Another Fine Mess You Have Gotten Us Into

This week Formula 1 finds itself once again embroiled in a controversy that it doesn't need to, a controversy that could have a pretty significant impact on the sport, but is so complex that most folks have a hard time understanding just what's going on.

In a nutshell - the rules state that teams aren't allowed to develop and improve their engines during the racing season.  Mercedes did so well in 2014 that Ferrari and Renault have both been pushing to get this rule waived, arguing that they can't catch up to Mercedes due to the restrictions on development in place.

After reviewing the rules as they were written for the current engine Formula, both Ferrari and Renault have discovered that they are worded a bit vague.  So vague, that they could be interpreted that there is no restriction on engine development after the start of the 2015 season - an interpretation that Race Director and Chief Rules Interpreter Charlie Whitting agrees with.

Unless you're a new manufacturer to the sport - and then you can't develop your engine in 2015, you're stuck with following the 2014 rules.  Once you submit your engine to the FIA for scrutinizing (aka homologation) you can't change it.  Honda, who is returning this year is a bit upset over this new development and has complained to the FIA.

Still following along?

Between seasons, manufacturers can only upgrades specific components of their engines.  For the duration of the period where the current rules are in effect, the number of components a manufacture can upgrade each year decreases...  For example, (and these numbers are hypothetical for illustrative purposes) going into the 2015 season, teams can only upgrade 16 components, into 2016 - 12 component, etc...  

Still with us?  Because this is where it gets screwy..

If you're Mercedes, Ferrari, or Renault, there's a natural progress here, and more importantly every one of your competitors is playing by the same rules.  Unless you're Honda, or another new team...  The way the rules are currently written and instituted - the first year you're in the sport you're stuck with the 2014 rules for the development freeze, the second year you're in the sport you're then bound by the same upgrade restrictions as the rest of the field...   In other words, based on the current implementation of the rules - Honda must submit their engine for homologation at the end of February, and then can't develop their engine any more because the rules says that as a new team they need to do this just like all the teams that competed in 2014.  However, in 2016 Honda is limited to only being able to upgrade the same number of components as the rest of the field in 2016.  At no time does Honda get the same chance to upgrade their engines in 2015 as the rest of the field.

The whole intention behind the restrictions was to control costs in the sport.  By eliminating in season testing and development of the engines, development costs are constrained.  Less testing and development, less cost.  By constraining the costs you're creating a more level playing field across the grid, smaller teams with smaller budgets don't need to pour money that they don't have into in season developing and testing.  But the rules need to be applied evenly across the grid.  A new manufacturer needs to be able to participate at the same level as the rest of the grid.  The rules interpretation that Charlie Whitting and the FIA appear to be implementing this year, even it is inadvertently being done because the rules were writing poorly, don't layout an even field.  

FOM and Formula 1 can't afford to give the impression that they're not making a level field.  After loosing two teams from the grid, Formula 1 needs to attract more teams.  If Formula 1 handicaps Honda by following the rules as they are currently interpreting them then they are discouraging teams and manufacturers from coming to the sport.  There has been an increasing level of chatter over the last few months that a member of the VW group - either VW our Audi, could come to Formula.  But if Formula 1 handicaps a new team and forces them to compete at a disadvantage  then they're also discouraging others from entering the sport.  How do you attract new teams and new manufacturers when you also tell them that they'll be competing at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the grid?

The thing is, this is a controversy that Formula 1 shouldn't find itself with.  Providing a level playing field across the grid seems like something that would be obvious.  But apparently to the forces that rule F1 it isn't.  This is something that the FIA should be weighing in on.  So, where is the world motorsport governing body?

Posted on January 10, 2015 and filed under Formula 1.

Shut it down!

Ok, I'm calling it.  As Gordon Ramsay would say after going through the coolers on an episode of Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares - "SHUT IT DOWN!"  If Smith & Williamson who are the Administrators for Caterham can't find a buyer by the end of the week - then it's time to turn off the life support and shut this team down.

The BBC is reporting that Smith & Williamson will not be funding the team to take part in the test, so if the team is going to participate, there needs to be a buyer.  The firm insists that negotiations are still ongoing, but also admits that they haven't received an offer...

The first 2015 is just shy of 4 weeks away counting this week.  If the deal was finalized today - the new owners would have 4 weeks to hire a staff, drivers, and develop the basic operational plans needed just for the team to function...  All that without actually doing a lick of development on the car which will have to run last year's uncompetitive chassis...  

Now I admit, it wouldn't be  unprecedented for a team to miss the first test of the season, even part of the second test - Lotus was forced to do it last year...   But the fact remains, the clock is ticking down to race 1 in Melbourne.  Every day that passes without a buyer is one more day lost for development of something to improve the 2014 car, like maybe some jet engines or something...  Every day of development work lost further cements the car to the back of the grid, and makes it less likely that the car will even be able to qualify to race on Saturdays.  Every day of development work lost makes this team that much less of an attractive investment...

Posted on January 5, 2015 .

Wink Hub - Review

It seems that home automation is the big thing this year.  Until not long ago home automation systems were expensive, required specialized knowledge to setup and install and not compatible with just about anything you'd want to use them with...

Behind the scenes standards to get devices talking together like ZWave, X10 and Zigbee started to take shape, and devices to take advantage of those standards are starting to become more common.  This year, Belkin and several other manufacturers have worked to bring home automation into the mainstream.

Quirky has rolled out it's system known as Wink, you've probably seen the commercials for the system featuring the couple with the robot butler.  Wink uses the Zwave standard which is supported by Nest, GE (which Quirky has a partnership with), Schlage, Kwickset, Lutron and several other companies.

We picked up the Wink hub and so far are using it to connect and control the Schlage keypad deadbolt.  The hub is a "simple" device, no buttons, switches, or even a display all it has is one multicolored indicator light.  To configure it, you download and install the Wink app on your iPhone or Android phone, and plug in the hub.  The app uses Bluetooth to configure the hub, pulling your WiFi settings from your phone and importing them to the hub, it took just a few seconds to get the hub online and on to our network.

The Wink Hub

The Wink Hub

Once the hub is on the network the app will see it and allow you to add devices, The app provides the instructions and in some cases videos that show you how to connect your compatible device and in most cases the process should be pretty simple.  Connecting up our Schlage lock wasn't quite as easy.  The instructions provided by the app say that connecting should be simply a matter of extending the deadbolt and entering the programming code, which didn't actually work.  It took a look at the Schlage website to discover that the lock needed to be reset in order to prepare it to connect.  Once connected the lock worked as expected - swipe a button to lock, swipe again to unlock.

There are a few things I don't like...  Range appears to be an issue, while not indicated by Wink or the app - Schlage recommends the hub be within 6 feet of the lock when pairing, and I could only pair it when the hub was that close to the lock.  Once the hub was paired to the lock and connected it could be moved further away from the lock, however the further away from the lock you place the hub, the slower the lock response to a command.

In order to keep the interface as simple as possible, the app provides very little information.  There doesn't appear to be a way to determine if the hub is actually connected to a device or if it's out of range. This isn't much of a problem, except when you're trying to determine the best placement for the hub in your home.

Overall though, Quirky's Wink Hub looks like a promising device, and we have several more compatible devices on their way over the next few months.  I'm excited to see what we can do with it...

Posted on December 21, 2014 and filed under Technology.

Sony Makes a Mess

At this point it's hard not to be at least somewhat aware of the mess that has come out of the massive hack at Sony Pictures Entertainment.

So far the company has managed to become a four time looser out of this...

  1. They were hacked
  2. A staggeringly large amount of proprietary and confidential data was lost and leaked
  3. The loss of money spent in producing and publicizing a movie that at least for now won't be released.
  4. The ever worsening PR disaster that the company has experienced since news of the hack first broke.

But it's Sony's last move, the decision to cancel the opening and release of The Interview that will probably have the worst and most widespread implications...

First let's get it out of the way - when I first heard about The Interview, I thought it was going to be just another in a line of mindless "comedies" that would get a lot of publicity, but ultimately flop at the box office and quickly fade into obscurity.  12 months from now you probably would have been able to find it in the $9.99 bargain DVD bin collecting dust...  By hacking into Sony and making it an issue - the movie got more traction and buzz than it would have gotten if it had been ignored outright.

That being said, Sony and the various theater chains caving to the bullying of the hackers was the worst thing it could possibly do.  I get that the companies were faced with a terrible choice - ignore the warnings and risk an incident at a theater and get accused of not doing enough to protect theater goers and deal with that taint on the movie, or cave to the demands of the hackers - don't run the risk of an incident, and take the PR hit for caving....

When looking at this purely from a human perspective - pulling the movie is an easy choice, even when there's no evidence of a credible threat - better to not have blood on your hands...

The thing is - of course the North Koreans were going to get mad over The Interview...  In the UK they went so far as to send some goons over from the Nork Embassy (thank you El Reg for gifting the world with the term Nork...) to try and bully a hair salon owner to take down a poster criticizing young Kim's hairstyle...  By the way, the owner left the poster up, a London hair stylist apparently is bolder than a multi-billion dollar trans-national corporation...   Sony couldn't have been so stupid as to think that the disciples of the Kim family weren't going to try some level of bluster that would get the world's attention.

But the implications of this decision are immense.  Sony has just told the world "the US Government might not be bullied or swayed by hackers and their demands - but US Companies - they'll cave in...."  It wasn't highly publicized, but Sony wasn't the only major hack of a US Corporation this year.  Sands Casinos were also hacked this year in an attack traced back to Iranian activists acting in response to comments made their majority shareholder regarding Iran.  The scope of the attack on Sands was just as broad as the Sony attack, but the attack was focused on destruction not on theft and disclosure...

Odds are hackers are in other companies too - and thanks to Sony caving - odds are other companies are now going to get demands too...  Company releases a product that your group wants to scuttle - hack them and threaten to physically attack any store that sells their product...  Blackmail a company in order to change their position or not release a product... Try and elicit a payoff, or payoffs from a company you want to damage...  Because if these tactics worked on Sony - you can bet they're going to be used on other companies too...

One of the US's great strengths is it's economy, and Sony just handed the worlds cybercrimals and terrorists a few thousand ways to attack the US economy...  

Posted on December 19, 2014 and filed under Technology.

Prove Me Wrong Finbarr O'Connell

Today was day 2 of the Marussia fire sale with more parts, computers, art work and team wear being liquidated.

And while this is going on we wait for defacto Caterham Team Principal Finbarr O'Connell to produce a deal that will save the team from the same fate.  O'Connell has said that negotiations are ongoing with three different perspective buyers, and that the accountant believes that the concession he got from Formula 1 allowing new team owners to run the 2014 chassis in the 2015 season will be enough to attract a buyer and return the team to the grid...

But in all honesty, what would a new owner be buying?  Motorhomes, chassis, assorted parts and computers mostly I'd expect.  There can't be much staff left in the organization - much of the staff was laid off in the late summer/early fall, and given the state of the team it's unlikely that there are many of the rest left at this point.

From a staffing perspective - finding drivers and marketing folks shouldn't be hard for a new owner...  But how do you attract skilled technical personnel back to this team?

More than that, the team would have a car that wasn't competitive in 2014, that has had minimal if any development over most of 2014 and none into 2015?  How likely is it that a car that was 4 seconds a lap off the pace at the last race of the season and had no development work done in the off season will even be able to make it out of qualifying and meet the requirements of the 107% rule in order to actually race? 

Then there's Formula 1 in general.  The guy who is responsible for marketing F1 and for the overall survival of the sport believes that the failure of both Marrussia and Caterham is because they both needed to spend less.  That same person has also said that he's not interested in increasing the sport's presence on social media or even marketing the sport to younger fans "because they don't have any money." The sport has a financial structure that pays teams not just based on their level of success but on how long they've been in the sport and are willing to stay in the sport. So with all of that - why would anybody even want to get involved in Formula 1, let alone purchase a failed team and the prospect of running a car that even if it does qualify won't be remotely competitive?

As much as I want to see Caterham rise from the ashes, I just don't see it happening...  So, prove me wrong Finbarr O'Connell...  Please...

Posted on December 17, 2014 and filed under Formula 1.