history – Romano Pisciotti Industrial & Business Management

Teaching history is a loaded weapon

Teaching history is a loaded weapon: the influence that the teacher can give on the social and political development of students could be the beginning of a revolution or the civil path of social development.

Knowing the past, without judging it with today’s canons, and framing it well in its time and environmental situation, serves to understand the current geopolitics; perhaps many students will never delve into the meaning of geopolitics, but everyone will be able to have a clearer thought about modern events… this, too often, scares politicians and the industrial world itself.

One thing we know for sure is the influence that the ideas pre-chewed by politics have on the sheep people or on the ignorant people (ignorance, indifference and servility are not always present simultaneously).

First of all, it is necessary to know the historical facts well, then they must be framed in their context and, subsequently, get an idea of them. The teacher must not indulge in biased comments influenced by his own political ideas or religion, but can bring life experiences and testimonies drawn from writings, making sure to refer to documentation from heterogeneous sources, without creating a single account of the facts. and their historical consequences. Therefore, a difficult task and subject to partisan criticism and varied interests.

The celebration of heroes is always readable in two senses: the same character can be a hero or delinquent from different points of view … it is very likely that historical impartiality becomes impossible, after all we are not talking about physics or mathematics, but It is important to offer correct and neutral teaching and to leave the related celebrations to politics and memory.

The historian investigates the past without prosecution! The fallout of history and future projections of facts and events are the tasks of geopolitics, while the instrumental use of history is the habit of politics.

Some fools have already thought of thinking about teaching history as a useless exercise …. this way of thinking is not just a loaded weapon, but a fatal blow to the civil development of a country.

By Romano Pisciotti

IMAGINE THE HISTORY DIFFERENTLY

I Lloyd’s, insieme alla società di modellazione RMS, hanno pubblicato un rapporto – intitolato “Counterfactual Disaster Risk Analysis: Reimagining history” – che descrive come una tipologia di pensiero laterale, chiamato counterfactual (controfattuale, ipotetico), possa essere applicato per contribuire all’analisi dei rischi da parte degli assicuratori.

“E se una tempesta solare avesse colpito Londra durante le olimpiadi del 2012? E se il vento avesse portato la contaminazione radioattiva verso l’interno quando gli impianti nucleari di Fukushima sono stati colpiti dallo tsunami nel 2011? E se l’Africa orientale fosse rimasta coinvolta in una guerra civile durante la crisi dell’Ebola nel 2014?”.

Eventi globali cruciali come questi – chiariscono dai Lloyd’s – avrebbero potuto svolgersi in modo molto diverso se le cose fossero accadute anche in modo lievemente differente. Il peggior disastro nella storia dell’aviazione, ad esempio, è stato evitato per poco lo scorso luglio quando un pilota di un aereo passeggeri che stava atterrando all’aeroporto di San Francisco è risalito all’ultimo secondo.

Il rapporto Lloyd’s – RMS parla di come l’analisi controfattuale di esiti peggiori – in altre parole considerare come eventi storicamente evitati per poco avrebbero potuto dar origine a disastri di grave entità – può essere svolta in pratica e divenire un punto di partenza per una futura ricerca riguardante eventi controfattuali e le loro caratteristiche.

Secondo i Lloyd’s il pensiero controfattuale produce una serie di benefici per gli assicuratori: “Il fatto che eventi controfattuali siano ancorati ad esperienze storiche reali – ha spiegato Trevor Maynard, Head of Innovation ai Lloyd’s – aiutano a rendere più semplici spiegazioni complesse, facilitano comprensioni più approfondite e rendono la comunicazione più coerente per i rischi futuri e la modellazione dell’incertezza per i consigli di amministrazione, i contraenti, gli assicuratori, i risk managers ed altre figure coinvolte”.

“Gli assicuratori – ha affermato Gordon Woo, Catastrophist presso RMS, ha aggiunto –trarranno beneficio dal poter esaminare il passato anche solo per realizzare ciò che sarebbe potuto accadere. Qualsiasi sia il passato, la comprensione dei rischi si origina dalla possibilità di esplorare come le cose avrebbero potuto voltare al peggio. Adottando una prospettiva controfattuale ed esplorando come gli eventi nella storia avrebbero potuto svolgersi differentemente, è possibile avere approfondimenti rispetto a perdite estreme rare che altrimenti potrebbero arrivare come una sorpresa”.

“L’analisi del rischio controfattuale – ha aggiunto Woo, riferendosi alla modellazione dei rischi – aiuta a evitare i pregiudizi che possono far parte di alcuni modelli basati sugli stessi gruppi di dati storici. Se si espandono i dati a disposizione includendo ciò che sarebbe potuto accadere, questi modelli possono essere costruiti affidandosi meno su singole fonti di dati, andando così a migliorare la loro accuratezza. L’analisi è inoltre uno strumento utile per le autorità di supervisione al fine di testare i modelli di rischio catastrofali”.

“Il rapporto descrive come applicare il pensiero controfattuale sistematicamente – ha concluso Maynard –. Ai Lloyd’s sappiamo che viene già operata un’attenta gestione del rischio e questa nuova metodologia dovrebbe essere considerata come un utile complemento alla serie di strumenti già a disposizione di assicuratori e risk managers. Dopo un disastro gli analisti del rischio tendono a studiare con cura cosa è accaduto ma poca attenzione viene riservata a cosa sarebbe potuto accadere. Sicuramente questa attività è tecnicamente più impegnativa ma noi riteniamo che gli assicuratori trarranno benefici dalla valutazione sistematica dall’analisi controfattuale”.

Intermedia Channel

BY GOOGLE TRANSLETOR:

Lloyd’s, together with the modeling firm RMS, have published a report – entitled “Counterfactual Disaster Risk Analysis: Reimagining History” – which describes how a type of lateral thinking, called counterfactual (counterfactual, hypothetical), can be applied to contribute to risk analysis by insurers.

“What if a solar storm hit London during the 2012 Olympics? What if the wind brought inward radioactive contamination when Fukushima’s nuclear facilities were hit by the tsunami in 2011? What if East Africa was involved in a civil war during the Ebola crisis in 2014? “.

Crucial global events such as these – make it clear from Lloyd’s – could have taken place very differently if things happened even slightly differently. The worst disaster in aviation history, for example, was barely avoided last July when a pilot from a passenger plane that was landing at San Francisco airport climbed back to the last second.

The Lloyd’s – RMS report talks about how counterfactual analysis of worse outcomes – in other words, considering how events historically avoided could have caused serious disasters – can be carried out in practice and become a starting point for a future research concerning counterfactual events and their characteristics.

According to Lloyd’s counterfactual thinking produces a series of benefits for insurers: “The fact that counterfactual events are anchored to real historical experiences – said Trevor Maynard, Head of Innovation at Lloyd’s – help to simplify complex explanations, facilitate understandings more in-depth and make the communication more coherent for future risks and the modeling of uncertainty for the boards of directors, contractors, insurers, risk managers and other figures involved “.

“Insurers – said Gordon Woo, Catastrophist at RMS, he added – will benefit from being able to examine the past just to realize what could have happened. Whatever the past, the understanding of risks arises from the possibility of exploring how things could have turned to the worst. By adopting a counterfactual perspective and exploring how events in history could have unfolded differently, it is possible to have insights into extreme rare losses that might otherwise come as a surprise. ”

“The counterfactual risk analysis – added Woo, referring to risk modeling – helps to avoid the prejudices that may be part of some models based on the same historical data sets. If you expand the data available to include what could have happened, these models can be built by relying less on individual data sources, thus improving their accuracy. The analysis is also a useful tool for supervisory authorities in order to test catastrophe risk models “.

“The report describes how to apply counterfactual thinking systematically – concluded Maynard -. At Lloyd’s we know that careful risk management is already under way and this new methodology should be considered as a useful complement to the series of instruments already available to insurers and risk managers. After a disaster, risk analysts tend to study carefully what happened but little attention is given to what could have happened. Surely this activity is technically more demanding but we believe that insurers will benefit from the systematic evaluation of counterfactual analysis “.

Intermedia Channel

PRESENTED BY ROMANO PISCIOTTI

The supersonic, multi-role F-35

The designation of fighter aircraft by “generations” began with the first subsonic jets toward the end of World War II, with each new generation reflecting a major advance in technology and capability. The F-35 Lightning II is referred to as a 5th Generation fighter, combining advanced stealth capabilities with fighter aircraft speed and agility, fully-fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced logistics and sustainment.

The supersonic, multi-role F-35 represents a quantum leap in air dominance capability with enhanced lethality and survivability in hostile, anti-access airspace environments.

The F-35 combines 5th Generation fighter aircraft characteristics — advanced stealth, integrated avionics, sensor fusion and superior logistics support — with the most powerful and comprehensive integrated sensor package of any fighter aircraft in history. The F-35’s advanced stealth allows pilots to penetrate areas without being detected by radars that legacy fighters cannot evade.

The F-35 is designed with the entire battlespace in mind, bringing new flexibility and capability to the United States and its allies. Reliance on any single capability — electronic attack, stealth, etc. — is not sufficient for success and survivability in the future. Missions traditionally performed by specialized aircraft — air-to-air combat, air-to-ground strikes, electronic attack, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance — can now be executed by a squadron of F-35s.

Romano Pisciotti, surfing web