July 22, 2004
Dear Everyone:
In the xxx business, anything that is still in the ground is considered “upstream”. Once it comes out of the ground, it becomes “downstream”.
Over the years, the various Upstream groups in the combined Company-Other Company-Another Company company have found interesting and unique ways to manage their records. In fact, there are over seven distinct records management systems being used around the world. At times, teams have been formed to look into the possibility of merging some of these systems together.
Most recently, someone decided to look into merging as many of these groups of information into our electronic document management system as possible. This would be the document management system for which I, along with two others, provide training to new Users. So the Training Coordinators (that’s us) are tasked with developing training materials for this proposed new system.
The new system is called Upstream Active Records Management, or UARM. It has been in development for several months. There has been a certain amount of “development creep”. This means, as they have been developing the new system, they have encountered bugs, problems and “undocumented features” which have slowed the project down so that it couldn’t meet it’s “Go Live” date.
This has annoyed Management to the extent that they have put their collective foot down and decreed that the present “Go Live” date cannot be changed and the system will “Go Live” whether it’s ready or not.
Which means we Training Coordinators have to develop the training materials, based on the test environment, while the system is not quite functioning as it should. In other words: UARM is FUBAR.
It makes for a rather tense and frustrating situation. Nevertheless, we begin training on August 2nd, ready or not. But enough about that.
I saw two movies last weekend, one with “Jeannie” and one without. On Saturday, my Homeowners Association performed a “Landscape Walkthrough”, something we do about once or twice a year. A group of us meet at the pool house and walk through the complex with the property manager and the landscape consultant and pick out places where a tree needs to be cut down, or an empty space needs some bushes “installed”. Because we’ve done this before, it doesn’t take a lot of time. When I returned home, I realized that I could walk over to the movie house in plenty of time to see Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11.
This is a scathing review of the
Bush administration’s actions both before and after the
terrorist
attacks on
As for the Saudi nationals leaving the
As for the film itself: Biased, but interesting.
The second movie, which I watched on Sunday with “Jeannie”, was I, Robot. Back in the sixties, Isaac Asimov wrote a book called I, Robot. It was a cautionary tale, highlighting the problems that advanced technology might cause for humanity. The book did well enough that Asimov wrote a number of sequels.
None of this has anything to do with the movie. The credits even say, “Suggested by Isaac Asimov”. They kept the title and a couple of characters’ names and that was it. So, if you loved the books, don’t worry. Even if you never read the books, don’t worry. You can watch this movie and just enjoy it for itself.
The year is 2035. Robots are as ubiquitous as TV’s are now. They do everything, from walking the dogs to cleaning the house to cooking dinner. Humans are freed from all drudgery. What they’re free to do with all that time is never made clear.
Will Smith plays a police detective named Spooner. Unlike most people, he has a deep, underlying distrust of robots. Eventually the film lets you find out why. Spooner has a fondness for “antiques”. He wears “vintage” sneakers, circa 2004. He has one of those old-fashioned CD players that require a remote control. All of this allows for some clever product placement, even though the action takes place well into the future. Audi even got to create a “futuristic” car just for the movie. Want to bet a lot of other auto manufacturers tried to get that gig?
A man is dead and Spooner is called in to investigate. It seems obvious that the robot did the killing, except that there are the “3 Laws” designed to prevent a robot from ever harming, or causing harm to, a human being. Spooner begins running into roadblocks and red herrings pop up in all directions. Then, just as he starts to put it all together, the movie turns into a action sequence. Darned good special effects.
Oddly enough, the most interesting character, a special robot named, “Sonny”, is completely computer-generated. When he and Spooner have conversations, only Smith is on the set. Sonny is added later. Nevertheless, he is a robot with a destiny.
Smith manages to slip in a few wisecracks, and good ones; but for the most part, he plays the role like a grownup. He is, after all, in his thirties now, and beginning to look like an actor to be reckoned with.
Whether you crave political umbrage or a futuristic romp, either way, it’s two hours in a dark, air-conditioned theater. What more could you want?
Love, as always,
Pete
PS. For
those of you who don’t know, FUBAR (politely put) stands for Fouled Up
Beyond All Recognition.
P.
| Previous | Next |