outcome, if you want someone to feel understood, you do have to listen at a point where you can consider what they bring forward.

Frustration of Being Questioned

On the other side, it's frustrating to have your decisions questioned. Reviewing a decision takes time. Even if the TC agrees with a maintainer, asking that maintainer to sit through a long process can create frustrations as deep as any I discussed in the previous section.

So the process is doubly bad for maintainers. Someone can bring up an issue which requires precious time. Then if the TC decides against the maintainer, we have all the problems I discussed previously.

I acknowledge this. A good process must respect the maintainer's time. However, it must respect the community members who disagree with maintainers. Everyone who brings an issue to the TC is a developer. They have contributed significantly to our community and are part of our team. Yes, we need to protect the process against abuse. But in a very real sense if we aren't willing to consider an issue and we aren't willing to engage with someone, understand why they think the issue should be considered, and work until they understand why we made our decision, we are saying we do not respect them enough to take that time. We should expect that to drive people away.

I wonder if the solution here involves a two phase process. During the first phase we work with someone bringing an issue to us until we understand it. We either engage the maintainer at that point, spend the time to help the person bringing an issue to us understand why we are not engaging the maintainer, or have decided the issue is abusive of the processs/misdirected. For this to work maintainers would have to trust us enough to actually be willing to sit back and not spend a lot of their time.

Sam, It's Just Personalities

One criticism I've heard as I discuss this is that a lot of the negative feelings surround interpersonal conflict and are personality conflicts. Yes, personalities matter. Yes, we’re still healing from the Systemd discussion.

However, as a community, I think we need to figure out how we respect the inevitable personality conflicts. I can think of one or two developers I'm still upset with years after an issue. It happens. Perhaps if I were a maintainer when one of these developers raised a concern with my packages, I could ask that someone else be a primary advocate for an issue. Similarly, if a developer wanted to address an issue with me as a maintainer but would prefer not to deal with me, perhaps we could figure out some way that we could see if someone else shared the concern.

Dropping a Package is Sometimes an Answer

My concerns were sparked by instances where a maintainer dropped a package rather than interact with the TC. Sometimes that can be a healthy step in a transition. At Debconf this year, Enrico Zini gave a talk on consent culture in Debian. One of the key points of his talk is that we can find over time that what we're being asked to do in Debian is no longer consistent with our boundaries. If it isn’t helping us move forward—if it isn’t fun—then it is likely time to stop.

In that sense, approaching disagreement can be a great time to take stock and ask whether we still enjoy maintaining a package. If we don’t, then stepping aside and letting others take it on can be a great way that we and they can be happier. I don’t really think that’s what happened in these instances though. Based on comments made to me, this sounded more like a lack of faith in being treated well or in our ability as a committee.

Even so, Enrico’s talk applies in a number of ways here. He suggests that the approach we should take when someone is done and steps away is to thank then. I couldn’t agree more. From the depth of my heart I offer thanks: “Thank you for taking care of yourself and stepping away when it is no longer fun. Thank you for all the effort you have put into these packages. I hope to work with you on great things in the future.”

Russ Allbery: Review: The Black Gryphon

27 October, 2017 - 09:49

Review: The Black Gryphon, by Mercedes Lackey & Larry Dixon

Series: Mage Wars #1 Publisher: DAW Copyright: 1994 Printing: January 1995 ISBN: 0-88677-643-0 Format: Mass market Pages: 460

The Mage Wars series (or the Gryphon series, which isn't its official title but which is in all of the titles) is part of the sprawling Valdemar mega-series, but it's a prequel to all of the other stories. It's also slightly challenging if you're reading in publication order, since it was published simultaneously with the Mage Storms series. If you're following publication order, in theory you should interleave the two series, but I hate doing that. I'm therefore reading it after Mage Winds and before Mage Storms. We'll see whether that was a good idea when I get to the next series.

You could, if you really wanted to, read this series before any other Valdemar book. As a prequel from the deep past of Valdemar's world, it doesn't depend on the other series, and you'll get a rediscovery of lost knowledge feel from later books. The downside is that it's a rather boring introduction, and that order would spoil a lot of the revelatory flow of the other series (particularly Elspeth's adventures in the Mage Winds books).

I'm now getting into the Valdemar books that I've only read once. I've been putting off continuing my Valdemar re-read because this series was next and I remember being rather bored with it the first time I read it. But I'm re-reading for the world-building and background as much as for the characters, and this is a huge chunk of world background that fills in the bones underneath Winds of Fate and its sequels. Here's why Dhorisha is a crater, here's why the Pelagiris forests are such a mess, here's where Ma'ar starts, here's the origin of both the gryphons and K'Leshya, and here, finally, we get to see the legendary Urtho on the page.

The problem with writing novels set in the epic backstory of your universe is that it's hard to live up to the drama that readers have invented for themselves. A lot of The Black Gryphon is background to events Valdemar readers already know will happen, creating a corresponding lack of surprise. I reached the end of the book and said "yup, that's pretty much what everyone said had happened."

Lackey and Dixon do try to do some interesting things here, one of which being the backgrounding of the war. The Black Gryphon starts in the middle of a long-running conflict between Urtho and Ma'ar and doesn't follow the generals or the battles. The protagonists, instead, are a kestra'chern (a type of psychiatrist and spiritual healer who also uses sex, with the expected conflicts of people who incorrectly think of them as prostitutes) and the eventual leader of the gryphons (Skandranon, who is referenced in later books and who provides the title). We get some combat scenes from Skandranon and later another gryphon, but a lot of the book is Amberdrake fighting the effects of the war instead of the details of the war itself.

There's a deep and moving story in that idea, and in some of the attached love stories that play out in the army camps. There's also a great story somewhere around Urtho: a brilliant but detached mage who is way out of his depth trying to run an army but smart enough to gather good people around him. He's also a creator of new life, including the gryphons. The Black Gryphon tries to talk about Urtho's paternalism, the weird emotional currents of his relationship with his creations, and the places Urtho keeps things from others for, supposedly, their own good. If this book had looked a bit deeper at the support structure for an army that's trying to be humane, or at the ways in which Urtho strays far too close to being an abusive tyrant through inaction despite having the best of intentions at every step, I think it could have said something significant.

Unfortunately, that's not this book. This book is full of relentlessly black and white morality (the flaw of much of the Valdemar series) that bleaches away interesting shades of grey. Urtho is good and wise by authorial fiat, and Ma'ar is the same utterly irredeemable force of evil that he is in other books. The story skitters over Urtho's odd tyrannies, making them all better with the pure power of friendship and good intentions. There just isn't much emotional depth, and while I don't expect that of Lackey in general, this story really needed that depth to work.

What we get instead is repetition, as Lackey and Dixon hit the same emotional notes with Amberdrake repeatedly. This is one of those books that makes me wonder if Lackey was trying to write too many novels in a short time than was good for their individual quality. (Collaborations often mean that the lesser-known name is doing all the work, but Dixon is Lackey's husband and the tone of the book is sufficiently Lackey that I don't think that happened here.) It felt padded by Amberdrake turning over the same emotional rocks repeatedly, to largely the same effect.

This is, in short, not Lackey's finest effort, although it does have its moments. As always, Lackey is at her best when writing psychological healing narratives. Zhaneel's story is a bit too easy, but the dynamic between Amberdrake and Winterhart is the best part of the book. And The Black Gryphon does tell the reader exactly what led up to the Cataclysm and why. There are no major surprises, but there are some small ones, and it's a nice payoff for the lore-obsessed (like me).

This is missable unless you want the full world-building behind Valdemar's past, and it's not the best writing. But if you're heavily invested in the Valdemar universe, it's at least readable and provides an important bit of the history.

Followed by The White Gryphon.

Rating: 5 out of 10

Russell Coker: Anarchy in the Office

26 October, 2017 - 18:16

Some of the best examples I’ve seen of anarchy working have been in corporate environments. This doesn’t mean that they were perfect or even as good as a theoretical system in which a competent manager controlled everything, but they often worked reasonably well.

In a well functioning team members will encourage others to do their share of the work in the absence of management. So when the manager disappears (doesn’t visit the team more than once a week and doesn’t ask for any meaningful feedback on how things are going) things can still work out. When someone who is capable of doing work isn’t working then other people will suggest that they do their share. If resources for work (such as a sufficiently configured PC for IT work) aren’t available then they can be found (abandoned PCs get stripped and the parts used to upgrade the PCs that need it most).

There was one time where a helpdesk worker who was about to be laid off was assigned to the same office as me (apparently making all the people in his group redundant took some time). So I started teaching him sysadmin skills, assigned work to him, and then recommended that my manager get him transferred to my group. That worked well for everyone.

One difficult case is employees who get in the way of work being done, those who are so incompetent that they break enough things to give negative productivity. One time when I was working in Amsterdam I had two colleagues like that, it turned out that the company had no problem with employees viewing porn at work so no-one asked them to stop looking at porn. Having them paid to look at porn 40 hours a week was much better than having them try to do work. With anarchy there’s little option to get rid of bad people, so just having them hang out and do no work was the only option. I’m not advocating porn at work (it makes for a hostile work environment), but managers at that company did worse things.

One company I worked for appeared (from the non-management perspective) to have a management culture of doing no work. During my time there I did two “annual reviews” in two weeks, and the second was delayed by over 6 months. The manager in question only did the reviews at that time because he was told he couldn’t be promoted until he got the backlog of reviews done, so apparently being more than a year behind in annual reviews was no obstacle to being selected for promotion. On one occasion I raised the issue of a colleague who had done no work for over a year (and didn’t even have a PC to do work) with that manager, his response was “what do you expect me to do”! I expected him to do anything other than blow me off when I reported such a serious problem! But in spite of that strictly work-optional culture enough work was done and the company was a leader in it’s field.

There has been a lot of research into the supposed benefits of bonuses etc which usually turn out to reduce productivity. Such research is generally ignored presumably because the people who are paid the most are the ones who get to decide whether financial incentives should be offered so they choose the compensation model for the company that benefits themselves. But the fact that teams can be reasonably productive when some people are paid to do nothing and most people have their work allocated by group consensus rather than management plan seems to be a better argument against the typical corporate management.

I think it would be interesting to try to run a company with an explicit anarchic management and see how it compares to the accidental anarchy that so many companies have. The idea would be to have minimal management that just does the basic HR tasks (preventing situations of bullying etc), a flat pay rate for everyone (no bonuses, pay rises, etc) and have workers decide how to spend money for training, facilities, etc. Instead of having middle managers you would have representatives elected from each team to represent their group to senior management.

PS Australia has some of the strictest libel laws in the world. Comments that identify companies or people are likely to be edited or deleted.

Related posts:

  1. Preferring Not To I’ve just read Bartleby the Scrivener which is a short...
  2. Contract Pay Rates In a comment on my post about Bad Project Management...
  3. more about securing an office My post about securing an office received many comments, so...

Russ Allbery: Review: Waypoint Kangaroo

26 October, 2017 - 10:30

Review: Waypoint Kangaroo, by Curtis C. Chen

Series: Kangaroo #1 Publisher: Thomas Dunne Copyright: June 2016 ISBN: 1-250-08179-3 Format: Kindle Pages: 312

Disclaimer: Curtis was a classmate of mine at Stanford and part of the same social circle. That was a surprisingly long time ago.

Kangaroo is a spy (and, for this book, you should think James Bond). Agency training, fake identities, lots of gadgets, grumpy yet ridiculously competent support staff... the typical package. But Kangaroo also has a special power, which is the entire reason he ended up in the position he has. He's apparently the only person in the world who can open the pocket: a hole into another dimension, which can function as infinite storage and quite a bit more.

Waypoint Kangaroo opens with the tail end of a mission and Kangaroo in action, as an introduction to Kangaroo's first-person narrative voice, job, and the capabilities of the pocket. But the real story starts when Kangaroo is sent on vacation. The office is being audited, Kangaroo hasn't had time off basically ever, and his boss insists on a trip to Mars on the space equivalent of a cruise ship. No work. An expense account. Just relax and have fun.

Kangaroo isn't sure he knows how to not work. Or how to avoid boredom when trying hard to not work. It leads to probably ill-advised decisions like falling in love at first glance with the chief engineer, or going on entirely unauthorized spacewalks in the middle of the night. It's very lucky for him that the captain of this commercial cruise ship appears to also work for his agency. And it's good for his inability to stop working that there's a murder on board.

For a first novel, this is refreshingly free of a lot of first novel problems. It's lean, well-structured, easy to follow, moves right along, and doesn't feel over-stuffed with exposition or world-building. There's an interplanetary war in the past background, and of course a lot of loving description of the precise mechanics of the pocket and the tricks with momentum and retrieval Kangaroo can do with it, but the book never falls into too much explanation. And the plot is satisfyingly twisty. It's an action story plot, to be clear: don't expect deep puzzles or complex deduction. But there are enough players and hidden motives to keep things interesting.

The downside is that I didn't like Kangaroo very much. He's a bit of an ass.

Some of this goes with the spy novel territory, and some of it is good (if occasionally grating) characterization. Kangaroo doesn't know how to turn off the part of his brain that makes everything a mission. But his flippant, know-it-all attitude got on my nerves after a book full of first-person narration, and while (full credit to Curtis here) the romance in this book is clearly consensual and stays well away from the creepy romances so common in spy stories, the love-at-first sight bits and some of Kangaroo's awkward reactions provoked more eye-rolling than enjoyment. A lot of this is just personal taste, but that's the peril of books told with first-person narration. The reader has to really like the protagonist to spend a whole book in their head. If that relationship doesn't click, the supporting characters have a harder time salvaging the experience.

Waypoint Kangaroo avoids the problem of too many loving descriptions of guns, partly because it's a spy novel and instead has loving descriptions of spy equipment in a future that supports implanted devices. I think there was a smidgen too much of this, but it was within genre conventions and spy stuff is more interesting than guns. But (and I admit that this is probably idiosyncratic), it also had way too many loving descriptions of alcohol and one drunk scene. I don't care if I ever read another book with a drunk protagonist (particularly first-person), and I care considerably less about alcohol than I do about spy equipment or guns.

That said, I still liked this well enough that I'll probably buy the sequel. (No cliffhangers; Waypoint Kangaroo is a complete story. But this is a character who could easily support a long episodic series.) The pocket is a neat gimmick, the world background is at least mildly interesting, and some of the supporting characters were excellent. (Particularly the security chief and the engineer.) I might even warm to Kangaroo over time if subsequent stories stay more on his creative fast-talking rather than his drinking and awkward romances.

I don't think this is quite good enough for me to recommend it, but if you're in the mood for a light and fast-moving first-person Bond-style story with science fiction trappings, it does deliver.

Rating: 6 out of 10

Pages

Creative Commons License ลิขสิทธิ์ของบทความเป็นของเจ้าของบทความแต่ละชิ้น
ผลงานนี้ ใช้สัญญาอนุญาตของครีเอทีฟคอมมอนส์แบบ แสดงที่มา-อนุญาตแบบเดียวกัน 3.0 ที่ยังไม่ได้ปรับแก้