Making Singapore Tech-Friendly

[Benjamin Scherrey]

Long arduous rant to follow - stay with me if you dare....

I'll take up Alvin's call and (attempt to) avoid the complaining and focus on what I think are some viable actions/policies that Singapore could adopt - on both a professional and governmental basis to make it a viable and competitive location in which to start and grow a tech company. I will have to make some observations, however, that may be considered rather harsh or controversial in order to show the reasoning behind my thinking. I hope anyone reading this will give me the benefit of the doubt that I do so entirely through my desire to see Singapore succeed and to share in it's success and that my efforts with the local startup scene over the last few years would demonstrate my true intentions.

Invest & Build Great Talent in Singapore

First and foremost - and, in fact, if you can do this one thing you win. The rest is gravy. It's all about building the right team with the best people possible. What is so clearly lacking is capable and experienced development talent. This - so far - has absolutely nothing to do with cost. I can't pay extra and find good talent here. Having worked with companies on beautiful islands and exotic destinations I also know how difficult it is to import top talent long term for any amount of money even if the company could afford it - which, for our purposes, it cannot. 

Now you might hear arguments that "we're just a small island" etc etc but those are excuses not causes. I like to compare Singapore to Dallas, Texas - the first city I migrated to after starting my first business in 1990. Population's about the same as then and the city definitely did not have a tech orientation then. It was oil & gas (which had just busted a few years earlier). Besides SMU there wasn't much in the way of leading tech unis - yet the interest, opportunity, and capabilities of local dev talent in which I was able to draw from dwarfs what is present today in Singapore.

So perhaps you say it's not fair to compare Singapore with the United States where most IT innovations occurred. Ok - let's compare Singapore to it's neighbors who have none of the advantages Singapore has. Let's speak about Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam for example. Here's where it gets tough. As a software development group, we get asked to take over or extend development of critical business systems for companies in Singapore. This is from tiny 2-man shops up to major corporations. On the whole - the quality of code and developer even trying to balance all other variables and ignore Singaporean educational advantages - is the worst I have encountered anywhere without exception. :-( (Exception to place, not that all code in Singapore is worse than code anywhere else - there's some good stuff too.)

How can this possibly be true? I really just thought I was seeing exceptionally poor examples and that's why they were calling me in the first place but then I've also been looking at the code and teams that are at the center of major successful businesses here and see the same thing. It's not that Singapore doesn't have brilliant people and doesn't recognize the value of same - it does better than most all it's neighbors per capita. As far as I can determine it seems to be that the only consistent difference I see are 2 things:

1) Government influence on education by subsidizing people to leading US & European universities who really don't understand how to take advantage of such opportunities except to get the sheep's skin diploma. This gives so many people a sense of entitlement in terms of job responsibility & pay that is way out of whack with their capabilities & value. I can't use them and, even the promising ones, I can't afford! This then enforces the biggest issue...

2) While most Asian countries have developers who are not very good but they know it and are highly motivated to improve once given the opportunity, Singaporean developers are not very good but think they are already world class and therefore need not be bothered about the fundamentals they are missing. And this issue is basically why the software development situation in Singapore is inexcusably bad.

There I said it. Some things that appear to be gross, nasty, incendiary generalizations but conclusions I cannot seem to avoid arriving at regardless of which direction I approach it from. I want so much for it not to be the case but as someone who's been investing and trying to build such a group in Singapore (and having done it more than a dozen times in the US and now Thailand) it is the one area that prevents me from putting my chips in here. There are clearly some exceptions but they've been dispersed in a manner to become completely ineffectual as I'll describe momentarily.

So in coming to Thailand with the explicit purpose of demonstrating that I could build a world class development group with local talent and do innovative work using the latest best technologies & processes - I was repeatedly told, "you'll never find python, C++, (insert cool tech here) developers in Thailand." My response was and remains and has been demonstrably proven I think - "I'm not looking to find them, I'm looking to make them." And so we did and the results were better than I had dared hope. I just found the geeks who wanted to be geeks and were motivated to learn and try new things thanx to a clear unlimited technical career path and a group clearly run as a meritocrisy. Such opportunities simply didn't exist in Thailand at the time (but more seem to be coming). So how can it be done in Singapore?

Now let me tell you that, compared to the rest of the software industry around the world, Singapore's situation is not as disastrous or nonrecoverable as it may sound. The fact is, especially in large projects which companies such as IBM and Microsoft, given a team of 40 people doing a system - about 4-7 will do all the work and the rest will accomplish nothing or impede the work of the rest. So it's not like we need to build armies of tech talent. We do need to build up some core talent, get them fully capable and mindful of the best technologies and DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES, and then demonstrate with real results how those assets shine compared to the alternatives. Then, in true Singaporean fashion, everyone will copy that and no one will be able to compete with Singapore in the region.

How to do this? Well first off we have to incentify people to invest in Singapore. That means Singaporeans investing in what actually is important and foreigners conducting business here in a manner that brings long term improvements to the afore-mentioned conditions. This does not simply equate to hiring more Singaporeans which seems to be the sole focus of the govt. KPIs. Indeed ALL govt KPIs, however well intentioned, are, IMNSHO, destroying the very things they're trying to develop through the law of unintended consequences. More on that in another rant...

Meanwhile - what can be done? First - Singapore geeks and geek wanna-bes have to really challenge their assumptions and perform some real self-criticism. For example. If you are entertaining building some competitive new business capability that required logic even just barely beyond loading up web pages from a simple database for a few thousand people and you don't know use-cases, can't name your development process (or you call it waterfall), and you intend to write it (or worse yet - hire someone to write it) in PHP - then you're doing it wrong. Stop it right now - step away from the damn computer and pay attention to what the real tech innovators are doing. BTW - Google is NOT a tech innovator unless you're doing search or advertising and then they're gonna smash you.

So that's my advice for the private sector folk. What about the government?

A: Get the hell out of technology development where you have to pick what project you will or will not support. Stop funding incubators in a manner that requires them to alter their business plans to fit your KPIs that a normal angel investor or tech VC wouldn't require. You're killing me!!! You're passing out fifty grand to any 3 idiots who can write a few page company proposal and then convincing them that they are tech entrepreneurs. Then they run out and go into permanent limbo cause there's no growth investment strategy for where you've driven them. All you've done is dilute and scatter the small bits of real talent available amongst companies guaranteed to never innovate due to what is require to comply with your KPIs on innovation! Dammit stop!!! 

B: If you must play in our little free market game and try to jig things in your favor, make investing in Singapore affordable and competitive to the other options startup entrepreneurs have at their disposal. Make it easy for me to bring in experience talent but don't subsidize them. Now subsidize the hell out of the local geeks I wanna invest in so it makes sense for me to train the ones with the right attitude but missing skills and that I won't lose that investment in 2 years. Support those of us who actually wanna invest in Singapore long term by investing in Singaporeans. And don't wait 6-9 months to reimburse my payroll subsidy. I need the money as the expense comes due. I'm a frickin startup! But if anyone has demonstrated an ability to do tech in real life - do let them in. They aren't crowding your buses. They're too busy coding. All my kids got other places they can go that don't interrogate them for 3 hours at immigration. You should be picking them up from the airport in limos.

That's it. Otherwise stay the heck out of the way. Yes there will be idiots who treat software development like a factory and hire a bunch of (newly) cheap Singaporeans devs rather than Indian, Thai, or Vietnamese ones. And they will get standard predictable results which your accountants may even declare as good. But they'll also attract the devs I don't want so I don't care - they aren't competition to me. 1000 artificially supported tiny startups with entrepreneurially minded geeks who are being setup to fail - well that's my competition. And it hurts everybody - especially them. UNDERSTAND YOU ARE COMPETING AGAINST ME. (by the way, you will lose and that means Singapore loses.) So why should I invest in Singapore?

So far I see only one and a half promising things going on in Singapore that are effectively pro-tech entrepreneur. 

#1 - JFDI. We're gonna see if this concept works soon enough but it is the only one that even approaches addressing the above considerations. People going through JFDI are gonna get exposed to things at a world class level I think. Way to go Meng & the team. I have your backs however I can.

#1.5 - Neotny. Joi & James are leading by example here. The only legit tech investment fund I know of in Singapore. Why only a .5? Well they only do social media - but that's smart for them cause that's what floats Ito's boat and you shouldn't mess in places you don't love. We just need more who cover other areas. But the other negative is that it seems when you take money from Neotny, you also take money from the SG govt and are not as well insulated from those KPIs as one would hope. I'd love to be corrected on that last point if it is not true and I'll admit I have not asked James directly - but this is what my understanding is from my awareness of the incubator program with which they participate. Depending on your company this could be fine or it could be "bad money" and sink you later. I've not actually seen any individual deal terms to confirm.

I'll also throw in a shout out to Pivotal Labs who share a lot of my own goals even though we come to difficult conclusions about how to address some things. They're putting their money where their mouth is and demonstrating one viable course of Agile development. Now if we could only get people to appreciate the value of that as much as just the value of some good code... that's when Singapore will grow up.

thanx and may the flame attacks on my person begin.... :-)

 -- Ben Scherrey

...wondering if they're gonna let me in next time.

[Lucian Teo]

Thanks for the great depth of points. Would you like this communicated to relevant folks in the government?

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[James Yuen]

Thanks Ben for your take on things. For someone who's new like me to
SG, your insight could be pretty invaluable...

I was wondering if you could expand on one of your points you made in
the following quote:

"But the other negative is that it seems when you take money from
Neotny, you also take money from the SG govt and are not as well
insulated from those KPIs as one would hope."

Could you give some specific examples of KPIs that would be a
hindrance to most startups?

> care - they aren't competition to ...
>
> read more »

[Jeffrey 'jf' Lim]

Ben, I would be interested to know - what exactly have u done over
here? what steps have u taken? I think that showing us / telling us
what you've done so far would help. As you claim, you have a "desire
to see Singapore succeed and to share in it's success".

-jf

> --
> Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Benjamin Scherrey]

@Lucian - just as long as they don't arrest me at immigration, sure. :-)

@James - the entire premise upon which most govt deals are based on end up being anti-startup unless you are, and can demonstrate so, funded in the $10+ million range. They ask for plans and commitments for things that companies in a profitable business for 3 years probably could just maybe be able to document - but not in the tech world. So you've been setup to fail from the beginning. 

I do have some notes packed away for some programs that a few clients of mine considered then, correctly, rejected but don't have them handy. Will try to respond later when I have time. Meanwhile, just take a look at any program from the rational perspective of both an investor or small business owner and see if the conditions and terms make any sense in terms of private business. I don't see ANY good govt programs although the people behind them are clearly well intentioned.

I think the bigger area to address, however, is that of the local dev talent. Singaporeans can ignore the govt programs and move forward on their own but this issue of poor local talent is nearly an impassible barrier to overcome. Tech community has got to take a hard look at itself and commit to being the change it wants to be.

-- Ben

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Gibson Tang]

One more thing that pisses me off when i hire local developers is the topic of reservist. Being an ex-military guy for 6 years, i understand that reservist is something that can't be avoided, but i lost track of the number of times i applied deferment for my local guys and i was basically told to shut up and let them go for reservist. So that means every year, my local developer can't work for 1 month. For a small startup, a sizeable percentage of my workforce is MIA. 

My proposed solution is to let anyone who is working for a startup to be able to defer their reservist obligations for 3 years. To check whether the company is a startup, a simple check with ACRA or the IRAS will be able to sort that out.

Sent from my iPhone

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Benjamin Scherrey]

Jeff - 

   I have been consulting to startups and individuals in Singapore since 2009. I've incorporated a company there which is active and profitable but employees zero Singaporeans I'm afraid (but not due to lack of trying). I've built systems for startups that had a large impact on their ability to move forward as a company and actually receive private and govt funding. I've encouraged clients to both stay and move to Singapore with mixed results. I've been involved from all sides of the startup scene in Singapore and many of my best clients are Singaporean clients. I've been trying to build more of a physical presence there but these issues have made that clearly not a viable option for the time being - but I've not given up. We'll see how it goes. I think anyone who's been active at the hackerspaceSG startup scene or has heard about Agile in Singapore is likely to know about me and my company, Proteus Technologies. Sadly I've seen a few local startups with good potential to break out decide to leave Singapore rather than build there and this is a trend that worries me most.

  -- Ben

> --
> Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Jeffrey 'jf' Lim]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Benjamin Scherrey <prote...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jeff -
>
>    I have been consulting to startups and individuals in Singapore since
> 2009. I've incorporated a company there which is active and profitable but
> employees zero Singaporeans I'm afraid (but not due to lack of trying).

thanks. Again as per my question - what exactly have u tried? I havent
seen or heard too much about your employment ads. You say you've
tried? How have u tried, and what have u tried?

> I've
> built systems for startups that had a large impact on their ability to move
> forward as a company and actually receive private and govt funding. I've
> encouraged clients to both stay and move to Singapore with mixed results.

cool.

> I've been involved from all sides of the startup scene in Singapore and many
> of my best clients are Singaporean clients. I've been trying to build more
> of a physical presence there but these issues have made that clearly not a
> viable option for the time being - but I've not given up.

referring to the entrepass, I assume. But dont u have a company here
already? How have things not been viable for you?

> We'll see how it
> goes. I think anyone who's been active at the hackerspaceSG startup scene or
> has heard about Agile in Singapore is likely to know about me and my
> company, Proteus Technologies.

haha.

> Sadly I've seen a few local startups with
> good potential to break out decide to leave Singapore rather than build
> there and this is a trend that worries me most.
>

That's sad. Where did they move to, and what made them move?

-jf

--
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."
--Richard Stallman

"It's so hard to write a graphics driver that open-sourcing it would not help."
-- Andrew Fear, Software Product Manager, NVIDIA Corporation
http://kerneltrap.org/node/7228

[Paul Gallagher]

I like the discussion. Less so for the startup aspect than what it might take to raise the profile and opportunities for world-class development (and startups will follow..).

I've been kicking around Singapore for a decade or more - working for an MNC SI and an MNC vendor, doing lots of Government and Commercial projects, working for startups, and now running my own. It would take a hell of a lot to make me move now, but I've come to recognise some of the quirks. Perhaps I have a more prosaic view than Ben, but this is how I have come to summarise the "facts of life":

I started off making a list, but on review I think I'll boil it down to one: The Republic of Singapore is, at it's heart, a trading nation. Better yet: a trading hub.

Just like Australia entered the "first world" on the sheep's back (followed by the odd gold rush or two), Singapore's early economic development can squarely be laid at the alter of the PSA. And given the stability of Government and the rule of law, it has later developed to become the ideal "hub" for finance and all manner of multi-national operations - ideally situated to straddle east and west. We know where the money comes from. Not from making things, but from trading. This even applies at a personal level (e.g. stocks and property speculation).

I think you can draw a direct relation to some of the main structural issues now affecting the IT industry:

• Supply exceeds demand: all the major players are in town "hubbing", either with regional operations or direct representative offices (vendors: goog, ms, orcl etc; SIs: accenture, wipro, hcl etc; and the locals: NCS [which subsumed SCS a few years back]).
• So Government (especially) has learned to assume that every IT contract will enjoy intense competition. Therefore they know when they say "jump", the vendors (must) answer: "how high?" No matter whether "jump" was the right thing to do in the first place or not.
• The multi-national's in town are largely driven by mandates and decision making that takes place "elsewhere". There isn't much latitude for innovative IT solutions (or if you do consider them, a corporate group overseas gets the nod to make it happen)
• For every business problem that may be conducive to some innovative IT development, you will have 5 competitors lined up offering to sell a packaged solution + brand + services + "no-one ever got fired for buying IBM" risk mitigation.
  
• And the local business remains commensurate with what it is - a large town. Small peanuts.
  

While from a rational economist's perspective this must sound like the ideal situation, the negative side-effects we suffer are many:

• I think this has contributed to Singapore still being stuck in "second era" IT (i.e. when "buy" overtook "build" in the ERP gold-rush of the 90's). In general, most of Government still hasn't got onboard the post-2000 resurgence of smart, rapid custom development. And most commercial operations don't have the mandate, interest or budget to even think the question.
  
• And the unfortunate upshot of a first-world, transparent, open tendering process in conjunction with excess supply is that it leads to a race to the bottom.
  
• It's a commodity trading mentality: vendors "must" compete on price. Fred Brook's not-withstanding, if you can get Wipro java guys at $150/day, surely 5x of them can do better than 1x of the other? (no: it's rhetorical). Demand is definitely skewed to (a) turnkey vendor solutions (b) big bang soup and nuts solutions (that may involve some dev) and (c) very little left over for truly innovative, creative [high risk] dev.
• There aren't many role-models for how to be a "maker". The closest Singapore ever came was probably Creative Technologies' Sim Wong Hoo. But that's now looking a bit lack-lustre - Singapore's answer to Nokia or RIM (i.e. a dinosaur that got caught out by climate change). Great technology (especially in the early days when they were selling almost by definition to geeks). But struggling to now understand "what people want" and flumoxed by what companies like Apple come up with.
• With record employment, it is sooo much easier to take the easy way out and forget any dreams of geekdom. Why try to be a world class dev when (a) no-one cares or thinks it is valued, and (b) you can earn twice as much, for half the effort and 10% the brain power by getting a job in technical pre-sales? (or even more $$ if you just do sales)  
• bottom line: yep, the best of kiasu *and* kiasi
  

A significant legacy is what I call the "three-layer glass ceiling" - 4k, 8k 10k - bottom line is a total devaluation of anything remotely like technical skill.

• sub-4k: do-ers. Lump in admin staff, operations people ... and developers of course. Applies to locals and "developing world expats/FT".
  
• sub-8k: the 4k people who've "made it", and probably have a family to feed by now. Senior devs. Also applies to locals and "developing world expats/FT".
• >10k: to get this you pretty much need to be either (a) a "manager" and/or (b) expat
• And if you are getting paid <4k to do something your 10k expat colleague is "supposed" to be an expert in, are you going to put out (even if you do get the "13th month")? 
  

A very unfortunate thing I see is that many startup efforts seem to be founded on the premise of embracing all of the above, and not trying to challenge it. See: every job posting that wants to pay developer's <2.5k, designers ><5k, while the founders expect to walk away with 10x exits.

OK, enough philosophising. This is better suited to a beer around a bar. But is there any hope?

On the one hand - no: some of these structural issues are pretty entrenched. And arguably "correct" based on history to date.

But on the other:

• for startups in particular: no one said you have to be slave to local norms and market. At least try to deliver true value to your clients *and* teach them why you need to charge accordingly. Create your own ecosystem and talk to the world. Why shouldn't Singapore be THE best place to found a tech startup? Great environment, access to talent, implicitly global in outlook etc. On paper it's ideal; I guess we still don't have an answer as to why that's not already the reality.
  
• for Government: I can't think of any single thing more important than an overhaul of IT tendering. Perhaps split-stream into "tactical" (aka bread and butter IT deals that IBM/MS/ORCL/NCS/etc can fight over) and "strategic" (subject to a clean sheet of criteria that values: innovation; local talent development; fast, iterative development; open standards; open data)
  

Regards,
Paul

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Lucian Teo]

This is a fantastic discussion that encapsulates so many of my own bugbears. Will type out a fuller response when I have access to a full sized keyboard. 

Any government folks on this list?

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Coleman Yee]

@paul

for Government: I can't think of any single thing more important than an overhaul of IT tendering. Perhaps split-stream into "tactical" (aka bread and butter IT deals that IBM/MS/ORCL/NCS/etc can fight over) and "strategic" (subject to a clean sheet of criteria that values: innovation; local talent development; fast, iterative development; open standards; open data)

The Government does have provision for procuring more "strategic" projects - it's called the RFP (Request for Proposal). It works quite similar to the Open Tender process, except that they don't give requirement specs. Instead, they give broad desired outcomes that aren't clearly defined (and they can specify their budget).

However, the RFP seems to be very rarely used for IT projects, my guess is because it's pretty obscure so nobody really dares to use something unfamiliar.

But at least the provision is already there.


coleman.

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Paul Gallagher]

@coleman if by RFP you mean GeBiz tenders (RFT/RFP aka ITT) - as opposed to RFQ aka ITQ - then these are the ones I'm actually referring to. All significant/"strategic" projects I've participated in have been the ITT form. And they all pretty much use the same template, with a pile of anachronistic nonsense plus a bucket load of tight specification around the form of the bid and boilerplate PMBok, contracting and operational requirements, leaving little room to actually say much about the essential requirements of the solution (you are meant to know that already - and you better, since you are quoting fixed price with LD). Fortunately I learned the rules of the game well - but they are definitely not small biz/startup friendly.

The main issue is that many of these big ITTs represent a missed opportunity to innovate (and perhaps fail fast) on a small scale first. They all seem to come from the same mill: (a) operational inefficiencies accumulate for years (b) many internal discussions, lobbying, vendor presentations etc build up steam behind "a change is needed" (c) someone takes the plunge and slates it or next year's budget (at some notional valuation) (d) the tender preparation team starts to work and the tender doc snowballs: infrastructure; maintenance; everyone's pet requirement. So before you know it, you have the mother of all big bang tenders that only one of the big end of town can afford the cost of sale, and could be trusted to deliver. Waterfall, of course.

PS: did I mention none of these projects ever "fails"? Perhaps that is part of the problem - because if nothing ever fails, then who in their right mind would even think of doing things differently??

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Benjamin Scherrey]

Jeff,

   I think you're working from a lot of presumptions that are false or, at least, that I would disagree with. First off, employment ads are not effective ways of recruiting the kinds of talent I'm looking for. Haven't been since 1989. Secondly, the things I'm writing about don't just pertain to me or my specific company. Indeed for the most part, I am not the demographic that Singapore should or does target. We're a services firm - not an investable entity for the most part. I'm mostly talking about my experiences helping my clients do tech startups successfully in Singapore and what they must endure.

   Finally, your questions don't really pertain to my analysis and proposed solutions. Rather than assume that I'm doing it wrong, perhaps you might express an opinion about my conclusions and offer some suggestions as to how these concerns may be overcome?

  best regards,

-- Ben Scherrey

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Lucian Teo]

Ben,

Think you've made very good and pertinent point about our environment. I'll see which contacts within the government I can forward them to. To be perfectly frank, it won't trigger an avalanche of change, but it may come in useful in somebody's plans to improve things. You've probably saved someone a lot of work in organizing and articulating the thoughts of many modern entrepreneurs trying to make it in Singapore.

Paul,

I was just talking with the owner of an innovative startup who's chosen the arduous path of working with the government, and I brought up very similar points to what you mentioned.

The government's antiquated model of procurement does not allow an iterative process for systems. Here we're talking about launching and quickly iterating to adapt to fast-changing needs of an increasingly expectant user base, and the old approach for project management insists that projects be delivered exactly to specifications. Changes to specs midstream are tedious. There is a lot of room for improvement, and it requires a massive change in the financial process.

Lucian

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Jeffrey 'jf' Lim]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 5:09 AM, Benjamin Scherrey <prote...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jeff,
>
>    I think you're working from a lot of presumptions that are false or, at
> least, that I would disagree with.

uh? I'm really just working on the presumption that u're open to questions.

> First off, employment ads are not
> effective ways of recruiting the kinds of talent I'm looking for. Haven't
> been since 1989.

take the term "employment ads" loosely. I'm sure you have better ways
of reaching people. Heck, we're on one (a mailing list) right now!

> Secondly, the things I'm writing about don't just pertain
> to me or my specific company. Indeed for the most part, I am not the
> demographic that Singapore should or does target.

ok. I'm not making a judgement on that. But u still want to be here?
Why shouldn't Singapore target ur demographic?

> We're a services firm -
> not an investable entity for the most part. I'm mostly talking about my
> experiences helping my clients do tech startups successfully in Singapore
> and what they must endure.
>

ok. No problem. Unless u're doing something really wrong here, it
still sounds like u should be part of the demographic targetted.

>    Finally, your questions don't really pertain to my analysis and proposed
> solutions. Rather than assume that I'm doing it wrong, perhaps you might
> express an opinion about my conclusions and offer some suggestions as to how
> these concerns may be overcome?
>

I dont know about that. That may be a bit too presumptious. I'm asking
questions to understand first before assuming that you're doing
anything wrong, and to understand where 're coming from.

-jf

[Paul Gallagher]

Hi Lucian,
Yep, it is the great paradox of the government open tender process, which was of course invented in an industrial era that pretty much assumed everything a government would want to buy could be specified and estimated up front.

Maybe one opportunity lies in a more commonplace and lightweight utilisation of the call for collaboration process as a precursor to major ITTs. i.e. agencies incented to first take 5-10% of a possible big bang ITT and have iDA run a CFC first. Even if the CFC just delivers a pilot that is then taken as the blueprint for a subsequent ITT, it should be a win-win.
 

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Ivan Chew]

Oops, earlier post had part of my response cut off. Wanted to add that while I'm not in a position to address the systemic issues discussed here, I'd like to know how I can help in my capacity in Singapore Memory Project team. We're thinking of providing a fund something along the lines of the NHB's Hi2p fund http://hi2p.sg/ Basically to encourage creative/ innovative works (tech or otherwise) as part of the Sg memory project.

It won't be a large fund, compared to what MDA offers. Probably peanuts. Still we're mindful not to kill private sector development unintentionally. At this point, there are no specific details about the fund. I'd be grateful for inputs, thoughts and advice on what we should not do, perhaps.

Cheers
Ivan Chew

On Saturday, December 3, 2011, Ivan Chew <rambling...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [raises my hand to Lucian]  I work for a govt agency, NLB. Though I wonder if Lucian's asking if the "govt folks who should *really* be reading this thread" are here :) Anyway, while I'm not in a position to address the systemic issues discussed here, I'd like to know how I cahe

>
>>>>>>>>>>>
> This is a fantastic discussion that encapsulates so many of my own bugbears. Will type out a fuller response when I have access to a full sized keyboard. 
>
> Any government folks on this list?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Every Book its Reader; Every Reader his Book"
S.R. Ranganathan. 1892 - 1972
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://RamblingLibrarian.blogspot.com
http://MyRightBrain.wordpress.com
http://ccmixter.org/people/ramblinglibrarian
http://www.google.com/profiles/ramblinglibrarian
http://flavors.me/ivanchew

[Ivan Chew]

[Justin Hammond]

Actually, the govt already has. Two big tenders in the last couple of years were awarded to EDS/SCS (now HP/NCS) called SOEasy. Basically outsourced the infra (Messaging/LAN/Wan/Datacenter). If memory serves me right it was one of the biggest Govt Tenders worldwide. 

I work in a MNC, and we do a lot of govt work. I think just about everything we do goes through the RFI/RFP/RFQ process. 

Go have a look at Gebiz.gov.sg. Just about everything the govt buys goes through that portal for RFQ/RFP selection. (From soap to IT!)

At least from my companies area of business, you have a much higher chance of winning deals if you partner through NCS/ST electronics, partly because of the local presence, and partly because of these guys track record. 

Do Startups have a chance to Win govt deals? At least the space I play in, Nope. Only because of the shear scale of the projects we do (touching every agency/ministry) unless you are partnering with a big SI, you probably won't even get a thank you note. 

If your a startup, I'd suggest pitching you business to EDB, IDA. If they like what your doing, they might invest some money in your company, but the real value you get is inside marketing these guys do for you. 

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 3, 2011, at 12:41 AM, "Coleman Yee" <colem...@gmail.com> wrote:

@paul

for Government: I can't think of any single thing more important than an overhaul of IT tendering. Perhaps split-stream into "tactical" (aka bread and butter IT deals that IBM/MS/ORCL/NCS/etc can fight over) and "strategic" (subject to a clean sheet of criteria that values: innovation; local talent development; fast, iterative development; open standards; open data)

The Government does have provision for procuring more "strategic" projects - it's called the RFP (Request for Proposal). It works quite similar to the Open Tender process, except that they don't give requirement specs. Instead, they give broad desired outcomes that aren't clearly defined (and they can specify their budget).

However, the RFP seems to be very rarely used for IT projects, my guess is because it's pretty obscure so nobody really dares to use something unfamiliar.

But at least the provision is already there.


coleman.

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Lucian Teo <lucia...@gmail.com> wrote:

This is a fantastic discussion that encapsulates so many of my own bugbears. Will type out a fuller response when I have access to a full sized keyboard. 

Any government folks on this list?

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Gibson Tang]

The thing about GeBIZ is that the competition is so stiff for IT projects that the most successful bidders will lose money doing the development phase of the project. So that kinda sucks, but the bidder can then recoup back the money in maintenance fees. Even so, the government agencies will also open up the maintenance projects for bidding via GeBIZ and sometimes you can lose the right to the maintenance even though you developed the IT project, which means that you lost $ overall on the project as you are unable to recoup back the $ via maintenance fees. This was related to me by a friend who did the bidding for his company which is a private entity(Not NCS/SCS). GeBiz is mostly a race to the bottom as most decisions are made on basis of the lowest bidder

Regards
Gibson Tang
www.azukisoft.com

+65 96565537
www.gibsontang.com

[Meng Weng Wong]

On Dec 3, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Lucian Teo wrote:

Think you've made very good and pertinent point about our environment. I'll see which contacts within the government I can forward them to. To be perfectly frank, it won't trigger an avalanche of change, but it may come in useful in somebody's plans to improve things. You've probably saved someone a lot of work in organizing and articulating the thoughts of many modern entrepreneurs trying to make it in Singapore.

I'd like to capture this discussion, and all the various points of view it attracts, in a wiki that eventually turns into a book that contains specific public policy recommendations.

Does anyone know any researchers at NUS or SMU who are already looking at this?

I think the private sector have what it takes to get this written, but if there are other efforts already underway, I'd be happy to plug in to those.

[Benjamin Scherrey]

Thanx for the clarification Jeff. It's a huge issue with a lot of directions we can go down. I've iterated through them a few times now and my email was basically a distillation of my conclusions and what I believe to be the core issues without which everything else has no long term impact. So, for now, I'd like to focus on that. I have to say I'm a bit surprised that no one has reacted - positively or otherwise - to my conclusions about the local talent pool. I don't know exactly what that means...

  -- Ben

-jf

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Benjamin Scherrey]

As someone who is actually a big fan of military service and feels that it is the primary role for government, I think a long term conscriptive policy is ultimately detrimental to a country's defense from a military perspective and also ends up having a higher cost economically. I doubt, however, that we're gonna be able to get that policy changed in order to improve the conditions for startups (and don't even get me started on why this has destroyed the music scene in Singapore...) but I do like your idea as a way of helping insulate small companies from the very serious impact.

Indeed I will reveal my next secret plan for recruiting raw talent in Singapore. I've basically given up on the Unis as a place of primary recruitment. I will certainly keep an eye out for the exceptional ones - as I always do - but the sense of entitlement from so many of the otherwise promising grads makes it a poor first choice. When I decide to refocus my efforts I will go to the polys. Naturally the downside of polys is that most of their grads have yet to do their military service so they're basically yanked out of availability right when they're most useful. However, girls and foreigners don't have this liability. So the natural thing to do is find the girl & foreign geeks and focus on them. Tough break for the guys, alas...

  -- Ben

...thinks of the name for his all-female development troupe - "Agile Angels" hahahaha We'll definitely have a band.

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Meng Weng Wong]

On Dec 3, 2011, at 2:19 AM, Paul Gallagher wrote:
> They all seem to come from the same mill: (a) operational inefficiencies accumulate for years (b) many internal discussions, lobbying, vendor presentations etc build up steam behind "a change is needed" (c) someone takes the plunge and slates it or next year's budget (at some notional valuation) (d) the tender preparation team starts to work and the tender doc snowballs: infrastructure; maintenance; everyone's pet requirement. So before you know it, you have the mother of all big bang tenders that only one of the big end of town can afford the cost of sale, and could be trusted to deliver. Waterfall, of course.

Well said!

In the ICT/IDM field, where agile software development has been proven appropriate for new-market/new-product situations, any contract for an "innovative solution" that relies on waterfall methodology is pretty much doomed to fail.

http://neverindoubtnet.blogspot.com/2009/07/tom-demarco-recants.html

It's interesting that the father of design patterns, Christopher Alexander, effectively espoused agile development in architecture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Experiment

Anybody who's registered a business recently with www.bizfile.gov.sg knows what I'm talking about. This is one of the worst designed websites I have ever used.

You're punished for clicking the back button: do not pass go, do not collect $200. Start from scratch at the home screen.

You're punished if your browser crashes and you log in again using a different browser: you have to sit in the corner for 30 minutes to ponder your sins.

You're punished for doing the obvious. There's a big fat "endorsement" link on the front page, under "most frequently used e-services". But that link doesn't work. Instead, you need to navigate three deep through "e-services / company / endorsements / by director" to find a working link.

I'm sure the client, ACRA, had the best of intentions when specifying the design. I'm sure the vendor had competent, capable developers.

It's waterfall design that produced this monstrosity of a website.

Checklist-based KPIs create a passive-aggressive development relationship between vendor and client, in which hostility and defensiveness are the norm.

[Meng Weng Wong]

On Dec 3, 2011, at 3:13 PM, Benjamin Scherrey wrote:

Naturally the downside of polys is that most of their grads have yet to do their military service so they're basically yanked out of availability right when they're most useful. However, girls and foreigners don't have this liability. So the natural thing to do is find the girl & foreign geeks and focus on them. Tough break for the guys, alas...

My first company, pobox.com, was founded in a time and place where development talent was not abundant.

As a result, most of the good hackers in mid-1990s Philadelphia passed through the company at some point, as employees or contractors or just friends of the company.

We had the size and financial wherewithal to act as an on-the-job training ground for fresh grads: we turned programmers into software developers. We gave them the space and time to grow professionally.

Agile software development houses do this job very well: raw talent go in, experienced engineers come out.

So do some "mature startups" and SMEs.

But I wonder if successful lean startups in their very earliest days can't afford the luxury of training raw talent.

The environment might be too chaotic. The startups could be too busy succeeding.

Fresh grads or poly students at startups often have to sink or swim.

(That's why JFDI screens for founder teams who can read as fast as they breathe, so they can absorb lean startup methodologies without having to be taught.)

But maybe they don't have to absorb it all by reading.

Can pair programming alone inculcate best practices efficiently enough for startups?

[Jeffrey 'jf' Lim]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Benjamin Scherrey <prote...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanx for the clarification Jeff. It's a huge issue with a lot of directions
> we can go down. I've iterated through them a few times now and my email was
> basically a distillation of my conclusions and what I believe to be the core
> issues without which everything else has no long term impact. So, for now,
> I'd like to focus on that. I have to say I'm a bit surprised that no one has
> reacted - positively or otherwise - to my conclusions about the local talent
> pool. I don't know exactly what that means...
>

I was getting to that. Key to that was finding out exactly what you've
done. You've got a pretty long post there (one of the longest to be
seen on this list!), so it would be good to summarize exactly what you
say here. I think your point about the pool (taking your own words)
would be

"What is so clearly lacking is capable and experienced development
talent. This - so far - has absolutely nothing to do with cost. I
can't pay extra and find good talent here."

Correct? If you mean to say that there are ZERO, Zilch, Nada, NONE, NO
capable experienced local developers, I would say that that can be
very easily demonstrated to be wrong. If you havent found any, you've
gone about it the wrong way (whatever way that is). Now if you were to
talk specifically about Python developers... then that would be a
restricted statement, about a specific subset.

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Benjamin Scherrey <prote...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As someone who is actually a big fan of military service and feels that it
> is the primary role for government, I think a long term conscriptive policy
> is ultimately detrimental to a country's defense from a military perspective
> and also ends up having a higher cost economically. I doubt, however, that
> we're gonna be able to get that policy changed in order to improve the
> conditions for startups (and don't even get me started on why this has
> destroyed the music scene in Singapore...) but I do like your idea as a way
> of helping insulate small companies from the very serious impact.
>

indeed. Local males can be shunned because of their service to the
nation. The irony.

(Music scene?)

> Indeed I will reveal my next secret plan for recruiting raw talent in
> Singapore. I've basically given up on the Unis as a place of primary
> recruitment. I will certainly keep an eye out for the exceptional ones - as
> I always do -

How are you doing that right now?

> but the sense of entitlement from so many of the otherwise
> promising grads makes it a poor first choice. When I decide to refocus my
> efforts I will go to the polys.

My experience and opinion is that the polys do a much better job of
education than the universities. But of course, as with anything, this
is a situation that's always in flux. Good lecturers pop up and appear
every now and then in either type of institution. The question is
which institution allows for the lecturers to focus on the teaching.
Rather than the uh... paper writing.

> Naturally the downside of polys is that most
> of their grads have yet to do their military service so they're basically
> yanked out of availability right when they're most useful. However, girls
> and foreigners don't have this liability. So the natural thing to do is find
> the girl & foreign geeks and focus on them. Tough break for the guys,
> alas...
>

hm. Something should be done to address that.

-jf

[Benjamin Scherrey]

I can relate my experience with Proteus Technologies in Bangkok. We controlled growth very carefully for our first two years. Hiring no more than a single person every couple of months. They were surrounded by a team that had already adopted our process and assimilated quite quickly and readily. Then in late 2009 we had a planned hire of 2 people at the same time and ended up with 4 as another couple who I couldn't pass up suddenly became available. That didn't go as smoothly - although it did get better and also caused us to look at more formally defining some of the things we do. So I kinda think for an informal mechanism such as pair-programming to do it on it's own you need to really outnumber the new talent or at least break them up from others reinforcing their old habits. Growing a team is probably the hardest thing in our biz to do right. I will say that the day I need an HR person to do it is the day I leave. :-)

  -- Ben

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Jeffrey 'jf' Lim]

ditto. As with any matter in the area of influence, it's a confluence
of multiple factors. Ben has already mentioned the "surrounding
influence" factor. You also need to take a look at what makes up the
team. Are you hiring malleable guys (or girls as per Ben's
suggestion)? Have you got somebody to show these guys the ropes
already?

(So I guess the simplistic - and realistic too - answer is "no". Pair
programming alone wont do it)

-jf

> --
> Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Benjamin Scherrey]

OK one last time down this line then I'm done for now...

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim <jfs....@gmail.com> wrote:

I was getting to that. Key to that was finding out exactly what you've

done. You've got a pretty long post there (one of the longest to be
seen on this list!), so it would be good to summarize exactly what you
say here. I think your point about the pool (taking your own words)
would be

Um... as you noticed the post was already long. And that *was* my summary. :-) How to do more without writing a book? I built an entire company around a 21 year old shy young gal from a tiny town in Thailand where I don't even know the local language. Let's just assume I know how to recruit for now.

"What is so clearly lacking is capable and experienced development
talent. This - so far - has absolutely nothing to do with cost. I
can't pay extra and find good talent here."

Correct? If you mean to say that there are ZERO, Zilch, Nada, NONE, NO
capable experienced local developers, I would say that that can be
very easily demonstrated to be wrong. If you havent found any, you've
gone about it the wrong way (whatever way that is). Now if you were to
talk specifically about Python developers... then that would be a
restricted statement, about a specific subset.

No this isn't what I meant and I clearly stated in that same email that there were exceptions here. The point I was making was that the issue is NOT one of pay which is an argument I've been presented with a number of times. 

I'd be curious to hear your explanation for my observation regarding the remarkably poor overall quality of real systems code compared to every where else given the educational, government, and financial advantages Singapore has over just about everywhere.

> Indeed I will reveal my next secret plan for recruiting raw talent in
> Singapore. I've basically given up on the Unis as a place of primary
> recruitment. I will certainly keep an eye out for the exceptional ones - as
> I always do -

How are you doing that right now?

I'm not. We've removed our physical presence in Singapore a few months ago and don't presently have an incentive to pursue it. I expect that will change again with new opportunities perhaps next year. At that point in time I will likely pursue this approach if I feel it appropriate.

I have to say, you seem very focused on the tactical issues and I'm very much trying to point out strategic implications. Tactics are going to be completely different for different needs. Proteus Technologies & Pivotal Labs are companies with very similar goals, capabilities, and ideas - but our tactics are night & day different because we are pursuing things according to our own philosophies and priorities. I wouldn't expect my tactics to be appropriate for many other groups. It's all way too context sensitive unless you consider tech talent to be like factory workers (which I clearly don't).

 

> Naturally the downside of polys is that most
> of their grads have yet to do their military service so they're basically
> yanked out of availability right when they're most useful. However, girls
> and foreigners don't have this liability. So the natural thing to do is find
> the girl & foreign geeks and focus on them. Tough break for the guys,
> alas...
>

hm. Something should be done to address that.

Like? :-)

[Jeffrey 'jf' Lim]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Benjamin Scherrey <prote...@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK one last time down this line then I'm done for now...
>

sure. I'm kinda thinking the same thing too.

> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim <jfs....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I was getting to that. Key to that was finding out exactly what you've
>> done. You've got a pretty long post there (one of the longest to be
>> seen on this list!), so it would be good to summarize exactly what you
>> say here. I think your point about the pool (taking your own words)
>> would be
>
>
> Um... as you noticed the post was already long. And that *was* my summary.
> :-) How to do more without writing a book? I built an entire company around
> a 21 year old shy young gal from a tiny town in Thailand where I don't even
> know the local language. Let's just assume I know how to recruit for now.
>>

ok..

>>
>> "What is so clearly lacking is capable and experienced development
>> talent. This - so far - has absolutely nothing to do with cost. I
>> can't pay extra and find good talent here."
>>
>> Correct? If you mean to say that there are ZERO, Zilch, Nada, NONE, NO
>> capable experienced local developers, I would say that that can be
>> very easily demonstrated to be wrong. If you havent found any, you've
>> gone about it the wrong way (whatever way that is). Now if you were to
>> talk specifically about Python developers... then that would be a
>> restricted statement, about a specific subset.
>
>
> No this isn't what I meant and I clearly stated in that same email that
> there were exceptions here. The point I was making was that the issue is NOT
> one of pay which is an argument I've been presented with a number of times.
>

Right. I sort of missed that. Not much sleep and a big body of text
will do that to you. Sorry about the misrepresentation.

> I'd be curious to hear your explanation for my observation regarding the
> remarkably poor overall quality of real systems code compared to every where
> else given the educational, government, and financial advantages Singapore
> has over just about everywhere.
>

I would argue that you really need to take a look at the makeup (and
processes) of the teams that churned out this crap. Can you say for a
fact that they were all local? A lot of change has happened over the
years. Especially in the big SIs that typically do this kind of stuff.
Even the SMEs have changed too.

>>
>> > Indeed I will reveal my next secret plan for recruiting raw talent in
>> > Singapore. I've basically given up on the Unis as a place of primary
>> > recruitment. I will certainly keep an eye out for the exceptional ones -
>> > as
>> > I always do -
>>
>> How are you doing that right now?
>
>
> I'm not. We've removed our physical presence in Singapore a few months ago
> and don't presently have an incentive to pursue it. I expect that will
> change again with new opportunities perhaps next year. At that point in time
> I will likely pursue this approach if I feel it appropriate.
>
> I have to say, you seem very focused on the tactical issues and I'm very
> much trying to point out strategic implications. Tactics are going to be
> completely different for different needs.

Right. As i said, i was seeking to understand first. But I will get
with the program, and talk about the strategic... (case about guys vs
girls, for instance)

> Proteus Technologies & Pivotal
> Labs are companies with very similar goals, capabilities, and ideas - but
> our tactics are night & day different because we are pursuing things
> according to our own philosophies and priorities. I wouldn't expect my
> tactics to be appropriate for many other groups. It's all way too context
> sensitive unless you consider tech talent to be like factory workers (which
> I clearly don't).
>
>>
>> > Naturally the downside of polys is that most
>> > of their grads have yet to do their military service so they're
>> > basically
>> > yanked out of availability right when they're most useful. However,
>> > girls
>> > and foreigners don't have this liability. So the natural thing to do is
>> > find
>> > the girl & foreign geeks and focus on them. Tough break for the guys,
>> > alas...
>> >
>>
>> hm. Something should be done to address that.
>
>
> Like? :-)

Gibson's suggestion is a start. I've also heard something about
actually being able to bring in a work laptop to reservist, but havent
followed up on it. This wont help mitigate the downside of having to
be away... but will help to migitate the effects somewhat. Aside from
these 2 things, this is a tough situation to deal with. It should also
prove useful to look at other small nations with compulsory
constription, and an active tech economy to see how they handle this
(Israel comes to mind).

-jf

[Gibson Tang]

In polytechnics, majority of the singaporean guys have to go for NS, but there are a few who have already went for NS and then opt for the poly route. These tend to be more responsible and mature, but they make up maybe 5% of each cohort.

And as the NS intake period varies for each guy, sometime you can grab a local poly grad and get him to work for you for 6 months after graduation. Good training for him and if he goes to NS and has a 9 to 5 job due to some medical issue or whatever, you can hire him on a freelance basis. But such cases are not common although i have seen 2 cases so far

Sent from my iPhone

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Paul Gallagher]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Meng Weng Wong <meng...@gmail.com> wrote:

Anybody who's registered a business recently with www.bizfile.gov.sg knows what I'm talking about. This is one of the worst designed websites I have ever used.

You're punished for clicking the back button: do not pass go, do not collect $200. Start from scratch at the home screen.

You're punished if your browser crashes and you log in again using a different browser: you have to sit in the corner for 30 minutes to ponder your sins.

.. just inhaled my coffee and had a big lol as I remembered my time in that corner;-)

[Coleman Yee]

@paul the RFP i'm talking about is a distinct process from ITT. It is NOT an ITT (I don't know how to emphasize this further). The value of an RFP spans the values of ITQs and ITTs (anything above $3k).

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post carefully, but your complaints about ITQ/ITT like tight specs etc simply do not apply to RFPs:

[RFP] works quite similar to the Open Tender process, except that they don't give requirement specs. Instead, they give broad desired outcomes that aren't clearly defined (and they can specify their budget).

Ok I need to clarify the statement that for RFP, "they don't give requirement specs". They do give requirement specs, but they are supposed to be broad and not clearly defined and allow for flexibility.

Ask your gov contacts to look up RFP in the Gov IM if you find this hard to believe.
 
@Lucian and @Ivan too - go look it up since you guys don't seem to be aware of it. And perhaps check with your Procurement colleagues why the RFP is so rarely used even though it looks like a great instrument.

[Paul Gallagher]

Coleman, can you provide a link with more information? EnterpriseOne seems to make it pretty clear that all procurement over 3k goes the GeBiz route as either ITT or ITQ. If there is another pathway, it would be great to know more about it..

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Coleman Yee]

@paul i don't have a link. i got my info from reliable gov sources.

i did a little googling and found a recent RFP that doesn't require you to login to gebiz to view:
http://www.nuhs.edu.sg/research/funding/workplace-safety-and-health-request-for-proposals-rfps.html

note that this RFP states a capped amount of $1m. the requirement specs can also be downloaded if you're interested.

i'll also let the enterpriseone folks know that they should mention RFP in that page.


coleman.

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Ciaran Lyons]

On Saturday, December 3, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Meng Weng Wong wrote:

(That's why JFDI screens for founder teams who can read as fast as they breathe, so they can absorb lean startup methodologies without having to be taught.)

This is the second time in as many days I've come across the idea of speed reading as a competitive advantage in the workplace. I'm interested to know if this is widely held in Singapore/SE Asia and whether people typically pay for courses in speed reading?

I googled 'speed reading singapore' and see quite a few hits, but I imagine that would be the case for any 'speed reading [country]' query.

Cheers,

Ciaran

[Alvin Jiang]

Do you know anyone who'd be willing to conduct such a class casually?

> --
> Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Tamas Herman]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Alvin Jiang <aji...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you know anyone who'd be willing to conduct such a class casually?

i also heard about speed reading after many years completely
accidentally in utube video.
im interested too.

--
tom

[Gibson Tang]

I am interested to attend a course if any is willing to conduct a class casually

--
 tom

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

--

[Ivan]

>>> Do you know anyone who'd be willing to conduct such a class casually?
>>
>> i also heard about speed reading after many years completely
>> accidentally in utube video.
>> im interested too.

speed reading is cool, but not enough. you also need to learn how to
take notes and how to review what you've read/learned.
http://pragprog.com/book/ahptl/pragmatic-thinking-and-learning is a
quite good intro to many useful practices.

- Ivan

[Patrick Haller]

On 2011-12-05 11:43, Gibson Tang wrote:
> I am interested to attend a course if any is willing to conduct a class
> casually

I'm not sure it's easily taught as we're undoing years of daily
reinforced habits. I'll try to come up with a test plan that doesn't
involve tasers and cocaine.

Anyone interested helping create THE PLAN? ;)

Patrick

[Ciaran Lyons]

Yep, I reckon that it would have to be a stricter thing than a casual class. Drills, re-inforcement, and the like. Something suited, say, to a mobile app?

Developers - start your engines!

--

Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Patrick Haller]

On 2011-12-05 13:08, Ivan wrote:
> speed reading is cool, but not enough. you also need to learn how to
> take notes and how to review what you've read/learned.

Speed reading should help with the reviewing. I.e.,

Lots of writers announce their intentions and then follow a trajectory,
so reading becomes just scanning for deviations from that path.

Does the current section fit into the overall argument flight plan? How
much of a deviation is this? Has the author's soaring argument just gone
into Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly?

Patrick

[Alvin Jiang]

A class is a lot easier to start than a mobile app, but I look forward
to trying it when you're done :)

If anyone is wwilling to spend an hour sharing their tips (and guiding
someone through the basics) of speed reading, I'll help to organise it.

I'm no expert but perhaps a good program would be an introduction, demo,
teaching, practice a random paragraph, and recall.

We'll leave it up to the individual to decide if s/he has the discipline
to continue practice and learning beyond the casual class.

Let me know if you'd care to conduct - seems there's already some
interest to learn here.

Alvin.

> --
> Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Patrick Haller]

On 2011-12-05 13:54, Alvin Jiang wrote:
> Let me know if you'd care to conduct - seems there's already some
> interest to learn here.

I'm interested in getting the materials together to do this.

Anyone else interested in running or helping run the workshop?

[Meng Weng Wong]

On Dec 5, 2011, at 9:23 AM, Ciaran Lyons wrote:

This is the second time in as many days I've come across the idea of speed reading as a competitive advantage in the workplace. I'm interested to know if this is widely held in Singapore/SE Asia and whether people typically pay for courses in speed reading?

Gosh, I'm surprised by the amount of interest in speed reading – that's cool, though I should clarify what I had in mind when I talked about reading.

I was thinking of ESR's Portrait of J Random Hacker:

http://freem.vmth.ucdavis.edu/~saintly/bio/portrait.html

Although high general intelligence is common among hackers, it is not the sine qua non one might expect. Another trait is probably even more important: the ability to mentally absorb, retain, and reference large amounts of `meaningless' detail, trusting to later experience to give it context and meaning. A person of merely average analytical intelligence who has this trait can become an effective hacker, but a creative genius who lacks it will swiftly find himself outdistanced by people who routinely upload the contents of thick reference manuals into their brains. [During the production of the first book version of this document, for example, I learned most of the rather complex typesetting language TeX over about four working days, mainly by inhaling Knuth's 477-page manual. My editor's flabbergasted reaction to this genuinely surprised me, because years of associating with hackers have conditioned me to consider such performances routine and to be expected. --ESR]

Some people watch TV for 4 hours a day.

They could spend that time reading.

But they don't.

Reading is hard. Let's go shopping!

[Patrick]

> Another trait is probably even more important: the ability to mentally
> absorb, retain, and reference large amounts of `meaningless' detail,
> trusting to later experience to give it context and meaning.

Nice window on his mind. The better model of the world you have in your
head, the less you need to experimentally verify.

Somewhat related, I turned the worst of 4chan /b/ into a presentation on
mistakes made:
http://haller.ws/projects/mistakes/

It has nudity and graphic violence, so you should probably skip it.

Patrick

[Mingming Wang]

The book How to read a book is very good on how to read. Recommended for every serious reader.

Patrick

--
Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[James Yuen]

Seems a bit counter intuitive......lol

On Dec 5, 11:48 pm, Mingming Wang <mingofd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The book *How to read a book *is very good on how to read. Recommended for

[Flo.]

I practise once in a while the speed reading method by Tim Ferriss :
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/07/30/speed-reading-and-accelerated-learning/
. The speed of reading increase dramatically during the 20 minute
practise, and drops back afterwards (when not focused on reading
fast), but I would think it helps on the long term.

[Ciaran Lyons]

@jasonong just tweeted this: http://beelinereader.com/

For reading bunches of web text. Nice idea, I wonder can you control the palette though.

Ciaran

--

Chat: http://hackerspace.sg/chat

[Martin Bähr]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 03:02:24PM +0800, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
> http://freem.vmth.ucdavis.edu/~saintly/bio/portrait.html

>
> [During the production of the first book version of
> this document, for example, I learned most of the rather complex
> typesetting language TeX over about four working days, mainly by
> inhaling Knuth's 477-page manual.

i had a conversation with a student a few days ago, who wanted to learn
python, and i gave him the 'learning python' book from o'reilly.

he then complained that the book was to verbose, and preferred something
more compact. fair enough, though i tried to explain that just reading
through it would still be helpful.

my take on this is that you can read something in order to remember where
you read it, so that when you have a problem you know where to look it up.

greetings, martin.
--
cooperative communication with sTeam - caudium, pike, roxen and unix
services: debugging, programming, training, linux sysadmin, web development
--
pike programmer working in china community.gotpike.org
foresight developer (open-steam|caudium).org foresightlinux.org
unix sysadmin iaeste.at realss.com
Martin B�hr http://www.iaeste.at/~mbaehr/ is.schon.org