Thread: This year's awards 2014

Originally Posted by eskimo

I think I Do...werent they the ones who ran the country.... ?

I thought they where a band?

Happy New Year

Ben

And yes the band

Originally Posted by RayG

Ok, getting back to wharfies, what sort of apprenticeship do you have to do to become a wharfie?

From what I understand it is not so much an apprenticeship but either being very lucky and being in the right place at the right time or you have family in the job.. I was just in the right place at the right time, but I no longer do it... I found more mentally stimulating work to my liking... However I will say the people I worked with were mostly decent people just doing what they could to survive and raise a family with only the odd dickhead..... Overall the work was not hard, but harder then a cushy PS job in an air-con office...

Originally Posted by cba_melbourne

Knowledge can be gained by reading as well as by experience. ... Common sense would say that reading is the fastest and most cost effective way to acquire the knowledge.

...I still enjoy learning new things, both by doing and by reading. Castigating someone for acquiring knowledge is very closed-minded. ... You may not have noticed, but the internet is more and more taking on and enhancing the role that books once had.

All very true, but at the same time there is a difference between knowledge gained first hand (and hence understood) and knowledge picked up without going through a learning experience (known but not necessarily understood). In a forum like this that deals primarily with applying knowledge, it is the details that are learnt that sometimes are the difference between success and failure. I for one consider it intellectually dishonest to quote information without acknowledging a source if the latter applies (This is a general comment - not singling anyone out in particular)
A recent discussion irritated me no end because while the argument being made was in fact correct, there were basic errors included in the information provided in support of the argument that suggested that information was being quoted without understanding. There was/ is a member on another forum who was famous for doing this. His temporary banning was seen as a god-send by many as discussions were not swamped with regurgitated fact, but enabled others to discuss and therefore learn about the issue at hand.

The internet is a wonderful source of information (and I use it daily at work for just that reason) but should not be seen as a substitute for or superior to knowledge developed through understanding*.

Michael

*When I talk to engineering students at Uni, I tell them that they must be able to show an employer they are RUDE - their studies are Relevant; they Understand the material they have been exposed to; they should be able to show they have Developed this information and they should have some Experience to back that up.

How true that is Michael, I've been in a position, where I had to TRY to make something designed by an engineer. One look at the plans and I could see that it wasn't going to work. After a long discussion of "I'M THE ENGINEER WITH A UNI DEGREE" I gave up, and tried to do the job as per plan, 5 hours later, and several phone calls, he came to see me, and could see what I was talking about. Yes it looked good on paper, but the practicality was dismal.
Kryn

Originally Posted by Michael G

... there is a difference between knowledge gained first hand (and hence understood) and knowledge picked up without going through a learning experience (known but not necessarily understood).

I don't believe there is necessarily a correlation between how knowledge/technique is gained and how well it is understood. An understanding of why something is done can be gained either from first hand experience (often through your own mistakes), just as easily as learning from someone else's mistakes. The understanding is no less valid.

How often do people do something a certain way because "that's just the way it's done" without really knowing why it should be done that way - first hand knowledge without understanding.

Originally Posted by Michael G

...there is a difference between knowledge gained first hand (and hence understood) and knowledge picked up without going through a learning experience (known but not necessarily understood)...

You are right - perhaps the quote should be
...there is a difference between knowledge gained first hand (and hence understood) and information picked up without going through a learning experience (known but not necessarily understood)...
At the time I was responding to a statement about knowledge and so did not express myself as well as I could have.

As an example to illustrate the point, supposing a new member posted "I've been asked to cut a small gear for a friend. I have a small mill and a rotary table. Do I have the right equipment to do it?"

If you just relied on information (knowledge) from google, the answer could well be "Yes, you can do it with that"
If you have some 2nd or 3rd hand knowledge of gears and the processes to make them, the answer is likely to be along the lines of "Probably but we need more information"
If you have 1st hand information on actually making gears, your answer could be different again.

While it's reasonably good, the internet is not error free. Web forums like this one are used as sources of information, so we (those posting here) should be taking care that we are not representing information (that is, knowledge without proper understanding) in a way that suggests that the poster has an understanding of the subject.

Michael

I think that may be splitting hairs ... whether you call it "knowledge" or "information" the fact remains that regardless of how you come by it, you may or may not understand it. Just because you are not basing that knowledge on actual experience makes no difference to the level of understanding.

Information/knowledge has always been gained and passed on by trial and error, word of mouth, books and more recently by the internet. Regardless of the method of gaining that knowledge there is always the possibility of getting it wrong or not understanding why "it works". Hopefully gaining that understanding (by reading or doing) will highlight whether the information is factual.

There certainly is a lot to be said about knowledge..

I once cut a piece of steel twice and it was still too short...


--------------------------------------------


These days there is a lot more teaching of why it is so, rather then do as I say.... I think that is for the better... But there are still plenty of people that are blissfully ignorant... Personally I think the internet is easily the greatest invention of the late 20th century...

I think it odd to answer a question on a forum like this with googled information, presumably the OP would/should have googled and found the same information!
But, the internet is a brilliant source, for example, did you know there is a cave system in the US 650 klm long, or how about this - the worlds largest lathe:

• swing over bed – 16 ft (4.87m)
• max turning diameter – 3000 mm
• boring diameter range – 350-1800 mm
• max workpiece length – 13,000 to 10,000 mm
• spindle speed 60 to 2400 rpm
• speed adjustment range : 60 ~ 2400 rpm
• faceplate speed (1st.step / 2nd. Step) : 1~41 / 4.2~169 rpm
• nominal speed (1st.step / 2nd. Step) : 10.3 / 42.2 rpm
• torque at the faceplate : 130000 N

It's for sale BTW, how big is your shed? Or more importantly, how big is your bank account? More info here: http://www.industrytap.com/worlds-la...the-sale/14280

Originally Posted by Michael G

You are right - perhaps the quote should be
...there is a difference between knowledge gained first hand (and hence understood) and information picked up without going through a learning experience (known but not necessarily understood)...
At the time I was responding to a statement about knowledge and so did not express myself as well as I could have.
......................Michael

Michael, you are implying that knowledge gained first hand is always understood and must therefore be superior. But Knowledge gained by doing and experience alone, is often incomplete and circumstantial. Knowing "how things are done" does not automatically mean understanding why.

Progress comes from understanding the why. Was it Leonardo DaVinci who said "poor is the pupil that does not surpass his master"? Just copying and matching a master does not lead to innovation.

An example based on the recent thread "how are very small twist drills made": one poster mentioned how he was amazed at a worker in Maryborough, Victoria sharpening minute drills by hand. Well, no doubt that worker lost his job long ago. In his place, new jobs were created in a place opposite the globe in Switzerland, where the precision grinding robots are designed and manufactured, that nowadays mass produce these drills to far superior standards that the worker in Maryborough could ever dream of.

Originally Posted by emanon

I think it odd to answer a question on a forum like this with googled information, presumably the OP would/should have googled and found the same information!
But, the internet is a brilliant source, for example, did you know there is a cave system in the US 650 klm long, or how about this - the worlds largest lathe:

• swing over bed – 16 ft (4.87m)
• max turning diameter – 3000 mm
• boring diameter range – 350-1800 mm
• max workpiece length – 13,000 to 10,000 mm
• spindle speed 60 to 2400 rpm
• speed adjustment range : 60 ~ 2400 rpm
• faceplate speed (1st.step / 2nd. Step) : 1~41 / 4.2~169 rpm
• nominal speed (1st.step / 2nd. Step) : 10.3 / 42.2 rpm
• torque at the faceplate : 130000 N

It's for sale BTW, how big is your shed? Or more importantly, how big is your bank account? More info here: http://www.industrytap.com/worlds-la...the-sale/14280

Clearly there are 2 people involved here that have no idea......
The guy who wrote that article and the one who just posted it above.....

a 38m lathe that can fit 13 to 10m between centers??

I think he was being facetious, given the opening line!

2400rpm might require a brave operator too.

Originally Posted by cba_melbourne

... you are implying that knowledge gained first hand is always understood and must therefore be superior. But Knowledge gained by doing and experience alone, is often incomplete and circumstantial. Knowing "how things are done" does not automatically mean understanding why.

No. I am trying to differentiate between information and knowledge. Information (facts if you prefer) is useful to have but unless it is understood (that is, converted to knowledge through discussion, further study/ examination or practical application), it is dangerous stuff and potentially misleading.

Typically this is the way that technical understanding has been transferred for years - either in the TAFE system, the University system or (prior to TAFE) in apprenticeships or traineeships. Information is presented to the trainee and then they are set a task designed to use that information and cement it in their minds as knowledge. People don't always fully understand why but they do understand that doing something in a particular way gives a particular result.
I have not said and will never say that knowledge gained first hand gives a complete understanding. The depth of understanding will vary with the task, training and the people involved. I remember once an engineer telling me that if cleaned off a local bluish discolouration on the surface of some heat treated steel (caused by a blunt cutter rubbing) it's properties would be unimpaired. That suggested that he did not understand why it had gone blue in the first place; in other words he had information that the part should have not have been blue but had no knowledge about the possible causes and effects of that. I dare say if I took the same item to a metallurgist they could provide even more understanding of what had happened and a better assessment of the problem. The metallurgist's understanding would be greater than mine which in turn was greater than the forementioned engineer's.

The point I was trying to make in previous posts is that looking up information on the internet does not necessarily provide an understanding of that information. To be able to claim that someone has acquired knowledge requires further effort on their part - thought, maybe discussion and perhaps application. Without that understanding there is no way of knowing whether that information is correct, complete or even fits the context. To then present that information on a forum like this without disclaimers acknowledging the source or the extent of how that information fits the poster's own knowledge is (apart from being intellectually dishonest) dangerous.

Michael