Years ago, one of my jobs was to do capacity planning for a mainframe system. On occasion, we'd move work around between logical divisions on the mainframe, so as to maximize the available capacity in one place. For example, if two divisions each were allocated 20 percent of the overall capacity, and one was using 10 percent and the other 8 percent, we might combine them to use 18 of the 20 percent in one division, leaving the 20 percent on the other completely free for new workload that wouldn't have fit in any other way.
On one occasion, I was in a meeting where we were trying to decide whether to move a given workload. I noticed after a while that the people who wanted to move it were trying to say that it would 'fit right in, no problem', and those who didn't want to move it would say 'its too big, it won't fit'. The initial rating for the workload was 5 MIPS (a computer rating). But the people who wanted to move it would say it was 3-5 MIPS, and the ones who didn't would say it was 5-8 MIPS. After a while, I asked everyone to agree that the best estimate of the workload was 5 MIPS, and they did. After all, that was what we had started with! I went up to the blackboard and wrote FIVE MIPS in block letters. When anyone would say anything else, I'd point to the board, and they would change what they said. It helped a lot.
Today I heard some political commentators making the point that Hillary Clinton has to win 'significantly' in Pennsylvania to be considered a viable candidate. How much is significant? Would it be by five percent or more? Well, one hedged, I don't know if you can say that.... certainly, more than one or two percent... and ten percent would definitely be a significant win... They never did decide what the lowest number would be that could be considered significant. They needed someone to do that -- and then write a block letters number on the board. Committing is hard, though.
But you know what? I bet that even if she loses -- which I think unlikely -- she'll keep going. She wants this so badly, she'd have to lose, and lose significantly, before she'd drop out. What's significantly?
Well... you know.
2 comments:
Hillary is deemed to lose if Obama gets a single vote. Anything beyond that is gravy.
She wants to be President? To be in this sort of race, you have to be convinced that you're destined to be the President! I'm not convinced that Obama is that point, yet.
But, as far as the commentators are concerned: the talking heads fill the air, and the rest of us turn up the air-conditioning. :-)
Carolyn Ann
I think you're being a little too severe, CA. Must come from having your road trip leathers on, hey? But seriously -- obviously, Obama IS going to get a decent turnout (overwhelming? doubt it). She can't stop that, but if she can gain a substantial amount of the vote, she can make a case that she's still viable. The more vote, the more substantial, of course. My uninformed swag -- if she gets anything over 45% of the vote, she'll say that.
As for wanting to be President -- years ago, I read *something* -- sorry, I really don't recall specifics -- about the only suitable candidates for that office being people who did not want it but could handle it. I think the metaphor they used at the time was 'riding the powerful horse' -- you had to have confidence that you could, while not having the need for it. It all sounded quite mystical and real at the time; less so, now. I don't know if she thinks she's destined; I would bet serious money she thinks Its Her Turn.
I agree with you on Obama. Though I'm still a little queasy on his length of service so far -- its like going from the minor leagues, suiting up in the bigs, and your first game is in the World Series. I sometimes wonder: what if he blows it, big time. Could he be worse than George? And I think: yes. Yes, he could.
And you're absolutely right about the commentators. Never once heard one say 'Beats the hell out of me!'
Post a Comment