- gesture based eye movements, maybe two sweeps on a nine by nine grid, which map directly to phonemes

- enormous 4k 75inch tv with thousands of words or ideograms or phrases

- "writing" with your eyes then doing line to text AI to clean up

- standardish keyboard with massive LLM prediction and clean UX for autocomplete/throwaway with branching options

Ideas are cheap so no clue if these work. Also Tobi split between cheap good non-hackable gaming eyetracking and medical products doesn't help. Finally, with ALS you want to communicate about different things and are more tired.

https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-...

Learned two interesting things

- if your tool mandates a philosophy or process, you massively shrink your market

- real pms , sponsors and engineer s buffer their risk by selectively disclosing information. They don't want a permanent record of open, granular outcome information unless they are in a very mature company.

So Clegg rolled the dice on getting proportional representation rather than first past the post to solve this and lost. He also had a go at being less of an opposition party (where you oppose) and more of a coalition party like in Europe to get things done (post the financial crisis). This failed.

Everyone hates him for tuition fees, but apparently George Osborne told him to vote against the huge raise. Had this happened I doubt people would remember him with the malice they do.

Finally, he always seemed an ethical person (Lib Dems usually are excepting local election shenanigans), so the charges seem odd and out of character, but so did the move to facebook.

Could you post a link? Can't find it and am just watching the Queens 70th Jubilee service which I think is pertinent ! thanks

Management ties contexts together, so other individuals don't have to ask infinite 'whys', they trust the manager has this covered.

Management can be done by individuals, within the team, or hierarchically. All can work.

Personally strongly disagree with 'managers typically have no skin in the game'. I find it is necessary to care about the outcome and the team and the customer when I work, but YMMV. Do agree that management is a support, though I prefer to use the analogy that it is the 'glue' role

But it's an interesting question - I've been intrigued throughout my career (5-25 person project management)

"Which 'reality disconnects' are important and need addressing, which can be left to lie, and which ones are fatal?"

Still don't really have the answer but my guidelines would go like this

- There has to be at least one part of the project (hopefully the most important) that is functional and grounded in reality to grow from. If there isn't then scrap the project/ do a new project. ( In consultancy a question to ask a new client was - Tell me about your last project that succeeded and your last project that failed - sometimes they had no successes - that was worth knowing)

- Fight the small battles all the time - How do we know what done is? Are the tests good? Is that code understandable? Are the specs and interfaces understood? Are we shipping sh*t?. You need to keep your principles here or you can't mentor and good people won't follow/ trust you

- Some of the big battles especially the political ones can only be fought in very specific contexts (changing budgets, team structure, new cultures). Put down a marker you'd like to see improvement there, but also state that now is not the time till the fundamentals are done.

- At the end of the day imagine yourself as a new hire in your team. If the new hire thinks 'My boss isn't the right person to lead the team' then think about leaving/changing roles. If they think 'Wow this is a tough job but I can see how we get there' keep on going. If they think 'I respect my boss but no-one can fix this mess' then think about re-negotiating to what can be done(either leave or help re-base things). If the 'junior you' isn't going to stay in your team, then things aren't going to work.

Strongly recommend Rands in Repose - Bits, Features, Truth

Some BBC Techs told me, back in the early days (1997?-2004?) when other companies were fighting with Vignette and Bea and IBM etc. and worrying how to balance the database, thread, webserver pool for high scale sites, and falling over at every high traffic moment, the BBC had this monster static Apache estate off loads of servers, with a hand-built Perl scheduler which essentially copied your 'subsite' or changes to a subset of these static servers, from whatever static ingest you gave it. This meant as long as you had a semi-centralised site/ information architecture and a good team on the Perl scheduler and load balancing; any internal content subteam could go off and build what they wanted, with whatever CMS/hand tools they had, as long as it spat out a static staging site the Perl scheduler could handle. This model/process/ org structure way out-performed the rest of the UK internet in uptime/performance/cost, and it let a thousand flowers bloom; but only for a one-way read only system - no custom content/ ads/ offers/ personalisation - probably hard to even do centralised log analysis.