Now that's Magic
Jun. 17th, 2005 03:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
avevale_intelligencerHACKER: Humphrey, I’m not happy about these accuracy statistics. They’re terrible.
SIR HUMPHREY: Oh, I wouldn’t say that, Minister.
HACKER: Well, what would you say then?
SIR HUMPHREY: I would say that they represent a considerable improvement in real terms over previous years.
HACKER: But the last time they were this bad was 1953!
BERNARD: That is a previous year, Minister.
HACKER: And the only reason they haven’t been as bad since is that we haven’t been collecting accuracy figures!
SIR HUMPHREY: Well, there you are, Minister. We weren’t collecting them, and now we are. Isn’t that a considerable improvement?
HACKER: It’s no good, Humphrey. I want a real improvement in the accuracy of this Ministry and I want it now.
SIR HUMPHREY: Well, Minister, we have already taken decisive steps in that direction.
HACKER: I’m not going to put up with your bureaucratic stonewalling and—what? Really?
SIR HUMPHREY: We are here to carry out your wishes, Minister, to the best of our humble abilities..
HACKER: What have you done?
SIR HUMPHREY: We have put in place a ground-breaking programme of redefinition and reprioritisation, with a view to bringing the antiquated standards of the Civil Service into line with the requirements of the modern digital age, taking into account the input from customer-driven outreach exercises and internal focus group discussions, and arriving at a fully functional paradigm for the successful pursuit of excellence while not neglecting the logistical exigencies of the prevailing economic climate and considerations of work-life balance.
HACKER: Of course. I can see that. (Pause) What have you done?
SIR HUMPHREY: We have redefined the concept of accuracy. Instead of depending on the unreliable and erratic provision of information from our customer base, we have chosen to place our trust in the state-of-the-art advanced data processing systems we already have in our possession.
HACKER: Bernard?
BERNARD: He means that from now on we don’t bother getting information from the customers, Minister. We use computer projections instead.
HACKER: But—but the customers are sending in information all the time. I’ve seen it. Sackloads.
SIR HUMPHREY: And we value that information very highly indeed, Minister.
BERNARD: We just don’t use it any more.
HACKER: So—accuracy no longer means getting the right information.
SIR HUMPHREY: Minister, let me put it to you like this. Who is more likely to have the right information: a large Government Ministry staffed with highly trained and dedicated individuals with the latest information-gathering technology at their disposal, or a simple private citizen?
HACKER: Well—
SIR HUMPHREY: And the first result of this new approach, Minister, will be a dramatic increase in our accuracy statistics.
BERNARD: It’s easier to be accurate about what you already know.
HACKER: But suppose we’re wrong, Humphrey?
SIR HUMPHREY: I’m…sorry, Minister?
HACKER: Suppose the information we have is not accurate?
SIR HUMPHREY: I don’t understand.
BERNARD: I think what the Minister means is, if our information, which we define as accurate for the purposes of accuracy checking, turns out to be inaccurate, would it then be accurate to define the accurate information as inaccurate for the purpose of accuracy checking, or would it then be permissible to bring our accurate information which is inaccurate into line with the customer’s inaccurate information which is accurate, or should we instead try to bring the customer’s accurate inaccurate information into line with our inaccurate accurate information?
SIR HUMPHREY: Is that the nature of your inquiry, Minister?
HACKER: (warily) Let’s assume for the sake of argument that it is.
SIR HUMPHREY: Surely, Minister, you must see that it would be counter-productive to devote costly resources and manpower to a time-consuming and totally unnecessary intrusion into the lives of our customers, purely on the off-chance that they might have information that differs from ours? In what way could such effort possibly be justified, especially when the only possible outcome could be a further decrease in our accuracy statistics?
(Pause.)
HACKER: Make sure the new statistics are on my desk as soon as they’re released, Humphrey. And as for these--just file them.
SIR HUMPHREY: Yes Minister.
SIR HUMPHREY: Oh, I wouldn’t say that, Minister.
HACKER: Well, what would you say then?
SIR HUMPHREY: I would say that they represent a considerable improvement in real terms over previous years.
HACKER: But the last time they were this bad was 1953!
BERNARD: That is a previous year, Minister.
HACKER: And the only reason they haven’t been as bad since is that we haven’t been collecting accuracy figures!
SIR HUMPHREY: Well, there you are, Minister. We weren’t collecting them, and now we are. Isn’t that a considerable improvement?
HACKER: It’s no good, Humphrey. I want a real improvement in the accuracy of this Ministry and I want it now.
SIR HUMPHREY: Well, Minister, we have already taken decisive steps in that direction.
HACKER: I’m not going to put up with your bureaucratic stonewalling and—what? Really?
SIR HUMPHREY: We are here to carry out your wishes, Minister, to the best of our humble abilities..
HACKER: What have you done?
SIR HUMPHREY: We have put in place a ground-breaking programme of redefinition and reprioritisation, with a view to bringing the antiquated standards of the Civil Service into line with the requirements of the modern digital age, taking into account the input from customer-driven outreach exercises and internal focus group discussions, and arriving at a fully functional paradigm for the successful pursuit of excellence while not neglecting the logistical exigencies of the prevailing economic climate and considerations of work-life balance.
HACKER: Of course. I can see that. (Pause) What have you done?
SIR HUMPHREY: We have redefined the concept of accuracy. Instead of depending on the unreliable and erratic provision of information from our customer base, we have chosen to place our trust in the state-of-the-art advanced data processing systems we already have in our possession.
HACKER: Bernard?
BERNARD: He means that from now on we don’t bother getting information from the customers, Minister. We use computer projections instead.
HACKER: But—but the customers are sending in information all the time. I’ve seen it. Sackloads.
SIR HUMPHREY: And we value that information very highly indeed, Minister.
BERNARD: We just don’t use it any more.
HACKER: So—accuracy no longer means getting the right information.
SIR HUMPHREY: Minister, let me put it to you like this. Who is more likely to have the right information: a large Government Ministry staffed with highly trained and dedicated individuals with the latest information-gathering technology at their disposal, or a simple private citizen?
HACKER: Well—
SIR HUMPHREY: And the first result of this new approach, Minister, will be a dramatic increase in our accuracy statistics.
BERNARD: It’s easier to be accurate about what you already know.
HACKER: But suppose we’re wrong, Humphrey?
SIR HUMPHREY: I’m…sorry, Minister?
HACKER: Suppose the information we have is not accurate?
SIR HUMPHREY: I don’t understand.
BERNARD: I think what the Minister means is, if our information, which we define as accurate for the purposes of accuracy checking, turns out to be inaccurate, would it then be accurate to define the accurate information as inaccurate for the purpose of accuracy checking, or would it then be permissible to bring our accurate information which is inaccurate into line with the customer’s inaccurate information which is accurate, or should we instead try to bring the customer’s accurate inaccurate information into line with our inaccurate accurate information?
SIR HUMPHREY: Is that the nature of your inquiry, Minister?
HACKER: (warily) Let’s assume for the sake of argument that it is.
SIR HUMPHREY: Surely, Minister, you must see that it would be counter-productive to devote costly resources and manpower to a time-consuming and totally unnecessary intrusion into the lives of our customers, purely on the off-chance that they might have information that differs from ours? In what way could such effort possibly be justified, especially when the only possible outcome could be a further decrease in our accuracy statistics?
(Pause.)
HACKER: Make sure the new statistics are on my desk as soon as they’re released, Humphrey. And as for these--just file them.
SIR HUMPHREY: Yes Minister.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-06-17 07:52 pm (UTC)Inspired by anything in particular?
no subject
Date: 2005-06-17 11:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-06-20 07:18 am (UTC)SCENE: The Watering Hole (Pretty d*mn near *any* Watering Hole), in the Old Days
Zander: [Finishes 3-minute piano piece]
Soren: That was nice, Zander -- what was it ?
Zander: What ? Oh -- er ... I was just making it up as I went along.
Soren: [Grrrr...] [Turns violently GREEN with jealousy].
Especially impressed with the long Bernard piece -- I can *hear* his voice saying it!!
's Truth
's Oren