Monday, 9 December 2019

The UK General Election 2019

On Thursday many people in the UK get to vote for our government, for the third time in the last 4 years. Although I have lived here for more than half my life, I don't get to vote.

I first came to the UK in the 90ies to study. Initially, I had planned to stay for only a year. As soon as I arrived in Edinburgh, I fell in love with the place and I decided to stay in Scotland for the entire degree. Like my fellow British students and students from elsewhere in the EU I didn't have to pay any fees - they were covered by the state.

After I finished my undergraduate degree I had the chance to continue my studies doing a PhD. At that time the research councils wouldn't fund EU students but I did manage to get industry funding for my PhD project on palaeoclimate modelling. After I had finished my PhD I worked as a postdoc for a few years and then in the oil industry. I now work at the University of Edinburgh as a Research Software Engineer.

I have now lived for more than half my life in Scotland. I have married a local and together we have two teenage kids. We have local family and friends from all over.

On 23rd June 2016 the population of the UK decided by a narrow margin to leave the EU. 51.9% of the votes were in favour of leaving the EU. I didn't see this result coming. But then 62% of the Scottish vote was in favour of remain. My continental family couldn't understand how the well-respected, rational UK could vote to damage itself so badly. They are right - what happened since the referendum (in fact since well before then) is deeply irrational.

Brexit makes no sense and Theresa May's government ultimately collapsed due to the contradictions (taking back control, no border in the Irish Sea, the Good Friday Agreement). I have learned what dog-whistle politics means: a clearly understandable message to the population: immigration needs to be curbed because immigrants are a burden on society. The current Conservative government with Boris Johnson as its head is lying: extra money for the NHS, extra nurses, extra schools, extra policemen while avoiding public scrutiny.

It was the successive Conservative governments that introduced student fees, universal credits, cut back public services, sold off NHS data. Austerity does not aim to solve the fallout of the 2008 banking crisis. Austerity is the neo-liberal policy of the Conservatives that allows them to scale back public services and exploit the majority of the population. Some very rich individuals and big companies benefit hugely while the majority suffers. This is only possible with the help of the billionaire press.

According to my union our salaries have stagnated during the last decade and we have lost 15-20% of our income to inflation. While at the same time our working conditions have deteriorated. That's why we went on strike last week. And I consider myself lucky - I have a job.

The UK like all other countries is faced with huge problems: climate change, resource exploitation and the social changes that come with automation and the internet.

A decade of austerity and universal credits have thinned out society to breaking point. Together with all the lies coming from the government and the media, we have forgotten that the world could be different.

I am hugely grateful to the Scottish government and most of the Scottish parties. The Scottish government is committed to being part of the EU. The SNP has been very clear that immigrants are welcome and that they not only contribute economically to society but also culturally. Yes, we work like everyone else, but we are also lovers, spouses, friends, neighbours, carers, etc. As far as I can tell this sentiment is also shared by the majority of people living in Scotland. I still do feel very welcome here.

On Thursday many people in the UK get to vote for the next government. I think this election is hugely important. The voters will decide whether they have some faith in their elected representatives and whether there is some shared basis of reality, that truth, the rule of law still matter and whether there is a balance between the interests of the majority and the vulnerable and the interests of the powerful; or if the only thing that matters is sheer power.

A Conservative government will not deal with the hollowed out public services, the NHS crisis, the homeless, the food banks and the climate emergency. The Tories will continue the transformation of this country to a neo-liberal laissez-faire country where xenophobia is rife, the majority is exploited and only sheer power counts.

This might be your last chance to vote for hope. Boris Johnson and his friends must be stopped. This means you need to vote tactically, ie vote for the party that is most likely to win against a Tory candidate. There are many sites on tactical voting, for example this page by the guardian.

A vote for the SNP does not necessarily mean a vote for Scottish Independence. First of all it helps stopping the Tories from forming the next government and ramming through the hardest of hard Brexits. Who knows we might get another independence referendum and my attitude towards Scottish Independence hasn't changed since 2014. The UK needs to be reformed and Scottish Independence might help with that. In any case, the question of Scottish Independence will not be answered by the outcome of the General Election on Thursday. Another referendum is required for that. The priority should be: vote the Tories out!

I don't get to vote. So, as you consider who to vote for, please, vote for me too.

I am very grateful to Tanja Bueltmann who came up with the idea for the vote for me too campaign. Please visit the campaign website for more information.

Friday, 22 November 2019

Preparing for another Strike

speedy skates

So we are going on strike again. In addition to the pension dispute which is still not resolved, we are also striking for better pay, working conditions, workload and the gender pay gap. Both issues are hugely important. But at the same time, it is ridiculous that they need to be discussed in the first place.

Gender pay gap - how come this is an issue? People doing the same work should get the same rewards, no matter their colour, age or sex or gender. And that is not even considering career breaks. Pay, working conditions and workload are all interlinked. Personally, I can't complain too much about my pay (compared with others) but over the last decade it hasn't changed and inflation has happily eaten away some of my income. All the while workload has increased, more students are being taught without many additional staff. Some of this extra workload is offloaded onto (mostly) young graduates on zero hours contracts without any job security. It is absolutely shocking that we exploit people like this. The students pay to get their education (I know it is a little bit different in Scotland if you are a Scottish student) and then they are exploited to teach the next lot.

The pension dispute essentially hasn't changed much. The original threat from a few years to turn the defined benefit scheme into a defined contribution scheme is off the table (for now). However, the pension provider (USS) argues that the scheme is not affordable. Since the last strike we have had a joint expert panel that looked into the pension scheme. One of the members was removed from the panel for blowing the whistle on information being withheld from the board. I don't understand how economics works and I have no desire to do so. However, I do understand modelling. A model that is very sensitive to a parameter that is also ill constrained, is not reliable. The pension provider was asked to run further scenarios with different values for this parameter. They refused because it is too much work. Well, I am speechless. If I am told more work is required and, in particular, if that request is well justified I just need to get on with it. On top of that the employers have taken a payment holiday a few years ago. Well, that has caught up with them and we are expected to pay for their shortsightedness.

The strike is tragic. We do enjoy our work. It is fun to research interesting stuff, to work with interesting people and to teach the next generation. Our work suffers and, most importantly, our students suffer. The work doesn't go away and can be sorted out later. But the students miss out, even though it is not their fault at all. I am hugely grateful to their support.

I do think this particular struggle reflects the much bigger struggles that currently ripple through the West. Both in the UK and the US we have a government that lies, manipulates and stokes the flames of hatred. I read a very interesting post on America's upcoming epistemic crisis. The impeachment procedure tests whether there is a verifiable truth or whether those in power determine what is true. The same is happening here in the UK. The government can make up all sorts of stuff, print it on a bus, break electoral law, blame the poor and the immigrants. It is a struggle between reason and sheer power.

We do need reason to deal with the huge issues that we face as a society: climate change, environmental destruction and the failure of capitalism. Those with power are interested in maintaining power and keeping us in the dark. So we protest, we strike and, if we are able to, we vote.

Monday, 23 September 2019

Research Software Engineering Conference, Birmingham 2019

binder starting up

Day 1

The conference started with a keynote by Andy Stanford-Clark, IBM UK Chief Technology Officer, on IoT, AI and Quantum Computing. The talk was very much fun. Although I must say I am still not convinced by IoT and I am somewhat worried by AI. The issue of needing to train the neural networks properly to reduce bias was brought up but all in all the talk was unsurprisingly optimistic. The third part on quantum computing was very interesting. IBM does provide access to their quantum computers online.

After the coffee break I joined the session on reproducible software. Anna Krystalli from the University of Sheffield gave an excellent introduction to rrtools which is an R package that helps scientists package up a paper and all associated data and R scripts as a package so that the paper can be regenerated. R seems to come with a lot of very handy tools that make this sort of workflow easy by providing templates and autogenerating a lot of the required infrastructure. Rmarkdown and bookdown featured to manage generating high-quality print outputs. The make for R system, drake, was also mentioned. It would be very nice to get similar tools for python.

The other talk in that session on BioSimSpace given by Lester Hedges from the University of Bristol was also very interesting. BioSimSpace provides an abstract interface to various computational chemistry packages which is quite neat. The thing that really impressed me was that it also provides a jupyter notebook GUI elements that handles inputs for a script with drop-downs and file uploads, etc. The really nifty thing is that these notebooks can be downloaded as python scripts. These inputs then are handled by the argparse module and can be run from the command line. I think this is a really cool approach to bridging the notebook/command line gap and could be used for all sorts of applications.

After lunch I attended the Revitalising Legacy Languages session. The first talk by Chris MacMackin, UKAEA, on object oriented fortran was excellent. I wish I could do some Fortran programming again as it is really good fun. New to me was the second talk on web assembly by Drew Silcock from STFC. Web assembly can take your favourite language such as,eg python + numpy + matplotlib (pyodide) and compile it to a bytecode that can be executed within your browser. It can also do 3D visualisation in the browser on the client. This looks very cool and a good way of avoiding having to write javascript. This might be a good way of providing interactive web applications.

For the third talk I nipped to the useful tools and libraries session to see Declan Valters' (now BGS) talk on geopandas. Declan presented a nice python notebook demonstrating the features of geopandas.

The remainder of the afternoon was about the RSE society, lightning talks introducing the posters and a panel session on sharing RSE work across boundaries. It is clear that the RSE movement is very collaborative and a large aspect is about training.

Day 2

Most of the morning session I spent in Citation and Software Discovery session. Alexander Konovalov from St Andrews developed templates (code4ref.github.io) to help register software in PURE. PURE can import data from ORCID. The other talk (by Stephan Druskat, DLR) I saw in this session was very theoretical and involved constructing graphs of the relationships between authors, software revisions, dependencies and institutions. Quite complicated and I am not entirely sure how useful that is, apart from dependencies should be cited properly. In between the two talks I went to see a talk on the limitations of machine learning by Camilla Longden from Microsoft Research. This was a recurring theme. Bias in the training sets were discussed as was the difficulty of interpreting the results. The tank story cropped up in a number of presentations in two versions: One version has it that the American military was training an AI to distinguish between American and Russian tanks. It turned out that the AI identified more (Russian) or less (American) grainy pictures. The other variation also involved the American military. This time they wanted to find camouflaged tanks in a wood. They used a training set with and without tanks in a wood. The system worked well for the training data. When tried with another data set it failed. The AI had successfully figured out that it was nice and sunny when the tanks were present but overcast when they were absent. AI is a bit of a buzz technology - in many instances linear regression or decision trees are sufficient and easier to understand.

Next followed the keynote given by Ben Goldacre. The presentation was excellent, enthusiastic, entertaining and shocking. Mostly on pharmaceutical tests and the fact that more often than not only the successful trials are reported. He also discussed sampling error and abuses of visualisation.

After lunch I attended the demonstration of nbfancy by Jack Betteridge and James Grant, both from the University of Bath. nbfancy can be used to annotate jupyter notebooks to produce teaching materials similar to the software carpentry style. Another tool to automatically mark submissions - submitty - was demonstrated by Anastasis Georgoulas and David Perez-Suarez, both from UCL. submitty is a rather nifty web application that allows students to upload programming tasks. These get automatically tested using predefined tests. The system allows for anonymous submissions, multiple markers, extra manual marks and penalising late submissions. One drawback with automatic marking is that it requires slightly different assignments that can be marked automatically.

After the break I attended a demonstration of autograd and automatic differentiation tool used by pytorch. Douglas Finch from the School of GeoSciences, Edinburgh presented his work on scraping DEFRA air quality data and displaying it as interactive graphs using django and plotly. Finally, Mike Simpson from the University of Newcastle presented his work on visualising uncertainty. They use blender and its python API to automatically generate hight quality 3D visualisations using a 3D model of Newcastle and sensor data. Data is presneted as glyphs (green, amber, red) and uncertainty as a sinusoidal border of the glyph - higher frequency sinusoid indicates more uncertainty. I was slightly irritated - the glyphs looked a bit like flowers. The blender visualisation (on youtube) was very nice though.

Maggie Aderin-Pocock gave the after-dinner presentation on having crazy dreams and being a space scientist. The presentation was very entertaining. I was particularly amused by the Clangers being the gateway drug to harder stuff - Star Trek.

Day 3

The last day of the conference was dedicated to workshops. I attended the Binder workshop in the morning. During the workshop we created a binder cluster on the Microsoft Azure cloud using kubernetes. I was interested both in how kubernetes and Auzre works and what binder looks like. Binder is a way of packaging jupyter notebooks in a docker container and running it in the cloud. The notebook, its dependencies and any datafiles are described in a file that is stored in github. Binder will build the image and deploy it on the cluster. The user gets a URL that can be shared. When someone connects to the URL a new container instance is started so that every user gets their own. I presume their is a way of limiting resource usage. Binder looks quite useful for people who want to share live notebooks with others. It might be possible to extend the EDINA noteable jupyterhub service to include a binder service. There is also a public mybinder service that you can use for small notebooks.

In the afternoon I attended the modern C++ workshop introducing the latest features of the standard C++ library. There is some really cool stuff that is worth looking into once the features become supported by the compilers (it'll take years for g++ in scientific linux to catch up). For anyone interested in C++ the website cppreference .com was highly recommended.

Tuesday, 5 March 2019

AI Crystal Ball

Schrott

I went to very interesting talk by Howard Covington from the Alan Turing Institute on Glimpsing our AI Future at the Bayes Centre, University of Edinburgh. The talk was very interesting albeit short on technical detail and maybe somewhat worrying. This is a summary of what stuck in my mind together with some of my own thoughts.

The talk started with an overview of the evolution of computer technology and the software advances made possible by those changes. The web allowed the development of search engines. Internet shopping followed, then messaging and social networks. The next big disruptive technology will by self-driving cars, powered by ever more sophisticated AIs. Covington reckons that over the next decade or so renewables will become lots cheaper than fossil fuels displacing them.

The 2030ies will see agriculture revolutionised: Cultured meat grown in factories and vertical farms will totally change how we produce our food. In particular leafy vegetables can be grown very efficiently indoors using electricity from renewables powering LEDs optimised to emit light at the preferred wavelength of the plants.

The 2040ies will bring fully automated and autonomous factories. These factories need no human workers and can be reconfigured to produce different things using software. AIs will also revolutionise medicine, ranging from expert systems used for diagnosis to surgical robots. Quantum computing will break current encryption systems including blockchain.

These developments go hand in hand with pervasive sensor networks to measure all sort of things. These sensors are used to optimise energy and food systems and feed the AIs with information. They will also lead to deep surveillance. China is already using a social credit system which scores individuals depending on their behaviour. Certain privileges (such as high-speed travel) are only available to people with a high enough score.

Covington pointed out that the truly big big data companies are mostly based in the US and China, the only two European big data companies are SAP and ing. Covington reckons that the attitude towards risk and investment in Europe makes it difficult to create new multi-billion companies. China is investing huge amounts of money in infrastructure in Eurasia through their Belt and Road Initiative. Our future looks distinctly Chinese.

I am very worried about the way software systems are put together especially as they increase in complexity. Programming Sucks is an excellent article on software engineering (or the lack of it). Another aspect of our complex society is that we more and more depend on the frictionless operation of our society. There is potential for things to go spectacularly wrong. It gets very terrifying when we add vulnerability to cyber attacks on these critical infrastructures. These attacks will be made even bigger due to the monoculture of systems. For example, the social credit system built by the Chinese will be a desirable target as it would allow the subversion of an entire continent. Distributed systems using blockchain technology will help until quantum computing comes along.

One aspect was not touched at all: all these technologies reduce the need for human labour. What will all the people do that are no longer required to work? It is clear that it will hit the factory floor workers and delivery and taxi drivers. But it will also hit many white collar workers whose jobs can be automated. As a society we need to spend more effort on social jobs, such a looking after our kids and teaching them and looking after the vulnerable and old.

Howard Covington's talk finished with the prediction of collapse in 2050 due to climate change. A member of the audience asked why collapse when the technologies should allow us to reduce emissions of climate gases. Covington's answer was vested interests will get in the way.

In any case it is clear that technology evolution will accelerate over the next decades and we will face huge changes.

Tuesday, 21 August 2018

Brexit, People's Vote and Indy 2

People's Vote March, Edinburgh

We are still waiting to find out what Brexit might mean. Although, more and more voices from all directions are warning that it is going to be an absolute disaster that will affect everyone in the UK. I went to the People's Vote rally on Saturday in Edinburgh. It was well attended - a thousand people or so. Maybe not as many as I would have hoped for. I enjoyed the speeches even though some of the jokes made me cringe. It was good to feel not alone and hear some other sane voices.

It seems that some people from the Scottish Independence movement have serious issues with the People's Vote movement: Brexit is an English problem; Scotland already voted to remain in the EU; a second EU referendum will divert attention from a second independence referendum; People's Vote is an English movement full of unionists; Brexit will facilitate Scottish independence. I think this is wrong. Yes, Scotland voted against Brexit (62%) as did Northern Ireland (55.8%) while England (53.4%) and Wales (52.5%) voted for Brexit. Yes, there is a massive imbalance in the UK makeup where England ends up outweighing the opinions of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. However, that is also true for London who voted 59.9% to remain with a population larger than Scotland. I do think that the UK needs to be reformed to balance out these regional tensions. I also think that this probably will not happen within the framework of the UK and that Scotland needs to become independent to embrace modern institutions fit for the 21st century (see also my posts on independence from September 2014).

However, independence is an entirely separate matter from Brexit and the People's Vote. Brexit is on a tight schedule and nothing else will be sorted until Brexit is dealt with next March. This schedule is not entirely due to Westminster invoking Article 50. It also depends on the upcoming elections for the EU parliament in May 2019. The position of the UK will need to be sorted by then. I am still not sure how to vote for Brexit happened. However, it is clear that the official leave campaign lied and broke electoral law. I also think the British press has a huge role to play using the EU as a convenient scapegoat for the last few decades.

Leading figures of the leave campaign are members of the current UK government. And yes, Scotland didn't vote for this government (although the Conservatives won 12 seats in Scotland in addition to their 1 seat they held previously). Scotland is part of the UK. And the Westminster Tory government is trying to figure out what Brexit means and what sort of Brexit should happen. And the Labour opposition seems to be keen on Brexit, too. Somehow they think that Brexit will allow the UK to become a socialist utopia. So Brexit is very much a Scottish problem as well because should Brexit happen Scotland will be dragged along if it wants it or not.

Giving the people of the UK another vote to decide which way Brexit should go when they have the options clearly before them is an obvious way to defuse this situation. If the people (and, yes, it will be mostly the English as they are the biggest group) decide that a no-deal Brexit or a blind Brexit is not desirable it will allow the government to withdraw from the brink of the cliff. On the other hand, I would have thought, that it would be a clear indication for an independent Scotland if the people of England decided that any Brexit should go ahead but Scotland decided it was a bad idea (again). If, however, Scotland decided Brexit should go ahead along with the English then, I am afraid, Scotland would sit in the same (sinking) boat as the rest of the UK.

I think another important aspect of the People's Vote and Indy 2 discussion should be that it would be a lot easier for Scotland to become independent if both Scotland and the rest of the UK were in the EU. The EU facilitates exchange of goods, services and people. This works very well as can be seen by the relationship between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. The border between iScotland and rUK would look very similar and it would pose no problem as long as both parts are part of the EU. If, however, iScotland wanted to be a member of the EU and rUK was thoroughly brexited then the same issue of a hard border would arise as between the Republic of Ireland and a brexited Northern Ireland currently discussed.

So, I think because of timing and practicalities Scotland and the Indy2 movement should support the People's Vote. Brexit must be stopped as it is totally insane. The People's Vote campaign in Scotland shouldn't be too hard as the Scots don't need to be convinced. Relative numbers mean that Scotland won't come to the rescue of England - the English need to sort out the Brexit mess they created themselves. However, it is in Scotland's interest to avoid Brexit. The case for an independent Scotland remains as strong as ever and as the Brexit episode demonstrates should be pursued with some urgency once Brexit is out of the way.

Tuesday, 1 May 2018

FLOSSUK Conference

The FLOSSUK conference was held in Edinburgh last week. I attended the two day conference and the hacking the raspberry pi workshop. The conference was excellent. Abstracts of all talks are on the FLOSSUK website. What follows are some notes from the talks I particularly liked.

Reproducible Build

Talk by Chris Lamb, the current Debian Project Leader. Very interesting talk on the need to be able to produce reproducible builds, ie the same source code in the same build environment always produces the same binaries. The reason for wanting to do this is to be able to trust binaries distributed by Linux distributions. At the moment we can look at the source code and make sure that it has no back doors built in. We then compile it and distribute it. When we download and install these binaries we trust the provider that the binaries are good. However, we do not know if their build environment is good or if they have been asked to compile modified sources (with a backdoor). Reproducible builds allow a number of people to build these binaries. If they all agree then chances of a compromised binary are reduced. Obviously, the compiler might be compromised itself. This is very difficult to establish and probably takes a new platform and cross compilation.
Anyway, Debian is now 94% reproducible. Chris introduced a very interesting tool - diffoscope which is a clever diff. It allows to compare binaries in some meaningful way. It would be really cool if this could be made to work with scientific dataformats such as HDF or netCDF.
I think the reproducible builds are also interesting from a scientific software perspective. Debian uses BuildInfoFiles to record the particular environment in which the package was build. This could be used to build scientific programs that require a particular environment.

Small Things for Monitoring

I really enjoyed this talk on IoT stuff. I was interested to hear about the ESP8266 based systems which look ideal for monitoring applications as they come with wifi on board. In particular the wemos D1 systems look cool. I am thinking of getting some of those with temperature and humidity sensors for my flat. Apart from the hardware I was very interested in the MQTT protocol which is a machine to machine IoT communication protocol on top of TCP. It can be used to move measurements around. This might also be interesting for the piccolo platform I am working on. There is also a similar protocol for serial connections called MQTT-SN. MQTT and the ESP8266 systems get combined using the homie project. Now I just need to find some time.

Internet of Things at the Uni of Edinburgh

IS is providing a LoRaWAN network in central Edinburgh that can be used for IoT applications. It is used for the CitySounds project. So if you have some interesting IoT project for central Edinburgh in mind you can use this for communication with your devices. More info on IoT in Edinburgh here: iot.ed.ac.uk/
One interesting thing I learned is that you can switch off the HDMI output of the Pi to save power. Would be good for the piccolo system.

Other Talks

  • Roy Thompson gave an excellent after dinner talk on climate change and how he used one line of R to tackle the relationship between temperature, CO2 and the economy. Somewhat gloomy but with a clear pointer of what could be done.
  • Lorna Campbell's keynote on the Open Knowledge Landscape was also most excellent. Interesting to hear about the various projects, approaches and platforms which was a suitable introduction of the subject to the geeky audience. Lorna then moved on to talking about the gender cap and misrepresentation of minority groups. Finally she talked about the Cost of Freedom and the tribute to Bassel Khartabil a Syrian internet activist who ultimately paid with his life for his involvement in open knowledge.
  • Being a photographer as well I really enjoyed Simon Biles talk on forensic photography

Saturday, 10 March 2018

Strike for USS

Strike for USS

We are now halfway through the 14 day strike over changes to our pension scheme. A further 14 days of strike are on the table depending on the progress of the negotiations between the union, the employers and the pension fund. At the centre of the dispute are different views on what the world will be like in 20 years. The employers UUK and the pension fund USS see a deficit in the future. They anticipate this deficit due to a number of assumptions: above inflation salary rises, steady increase of life expectancy and, most crucially, they prepare for the worst-case scenario of a sectorial collapse which would require the unwinding of the entire scheme. The union UCU contests these assumptions. The details of these assumptions are discussed in great detail elsewhere.

When the union asked us to support industrial action I was very sceptical. My previous experience of UCU strikes over pay was very half-hearted. Some of us went on strike, our pay was docked and our demands were ignored. I assumed this action would be similar. My heart sunk further when I heard that we were asked to strike for 14 days. At home we had big discussions of what to do. Ten years of effective pay cuts due to below-inflation salary rises and austerity and kids that are growing up and getting more expensive has left us in a tight financial situation. A job that used to allow us to live quite comfortably ten years ago now covers the basics but requires us to consider everyday expenses. Major expenses are fairly catastrophic. Yet our household income is well above the median household income. The loss of income due to the strike will hurt. Finally, my crystal ball is particularly dim looking ahead to the time when I might think about retiring in 20 years or so. The way I see it is either our world will be very dismal if we do not sort out the big problems of climate change, automation and rising inequality; or we will have sorted them out and we might well not need pensions as a universal basic income will be available.

In short, I was not convinced by the strike. I was surprised at how strong the support for the strike is. We even managed to picket both our buildings at King's Buildings, the University of Edinburgh Science and Engineering campus which is not known as a hot bed of industrial activism. I am also extremely pleased by the support we are receiving from our students. They are bearing the consequences of the strike by missing lectures and tutorials. My first concern was proven incorrect and although both the financial burden and my view of the future still remain I now fully support the industrial action.

So far, during the strike we have learned a lot about pensions and the assumptions and models that are used to assess their viability. We have also found out about the governance of our universities, their management and the finacialization of higher education. Universities in the UK are strange beasts, sometimes they are seen as public sector organisations and other times as private sector. As a member of staff I see myself as a public sector worker. I hope I contribute to society by helping to educate people to understand both our physical and social environments and by directly contributing to research. Management also sees university as public sector entities when it comes to our remuneration and below inflation pay rises. However, management see universities also as private sector entities when it comes to their remuneration, student fees (which are less of an issue in Scotland although oversee students face huge fees) and our pensions. The rise of zero hour contracts and precarious working conditions also point to a private sector view of the world. It also turns out that university governance and in particular the employer organisation UUK are very opaque.

Having seen the arguments brought forward by both sides, the unity of staff and students and management of many universities breaking rank with the UUK position I wonder how our world works. I am a geophysicist. I have a good understanding of how our physical world works, I have some idea of how our biological environment works but I have no idea of how our society works. I find it deeply irrational. How can the £400k salary of our principal be justified? Why are our pensions attacked using dubious assumptions when there seems to be no need to do so? How can our government, even if they are Tories, push through the hardest of BREXITs? Why are we not dealing with air pollution and the resulting deaths as a matter of urgency? What about climate change and the social implications of automation? Does our society work by the people with influence, money and power trying to get away with as much as possible, shaping our world to their needs and the rest of us forced to struggle against them? This post on narratives gave me a lot to think about.

The world is changing. It must change as continuing as we did in the past is not possible: there cannot be indefinite growth, our resources are limited; climate change is happening; digitalisation and automation is fundamentally changing how we work and most importantly how much human labour is required. This is then a struggle of where these unavoidable changes lead us to. Will the powerful exclusively benefit to the detriment of the majority? Can we come up with an alternative? I think this is exactly what the universities should attempt to do. And we need to start transforming the universities themselves.

Update: The Manifesto for the University of the Future is well worth a read. There is also the Aberdeen Manifesto which strikes a similar vein. This is the sort of thing I have in mind.