here is one, so you know what you are looking at:
Everyone agrees the trains are bad and nobody agrees about why.
Nationalised for forty years and they were not better. Ownership is not the variable.
Depends which line. Some of it is ownership, most of it is that track and trains are run by different people.
Every decision is made on a shorter timescale than the thing it affects. Defer the maintenance, leave before the bill lands.
no likes, no ranking, nothing to win.
create an account or sign in to crib.
The best thing about a newspaper was that it ended. You got to the back page and you were done and nobody suggested anything else.
Software has got worse. Everything is a web page in a costume now — slower to open, does less, and it wants an account before it will tell you the time.
Meetings are not the problem. Nobody distinguishing a meeting for deciding from a meeting for informing is the problem. Half the frustration in any organisation is people arriving in different modes and spending an hour discovering it, then booking a follow-up to do the thing they came to do.
Every sport eventually optimises the fun out of itself, because the people playing are trying to win and nobody is trying to make it enjoyable to watch.
Watching your team lose is a better test of whether you like the sport than watching them win.
Why is every app now trying to be a social network? I want the thing to do the thing.
Open-plan schools, hospital targets and the gig economy will look like the same idea wearing three hats — measure the throughput, ignore the thing being thrown through.
An unpopular position I hold about hospitals: the food is bad for a reason that has nothing to do with catering, and fixing it would cost more than anyone will admit. Hospital food has to be safe for people with immune systems that barely work, edible by someone who cannot chew properly, compatible with about fourteen medical diets, transportable across a large building, and hold at temperature for the twenty minutes it takes to get to the far ward. Given those constraints, what arrives is roughly what has to arrive. Every campaign to improve it treats it as a failure of will, as though somebody in charge simply does not care whether patients enjoy lunch. Then a celebrity chef gets involved, produces something excellent in one ward for six weeks, and the programme quietly ends when it meets the other three hundred wards and the actual budget. I am not saying it could not be better. I am saying that "why is hospital food bad" has a real answer, and nobody campaigning about it ever engages with the answer.
We know more about the surface of Mars than the floor of our own ocean and that is a genuinely strange set of priorities.
something you reckon. a gripe, a hunch, a hill you will die on. serious or not.
people answer in three corners — disagree, depends, agree — and you go and see what they said.
anyone can join with an email address. it is used to send you a code and nothing else.
what all this does to your head, and what to do about it.