Nick Seeber's blog

Hell's Gate - 35 years of burning

A story to capture the imagination: Hell's Gate, Uzbekistan.

This place in Uzbekistan is called by locals “The Door to Hell”. It is situated near the small town of Darvaz. The story of this place lasts already for 35 years. Once the geologists were drilling for gas. Then suddenly during the drilling they have found an underground cavern, it was so big that all the drilling site with all the equipment and camps got deep deep under the ground.

None dared to go down there because the cavern was filled with gas. So they ignited it that no poisonous gas could come out of the hole, and since then, it’s burning, already for 35 years without any pause. Nobody knows how many tons of excellent gas has been burned for all those years but it just seems to be infinite there.

Stories like this make me want to travel!

Finding the most inaccessible place on earth

I enjoyed this New Scientist article about finding the most inaccessible place on earth:

The maps are based on a model which calculated how long it would take to travel to the nearest city of 50,000 or more people by land or water. The model combines information on terrain and access to road, rail and river networks. It also considers how factors like altitude, steepness of terrain and hold-ups like border crossings slow travel. Plotted onto a map, the results throw up surprises. First, less than 10% of the world's land is more than 48 hours of ground-based travel from the nearest city.

There are obviously lots of flaws in the logic - I think I would have made the size of the city larger (say 1 million+ inhabitants) which would have made the remoteness of some places starker. But as it is, the study is fascinating...

On a separate note, I like that the modern air routes (shown as pale blue lines on the map above) aren't too dissimilar to the undersea telegraph cables shown on this map from c. 1890s:

Like the convergent evolution of sharks and dolphins, sea and air routes have clearly adapted to the constraints of the environment...

Thoughts on values

Most companies have corporate values - in other words, characteristics that they believe distinguish their culture from others. Often these values are words like 'straightforward', 'honest', or 'simple'. Sometimes they are phrases that embody the rest of the culture - Google's, famously, is 'don't be evil'.

Why do companies do this? After all, inevitably someone in the organisation does something that violates one of their values, and the resulting backlash is worse than it would have been without the value being there. For example, when it was found that Google was censoring internet searches in China, there was a furore. This wasn't because they were the only search engine to do so (they weren't) but because the public held them to a far higher standard because of their commitment to doing no evil. No-one is surprised when we hear about the awful business practices of some tobacco companies, or fast food chains, or clothing manufacturers. I'm sure that they also have values, but they don't seem to carry any weight because the companies themselves ignore them.

So it's not the stated values of a company, it's the accountability to the values which the company expects from its employees. Drawing a line in the sand means nothing unless there is some consequence to crossing it. The corporate culture has to provide examples of the values being practiced by its employees, from the top down. As soon as there is an unchallenged action that isn't consistent with the values, the culture will begin to be eroded.

Where am I going with this? Well, I wanted to state my own values, which I expect to be held to by others. My line in the sand.

My values are:

- Courage - Integrity - Compassion - Self-discipline

I'll talk more about this soon.

-------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry

Getting rid of privilege through greater transparency

Privilege is a word with an interesting etymology.

From the Latinate 'privi' and 'lege', we also obtain the English words 'private' and 'legislation', or law. So in its original meaning, privilege means 'private law' - a rule which applies differently to those in power than to those who are powerless. In Medieval England, a nobleman might have the privilege of hunting in Royal Forests, but a serf who did the same thing might have his hands cut off. That's privilege.

In the last few days, we've seen some MPs exploiting their positions of power to squeeze every last penny they can from their expense accounts. That they haven't been sacked for this abhorrent and unacceptable behaviour demonstrates that privilege remains. It may not look quite the same, but the priciple remains - different rules for the powerful few than for the powerless many.

The reason it's been this way is through lack of transparency. No-one would vote for venal and morally bankrupt individuals if their avarice was in plain sight - and they know it. MPs like Michael Martin (whose self-serving cronyism exemplifies the worst of political machinations) are doing all that they can to keep their expense claims hidden and private. Different rules. Privilege again.

So how do we introduce more transparency? We move towards a new mode of electronically-mediated government, where the norm is openness and visibility. We can use the power of social networks and collaboration (the blessings of Web 2.0, if you will) to solve the problems caused by lack of trust and transparency that plague government. It's what mySociety are doing and that's why Tom Steinberg is a hero of mine.

I'm looking forward to a day when all government is truly transparent, and where the actions of those in whom our trust is invested - the democratically elected leaders we are so lucky to have - are visible and accountable.

So where does that leave privilege?

I think we can live without it.

Debating Corporate Social Responsibility

The book group this evening (see last post) ended up discussing Corporate Social Responsibility and what it really means in practice.

It was interesting coming now from a company like BT (where CSR and acting 'inclusively' is a key part of our thinking and BT are seen as world-class in this respect) to one like Detica, who are now owned by BAE, one of the world's largest arms manufacturers.

The debate centered on whether CSR engagement is at an employee level or at a corporate level? Is it essentially branded volunteering, or more like pro-bono? Do companies do it to make their employees feel better or to increase reputation and thus Sales? Should CSR issues be linked to scorecards / reviews, or even to bonuses?

Of course there was no hard and fast conclusion, but it was a fascinating discussion, which raised some points I'll discuss with colleagues. And I'll try to attend the next book group!

Some facts that should change the world

This evening I'm attending a book group at my old company that I started when I worked there but has been carried on by a good friend and I'm glad to say is flourishing.

The scope was originally books that are pertinent to business consulting but not really the sort of thing you'd actually use as a textbook - examples being 'Emotional Intelligence' by Daniel Goleman or 'Influence' by Cialdini. These days there's a more varied mix but it's as interesting as ever, with the added bonus (for me) of being able to catch up with ex-colleagues.

The book this time is '50 Facts that should change the World', by Jessica Williams. By virtue of its structure - each 'Fact' is a self-contained chapter that can be read on its own - it's ideal reading material for a book group because it's possible to dip in and read as much or as little as you like without losing out. Or at least that's what I did.

Written by a journalist / TV producer, the facts range from globalisation 'horror stories' (there are lots of Starbucks shops in London; ten languages die every year) to privacy issues (number of CCTV cameras; aggregation of personal data) via human rights (slavery; female genital mutilation; torture) and sustainable living (greenhouse gases; 'throwaway culture').

Most of the issues I was broadly aware of, but there were a few around inequality and human rights that I wasn't aware of. In the table of contents I starred ten of the Facts that particularly surprised or shocked me and just read those chapters. They were:

8. Every cow in the EU is subsidised $2.50 per day, more than 75% of Africans live on.

9. In more than 70 countries, same-sex marriages are illegal; in nine countries, the penalty is death.

11. More than 12,000 women are killed in Russia each year as a result of domestic violence.

23. In Kenya, bribery payments make up a third of the average household budget.

32. Britons buy on average 50 items of clothing each year, most of which ends up being thrown away.

36. More people die from suicide than in all of the world's armed conflicts.

39. Two million girls and women are subjected to female genital mutilation each year.

42. One in six English teenagers believe that reality TV will make them famous.

44. There are 27 million slaves in the world today.

49. The US owes the United Nations more than $1 billion in unpaid dues.

Just appreciating these few Facts made quite a deep impression on me - they make for sobering reading, and put my very minor problems into perspective!

Now I just have to work out what I can do to change the world...

Nazi research and 18th century navigation: Phaeton magazine, Issue Two

Having registered with Scribd, I thought I'd have a play...

This is the second issue of a magazine I produced a couple of years ago for the London History of Science Society (which I founded with a friend). The society hasn't done much recently, but I expect it'll get revived at some point!

Anyway, if you've never seen it before, enjoy:

Phaeton magazine Issue 02

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Magazines & Newspape navigation naziresearch

Are you having a 'quarterlife crisis'?

Interesting article on the "Quarterlife Crisis" (worth reading, first few paragraphs hit the nail on the head):

Unrelenting indecision, isolation, confusion and anxiety about working, relationships and direction is reported by people in their mid-twenties to early thirties who are usually urban, middle class and well-educated; those who should be able to capitalize on their youth, unparalleled freedom and free-for-all individuation. They can’t make any decisions, because they don’t know what they want, and they don’t know what they want because they don’t know who they are, and they don’t know who they are because they’re allowed to be anyone they want.

When a contemporary 25-year-old’s parents were 25, they weren’t concerned with keeping their options open: they were purposefully buying houses, making babies and making partner. Now, who we are and what we do is up to us, unbound to existing communities, families and class structures that offer leisure and self-determination to just a few. Boomer and post-boom parents with more money and autonomy than their predecessors has resulted in benignly self-indulgent children who were sold on their own uniqueness, place in the world and right to fulfillment in a way no previous generation has felt entitled to, and an increasingly entrepreneurial, self-driven creation myth based on personal branding, social networking and untethered lifestyle spending is now responsible for our identities.

Purpose is the anecdote to this sort of listless emptiness.

Work hard at the things which will give you useful skills, live with integrity, and try not to complain.

If there's something you don't like in your life, change it. If it's impossible to change, put up with it.

And, start getting out of debt. It's really tough, but it feels great to be heading in the right direction :-)