James Avery’s blog

The term “think outside the box” has to be my most hated phrase, competing alongside the dreaded S word (solutions) for the platinum coated trophy of meaningless business speak. So why am I so proud to say that I do think INSIDE the box?

To me, thinking inside the box is a simple case of having an objective, and then defining the boundaries which are relevant for reaching that objective.  For example, the Chess Board Map I posted a couple of weeks ago might not make that much sense as a blog post, but it is very easy to explain in front of someone. I said I’d give it to my dad and let him work it out over the weekend. He’s back for the Christmas holiday now, and he worked out the first 20 or so cities in about 10 minutes. He did so, because it made sense to him. Likewise, the map was a lively discussion point with a fellow travel website owner at a Christmas party last week, because again, he thinks visually too.

I am still trying to find that magic bridge between the two different types of thinking, so I’m not quite there yet. Our Christmas greeting comes with the text “from Aalborg to Zweibrucken” or “Anchorage to Dunedin“. A to Z is for the conventional thinkers - yet Zweibrucken actually means “Two Bridges” in German. My grandparents used to live in Burgess Hill, which is not too far from Three Bridges in Sussex - but I digress - One Bridge is all I’m trying to cross here!

In the meantime, if you want simple instructions on drawing a map pr plan to demonstrate any point (remember that MAP is an anacronym for Make Anything Possible), please scroll down below:

      A                                                                 B
             a     b     c     d      e      f     g     h     i    
1     /     A     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
2     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
3     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
4     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
5     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
6     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
7     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
8     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     \
9     /     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     D     \
      C                                                                  D

• To hand draw: Draw the letter Z, starting at point A, and passing through points B and C to reach D.
• This represents the basic differentiation between traditional (A to Z) thinkers and visual (A to D through Z) thinkers.
• It also shows that the best thinkers actually DO think inside the box after all!
   

So, Google CEO Eric Schmidt has just called the internet a ‘cesspool‘ - where ‘false information thrives.’ Sure, there is a lot of junk out there, but isn’t it Google’s job to work out how to filter the spamalotters from the quality content? Sorry, I should have just said spam, spam and more bloody spam! Cesspool, cess, pool, Google, whatever - any sensible reader knows the difference between internet junk and quality content, just as a diner at the Savoy Grill wouldn’t expect to be fed with luncheon meat.

So does Google really no longer trust itself to fulfil its role as the sewage works of the internet? If not, then it must be time for someone else to come along and do a better job.

Correct information v Useful Information

Whatever Google says or does, we shouldn’t forget the original founding purpose of its search engine - to categorise the world’s information — Google was a popular mis-spelling of the word “googol”, which means 1 followed by 100 zeros. Whenever I think of this, I think of General Gogol from the Bond movies - but I guess he might well have had to remember 100 digit long secret codes!

There’s no doubt that the information is out there on Google - even if some of the highest ranking sites are not exactly of the quality Google likes to say they should be. Sometimes though, I’m not sure if it really matters whether the information is there or not - how much of it do we really need. The internet may or may not be a cesspool, but the amount of information it contains is certainly infinite. So if Google could just give the right answer without all the other junk, then they really would be able to clean up.

PS - I thought I’d test that out by asking the old politicians’ question of “What is 2 + 2″? Amazingly, Google does just come back with the result of 2 + 2 = 4 - and no other clutter. Then I tried finding a reference to David Blunkett thinking 7 x 8 = 54. No wonder I couldn’t find it - that was Stephen Byers!

Infinet Distractions

Anyway, as I was saying, there’s just too much information out there on the internet - some of it useful, some of it less so. Back to work!

Well, mainly due to my own lack of planning, I have a couple of hours to spend here on some worn out keyboard in a corner internet cafe in Granada, before trying to get into Alhambra for an evening visit (all day tickets were sold out). For any pedants reading this, I am talking about Granada´s Alhambra fort ‘ yes, “the” Alhambra, except that this is technically a misnomer, as Alhambra means “The Red One”, and I´m not going to visit “The The Red One”. Anyway, I digress - what was I saying about needing to kill some time?

Unsurprisingly, Wikipedia doesn´t have much to say on the matter. That great bastion of PC speak is probably quite happy with the concept of killing time, as so much of said activity is done on their own website! Well, at least you should learn something from each visit to Wikipedia, although if your name is Vernon Kay, then perhaps Wikipedia is one website you could do without!

A quick scan of Google for the phrase “killing time” (well, this is Spanish Google, so there might be better results in the UK) comes up with a hardcore band from New York, “Murder Consultants” (of the gaming variety, not hitmen - Dixon Jones of Receptional can sort anyone out in the UK looking for this kind of event in & around London), a Youtube spinoff and a book about Death Row in the USA.

No-one out there is giving much by way of definition or origin of the phrase (although according to Wikipedia, it has been used in the New York Times as far back as 1893), beyond the obvious. So in our 21st century society of re-branding and doublespeak, how should the phrase “killing time” be re-packaged to suggest a more productive use of such temporal luxuries?

Or would the PC brigade baulk at the suggestion that all time should be used constructively? After all, if exam failure in schools, sorry, learning communities, is now called “deferred success”, then sitting idle for a couple of hours is surely just “deferred activity”? Next time I´m sitting on the sofa watching another pointless squabble on Fox, I´ll think of that as my “deferred gym session” - but at least there are supposed to be a few feel good benefits from having a bit of a chuckle at some of the morons they get on that programme - everything in moderation as they say!

Well, that´s about 30 minutes so far of doing stuff which is mildly productive, and which has certainly managed to keep my attention going - so I certainly don´t think I need to go and turn myself in to the Time Police just yet! And if it means I´ve made my first non-political blog post in over 3 months, that can´t be too bad either.

But I´m still no closer to that definition. Answers on a PC please (that´s postcard, or comment sent from your Personal Computer - not reporting me to the Politically Correct Brigade or the local Police Constable).