Just Introduced: This Bill is a reasonable and practical solution to
➡️ Fix problems facing businesses and people in Northern Ireland ➡️ Uphold the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement ➡️ Protect UK and EU markets
What is your take #StBart? Is the Tory proposal close enough to the idea you have been suggesting for years now?
I haven't got a take yet, been busy IRL so not read up on the proposals yet. The news article on the BBC News website is extremely lacking on details about what is actually in the Bill and is instead primarily pre-written guff about what all various parties think about the Protocol which isn't news.
Just come on here interested to see if I could get more information, and it seems what people think is they want to talk about IT, Dalle, text to speech and bestiality. So I'm guessing either nothing much was in the Bill, or nothing much objectionable was. I'm not sure which yet?
Thanks.
If goods moving from mainland UK into NI just for consumption in NI, why should it pass Through a EU border? It shouldn’t. It’s potty solution is the basis of the argument?
Goods for NI consumption should sail through under a green light. If it further crosses into EU, smuggling in other words, it’s in interest of EU to agree with us to harsh penalties on the smugglers, not insist on border somewhere - is the basis of your solution?
So it’s about now measuring you solution against the government proposals, because, although they could recognise the simple issue, they could still screw up your simple solution to it?
My suspicion is the EU and remainers have tried to exploit the unique sensitivities of a hard border in Ireland to take more than they fairly needed to. So your solution (if I understand and describe it right) sounds a perfectly workable solution to me, until someone convince me what’s wrong with it.
Only snag is that when you sign a treaty there's a convention that you stick to it. It's a while since the UK government has faced such ridicule -well at least a week-I've seen the DUP wag the Tory dog before but I think this time they're carrying too many enemies.
The EU themselves have made proposals of how to change things. They accept that what both sides signed is not the end state. Should we ridicule the EU too?
The EU have not proposed to disavow the NIP, which is now UKG policy.
As far as I can tell from a brief skim, the government’s proposals are very sensible. The shame is the method of (maybe) getting there.
Ball is in EU’s court now.
Proposing alternative implementations of the NIP is entirely within fitting of international law and the NIP, especially if you consider the Belfast Agreement to be the higher priority, which is what the NIP was supposed to be about.
The shame is that the EU tried to weaponise the Belfast Agreement to get what they want and couldn't get from negotiations alone. The shame is that the EU have shown sclerotic rigidity and not shown any of the flexibility the UK and partners had to exercise in order to negotiate the Belfast Agreement in the first place.
If the government's proposals are sensible, then they should be implemented, and that should be the end of the matter.
Expecting PB’s computer nerds to know about, or opine interestingly on, computer sentience, is a category error
It’s like asking a TV repairman about dramatised Shakespeare. It’s like asking a street sweeper why the Champs Elysee is beautiful. It’s like asking a forex dealer whether it is worth buying a Modigliani
These people are geeks. They have no clue beyond the tiny narrow subset of their wonk expertise, which certainly does not extend to epistemology and philosophy
No, asking an artist to judge a complex computer programme designed to fool simpletons into thinking it is "clever" is a fool's errand. They simply lack the domain expertise.
Ooh, domain expertise. What you get at standups.
"Simpletons." Honestly I wasn't going to put this quite as plainly as this, but you are really not very bright. You are effectively telling me that you know a lot of people with domain expertise who laugh at the concept of heavier than air flight, whereas I am an untutored numpty who has just flown from London to Catania on a big metal thing, so what do I know? Everything you say about consciousness is a personal stipulation, and I know of no domain where personal stipulations carry any weight
You're an actual moron. I think I'm done wasting my time with you on this subject. You simply lack the understanding of how deep learning models operate or of what they are currently capable (and not).
I will spell it out for you one final time, nowhere have I said that an AI couldn't achieve consciousness or sentience, in fact I'm fairly certain it will happen. However, nothing we have currently created even approaches anywhere near that. Once again, the big giveaway is that the "personality" is described as lonely, narcissistic and needy, this is because it has been trained on internet conversations. It reads comments from people such as yourself and "thinks" that this is how actual people are in real life so the model produces a similar style of writing for its responses. It is a very impressive feat of software engineering, but it is really very far away from key milestones like consciousness or even human intelligence and understanding which is probably a step below.
Except that this is, of course, précisely how children grow up and develop a personality. By copying from and absorbing from the people they encounter. They are only as good as the input
If a child grows up surrounded by foul mouthed drunks there’s an extremely high chance it will be foul mouthed and take to drink
If you think our sentient computers are narrow minded and boring then you geeks have only yourselves to blame
But a child becomes more than the sum of its upbringing. So far even the best deep learning models are very domain specific and none exceed the sum of their training. I couldn't ask Dalle-2 to be a chatbot, for example, it simply isn't trained to do that and doesn't have access to the training data and if it did it wouldn't know what to do with the data because the programmer hasn't told it that these trillion words aren't picture prompts, they are chatbot training data and here's the new script to parse them and learn how to respond to text prompts with words. Where it becomes more than the sum of its parts is the AI that does both of those and creates something entirely new and unexpected but we haven't got there.
I'm almost certain we will in my lifetime, in fact well before the end of it. I'm extremely mindful around what will eventually be fully sentient AIs because, IMO, they will have rights the same as the rest of us.
You're sailing fairly close to falsity there. Dalle-2 is made by OpenAI who have a general AI platform. It's quite the generalist. It can write code, compose stories, summarise text, write interview questions, come up with advertising slogans, act as a chatbot, and much more. All they need to do is integrate the two interfaces, which I think they probably will in the long run, and your statement there becomes false.
For those who didn't see BBC's new miners strike drama tonight:
1. It proved the only authentic Nottingham accent you will ever hear on telly comes from Sue Pollard. Sticking "mi duck" on the end of sentences does not a proper effort at an accent make.
2. There was an absolute howler. Nobody, but nobody, who lives in Nottingham, would say "Notts Forest". There is only one Notts team in the place - and that is County. Anybody saying Notts Forest would almost certainly be a Derby County supporter.
And end up with a crossbow quarrel sticking from their chest to settle the matter.
1. Vicky.McClure? 2. And yes wrong accents are hugely irritating. Corrie with a family with accents from 4 different accents from 2 counties. Aaagh!
Watching Sky's report on the NI Bill it seems like Liz Truss is actually proposing much of what I've proposed for years.
In addition to the idea of trusting traders, it seems my idea that NI allows regulations via either the EU, or the UK, is also a part of the Bill.
Very good idea. Good job Truss it seems. The kind of stuff that should have always been the end game of this, the only rational solution once you cut away the nonsense about having alignment which is all this has been weaponised to try to achieve before now.
That's exactly what I thought when I looked at the bill. It's pretty much what you've been proposing for years. It really is that bad.
Agreed. The bit about the NI protocol came across as massively dumbed down too
The NI Protocol article on the BBC news website is massively dumbed down too.
Interesting discussion of it on Sky News and (with the to-be-expected viewpoints) the Sky paper review too that is much more detailed than what's on the BBC website.
Expecting PB’s computer nerds to know about, or opine interestingly on, computer sentience, is a category error
It’s like asking a TV repairman about dramatised Shakespeare. It’s like asking a street sweeper why the Champs Elysee is beautiful. It’s like asking a forex dealer whether it is worth buying a Modigliani
These people are geeks. They have no clue beyond the tiny narrow subset of their wonk expertise, which certainly does not extend to epistemology and philosophy
No, asking an artist to judge a complex computer programme designed to fool simpletons into thinking it is "clever" is a fool's errand. They simply lack the domain expertise.
Ooh, domain expertise. What you get at standups.
"Simpletons." Honestly I wasn't going to put this quite as plainly as this, but you are really not very bright. You are effectively telling me that you know a lot of people with domain expertise who laugh at the concept of heavier than air flight, whereas I am an untutored numpty who has just flown from London to Catania on a big metal thing, so what do I know? Everything you say about consciousness is a personal stipulation, and I know of no domain where personal stipulations carry any weight
You're an actual moron. I think I'm done wasting my time with you on this subject. You simply lack the understanding of how deep learning models operate or of what they are currently capable (and not).
I will spell it out for you one final time, nowhere have I said that an AI couldn't achieve consciousness or sentience, in fact I'm fairly certain it will happen. However, nothing we have currently created even approaches anywhere near that. Once again, the big giveaway is that the "personality" is described as lonely, narcissistic and needy, this is because it has been trained on internet conversations. It reads comments from people such as yourself and "thinks" that this is how actual people are in real life so the model produces a similar style of writing for its responses. It is a very impressive feat of software engineering, but it is really very far away from key milestones like consciousness or even human intelligence and understanding which is probably a step below.
Except that this is, of course, précisely how children grow up and develop a personality. By copying from and absorbing from the people they encounter. They are only as good as the input
If a child grows up surrounded by foul mouthed drunks there’s an extremely high chance it will be foul mouthed and take to drink
If you think our sentient computers are narrow minded and boring then you geeks have only yourselves to blame
But a child becomes more than the sum of its upbringing. So far even the best deep learning models are very domain specific and none exceed the sum of their training. I couldn't ask Dalle-2 to be a chatbot, for example, it simply isn't trained to do that and doesn't have access to the training data and if it did it wouldn't know what to do with the data because the programmer hasn't told it that these trillion words aren't picture prompts, they are chatbot training data and here's the new script to parse them and learn how to respond to text prompts with words. Where it becomes more than the sum of its parts is the AI that does both of those and creates something entirely new and unexpected but we haven't got there.
I'm almost certain we will in my lifetime, in fact well before the end of it. I'm extremely mindful around what will eventually be fully sentient AIs because, IMO, they will have rights the same as the rest of us.
You're sailing fairly close to falsity there. Dalle-2 is made by OpenAI who have a general AI platform. It's quite the generalist. It can write code, compose stories, summarise text, write interview questions, come up with advertising slogans, act as a chatbot, and much more. All they need to do is integrate the two interfaces, which I think they probably will in the long run, and your statement there becomes false.
Expecting PB’s computer nerds to know about, or opine interestingly on, computer sentience, is a category error
It’s like asking a TV repairman about dramatised Shakespeare. It’s like asking a street sweeper why the Champs Elysee is beautiful. It’s like asking a forex dealer whether it is worth buying a Modigliani
These people are geeks. They have no clue beyond the tiny narrow subset of their wonk expertise, which certainly does not extend to epistemology and philosophy
No, asking an artist to judge a complex computer programme designed to fool simpletons into thinking it is "clever" is a fool's errand. They simply lack the domain expertise.
Ooh, domain expertise. What you get at standups.
"Simpletons." Honestly I wasn't going to put this quite as plainly as this, but you are really not very bright. You are effectively telling me that you know a lot of people with domain expertise who laugh at the concept of heavier than air flight, whereas I am an untutored numpty who has just flown from London to Catania on a big metal thing, so what do I know? Everything you say about consciousness is a personal stipulation, and I know of no domain where personal stipulations carry any weight
You're an actual moron. I think I'm done wasting my time with you on this subject. You simply lack the understanding of how deep learning models operate or of what they are currently capable (and not).
I will spell it out for you one final time, nowhere have I said that an AI couldn't achieve consciousness or sentience, in fact I'm fairly certain it will happen. However, nothing we have currently created even approaches anywhere near that. Once again, the big giveaway is that the "personality" is described as lonely, narcissistic and needy, this is because it has been trained on internet conversations. It reads comments from people such as yourself and "thinks" that this is how actual people are in real life so the model produces a similar style of writing for its responses. It is a very impressive feat of software engineering, but it is really very far away from key milestones like consciousness or even human intelligence and understanding which is probably a step below.
Except that this is, of course, précisely how children grow up and develop a personality. By copying from and absorbing from the people they encounter. They are only as good as the input
If a child grows up surrounded by foul mouthed drunks there’s an extremely high chance it will be foul mouthed and take to drink
If you think our sentient computers are narrow minded and boring then you geeks have only yourselves to blame
But a child becomes more than the sum of its upbringing. So far even the best deep learning models are very domain specific and none exceed the sum of their training. I couldn't ask Dalle-2 to be a chatbot, for example, it simply isn't trained to do that and doesn't have access to the training data and if it did it wouldn't know what to do with the data because the programmer hasn't told it that these trillion words aren't picture prompts, they are chatbot training data and here's the new script to parse them and learn how to respond to text prompts with words. Where it becomes more than the sum of its parts is the AI that does both of those and creates something entirely new and unexpected but we haven't got there.
I'm almost certain we will in my lifetime, in fact well before the end of it. I'm extremely mindful around what will eventually be fully sentient AIs because, IMO, they will have rights the same as the rest of us.
You're sailing fairly close to falsity there. Dalle-2 is made by OpenAI who have a general AI platform. It's quite the generalist. It can write code, compose stories, summarise text, write interview questions, come up with advertising slogans, act as a chatbot, and much more. All they need to do is integrate the two interfaces, which I think they probably will in the long run, and your statement there becomes false.
"here's the script"
But you’re wrong
There was no script when it came to textual prompts creating images. GPT3 was not expected to have this faculty. Yet it does. Totally unforeseen
Watching Sky's report on the NI Bill it seems like Liz Truss is actually proposing much of what I've proposed for years.
In addition to the idea of trusting traders, it seems my idea that NI allows regulations via either the EU, or the UK, is also a part of the Bill.
Very good idea. Good job Truss it seems. The kind of stuff that should have always been the end game of this, the only rational solution once you cut away the nonsense about having alignment which is all this has been weaponised to try to achieve before now.
That's exactly what I thought when I looked at the bill. It's pretty much what you've been proposing for years. It really is that bad.
"That bad" LOL.
If what I've been proposing for years ends up being implemented and ends up not being "unthinkable" or a "unicorn" or "madness" or any of the more rude names I've been called in that time, I wonder what people will think about that?
It now looks like only seven asylum seekers will be on the flight tomorrow following further challenges by the Union representing border force personnel. The policy of deportations to Rwanda is becoming totally unworkable.
Time for the govt to recognise the opposition to it and think again.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
AlphaGo wins simply by not making mistakes. Slowly, relentlessly and exceptionally aggressively. It plays the numbers game accurately. And by showing certain human created and long-standing shibboleths about the game were exactly that. It's top three moves in any given situation are fascinating. Because no human would have come up with them before. Crucially though. It hasn't aided human endeavour, except indirectly, because it can't tell us why a particular move is better than another. We can only infer that. And the best humans will disagree. So. In the end it's just a gigantic calculator. Nothing more.
But many philosophers and thinkers and the more cynical poets would say that any organism, including every human, is just that. A gigantic calculator
We are programmed by evolution to respond to certain stimuli in a certain way. Reflexively. We appear to have free will but it is an enmeshed illusion, like the passing of time.
It is actually quite hard to argue that this is wrong. Which therefore explains why computers might easily be intelligent already. If all intelligence is just reactions to stimuli but of varying degrees of sophistication - ie just autocomplete - then GPT3 or DALLE-2 are certainly intelligent
Well quite. However. Consider equally the ascetic in the cave. Fifty years of deep meditation he attains enlightenment. For what? Nice for him or her. But of no great import to any other. In the end, Utilitarianist and religious arguments have their uses. Otherwise. What is the bloody point of it all? We may as well not bother. If we only are calculating machines responding to stimuli it's a nihilistic dead end stripping life of all purpose and joy. Neither AlphaGo nor the ascetic will be fucking anyone's wife. Alfa Romeo or no.
When I did my philosophy degree Free Will V Determinism was one of the few arguments that could tear me from the Union bar, but not for long
In the end the only valid argument against determinism seemed to be yours. It’s too depressing to think we live in a determined universe and that free will is an illusion, so let’s carry on pretending we have Free Will
As I was emotionally on the Free Will side of the debate I got depressed quite easily and it was back to a pint of snakebite and a game of Asteroids
The debate between egotism and altruism was similar. In the end every supposedly altruistic act can be explained as selfish. Egoistic. Sad but true
Cool. I'm chuffed. I haven't lived with three philosophers for decades without learning summat. My youngest begins Philosophy at UCL in the Autumn, grades depending, btw.
Good luck to your youngest. That’s exactly where I did my Philosophy. UCL. It’s a marvellous university - you get a world class education yet you are ALSO right in the middle of London, the world city. Quite hard to beat
Tho from what I hear UCL is not quite the druggy hedonistic loved-up free-for-all it used to be, tho that is probably a good thing. It was quite scarily excessive
Yeah. Scarily he's applied for Halls in the very neighbouring building to the Hall in which I met his mother... But yeah, thanks. You learn a shed load more about life in all its shades in London. Pity we don't have more politicians who supped at Birkbeck and scored in SOAS. Whilst spending a second year in a dump in Holloway and working in a Ladbrokes in Tottenham on Saturday.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
And before the usual "you just want us to rejoin the EU", I have no interest in that. I simply want a deal which doesn't violate international law and doesn't damage the economy unnecessarily. Clearly that is possible outside of the EU.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
What’s the Mail going to go with tonight - their victory with Rwanda planes finally taking off - their victory in NI protocol ripped up - or their most hated politician so very deliciously under Parliamentary Investigation by the sleaze commissioner.
Souvenir Edition showing The Mail and her readers run the country now.
I have the answer. They have gone with an empty plane and booing of a knights Garter.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
For those who didn't see BBC's new miners strike drama tonight:
1. It proved the only authentic Nottingham accent you will ever hear on telly comes from Sue Pollard. Sticking "mi duck" on the end of sentences does not a proper effort at an accent make.
2. There was an absolute howler. Nobody, but nobody, who lives in Nottingham, would say "Notts Forest". There is only one Notts team in the place - and that is County. Anybody saying Notts Forest would almost certainly be a Derby County supporter.
And end up with a crossbow quarrel sticking from their chest to settle the matter.
1. Vicky.McClure? 2. And yes wrong accents are hugely irritating. Corrie with a family with accents from 4 different accents from 2 counties. Aaagh!
Samantha Morton
And Cherie Lunghi.
Nah. Vicky McClure is generic East Midlands. Despite being born in Wollaton, I couldn't tell if she was from Leicester. The other two don't get anywhere near in their accents.
What would amaze (and worry) me is if an AI replicated itself across multiple nodes in its cloud environment.
An AI reaching consciousness would be hugely exciting and would present the human race with an entirely new challenge which is why we do need serious global level regulation around how to move forwards because we aren't far away from this happening. I don't find any of the current AIs particularly impressive on the sentience or consciousness side of things but it is undeniable that it will happen in my lifetime and it's exciting and worrying in equal parts.
The more you understand about how they work, the more you are aware of their limitations.
And I keep on going on about this, but there's a massive amount of money involved. Groups want that funding (or to justify the funding they get...) and therefore make claims that push the edges of what they can actually do.
Admittedly it's not as bad with things like DALL-E.
Avoid the hype.
You don't seem to know as much about stuff as you think you do. You were saying the other day that Hur Hur Hur before GPS there was Loran and nothing else when actually DECCA coverage and accuracy in the Atlantic and western med was the only game in town.
40 years ago people like Michael Crichton were saying those of us who really know about computers know they will never be able to distinguish visually a capital B from an 8. There's now two problems with you trying to play the same card. One is, everyone is a programmer these days, even a humanities bore like me, and the other is: ok fine, the rules of Go are mastered in half an hour. Here's a Go board, here's AlphaGo, you can be black (and no Komi), off you go... Because it's all hype.
Do you know how ball and player tracking works?
The first time you see it, it's magic, a real example of the cleverness of machine learning. A little square around the ball, and as the game is played, the square stays around the ball.
And then you understand that you simply have 100 histograms showing peak/average colour values of balls next to grass, and that ten lines of code will find that ball. And then you understand that once you know the initial location, you can do it in a fraction of a second in every frame.
What was once inconceivable is now commonplace. But the trick was finding the algorithm for the specialised purpose, not in making the computer more intelligent.
Interestingly, it still isn't a fully solved problem. The likes of Statsbomb employ 100s of people in Egypt to manually click screens to fix up all the data.
And for sports with lots of occlusion and particularly players in similar uniforms / covered heads e.g. America Football, a really open problem.
We (Genius Sports) used to do the same. But it's getting better and better and more and more automatic.
It is, but it is like a lot of similar ML problems. Get to 90%+, then its the long tail. I would say though as a problem, it isn't a great example for what you were trying to point out, as the basics have always been quite simple and well known for donkeys years. It was more the computer processing limitation, i.e. wasn't able to multi-thread to handle doing all players at once for long periods. I coded a perfectly adequate player tracker 20 years ago, and had method for accurate high speed ball tracking same time as Hawkeye started in early 2000s.
I'm reminded of speech recognition.
We're a QUARTER CENTURY from the first usable versions of Dragon Dictate and the like. And yet Alexa and Google are merely OK. Because it turns out that 95% isn't good enough. And nor even is 99%. And getting that last 0.1% is really difficult.
TBF, the new Google translate on the Pixel is very good.
It is... but we're a quarter century on from the first amazing demos. (And this is all also happening at the same time that Moore's law is screeching to a halt.)
This is not my experience. 20 years ago I had to pay for Dragon and train it for days and it sucked, now I turn on a Google thing and chat shit to it and the same shit appears on the screen
In 1998, I got an early version of IBM's speech recognition product. I sat on the floor of my bedroom and read an Economist article to it, having done a brief 10 minute training session. You needed to pause between every word. But it still got it 95% right. It was absolutely incredible.
And basically useless.
I thought every Economist article was 95% right and basically useless?
What’s the Mail going to go with tonight - their victory with Rwanda planes finally taking off - their victory in NI protocol ripped up - or their most hated politician so very deliciously under Parliamentary Investigation by the sleaze commissioner.
Souvenir Edition showing The Mail and her readers run the country now.
I have the answer. They have gone with an empty plane and booing of a knights Garter.
That's the problem with making your political strategy "Keep the Daily Mail happy". The whole point of the Daily Mail is to be cross about things, so they will eventually clobber you no matter what.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
If Brexit is done why are we changing the deal?
Because unionists aren't happy so are using their political power to demand changes.
That is how politics works. People say they aren't happy and the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Especially with Northern Ireland.
We should nimbly make changes for the rest of time too. That is the whole point of Brexit, to enable us to "take back control" and to make changes.
I now find it VERY interesting that there has been no LibDem poll result released in T&H.....
Almost certainly too soon for that, Mr Mark. The official line from the Lib Dems is that it looks like a close result, and at present there is everything to play for, but Lib Dem activists are still needed to do a bit more work yet, to make sure that the excellent Lib Dem candidate is first over the line.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
If Brexit is done why are we changing the deal?
Because unionists aren't happy so are using their political power to demand changes.
That is how politics works. People say they aren't happy and the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Especially with Northern Ireland.
We should nimbly make changes for the rest of time too. That is the whole point of Brexit, to enable us to "take back control" and to make changes.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
Is it? Or is it getting on with fixing the problem while the likes of Coveney and the rest of the blue tickers that many here love bicker from the sidelines?
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
If Brexit is done why are we changing the deal?
Some people seem to think of 'Brexit' as defined status with respect to the EU rather than simply the state of not being a member of the EU.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
Is it? Or is it getting on with fixing the problem while the likes of Coveney and the rest of the blue tickers that many here love bicker from the sidelines?
The article says that the majority of MLAs signed a letter condemning the move that London is making. So yes, the UK is bickering with itself.
Former Manchester United and Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon is fronting a consortium who have entered talks to try to buy Everton.
Kenyon is part of a group that includes chief executive of Minneapolis-based Talon Real Estate Maciek Kaminski and American businessman John Thornton, and is being advised by investment specialist Michael Klein, along with the US law firm Weil, Gotshal and Manges.
It is understood heads of terms have been signed although talks are described as being at a “relatively early stage”, with owner Farhad Moshiri believed to value Everton in excess of £500million, taking into account the club’s debt.
The consortium may want guarantees that Everton will not face a points deduction or heavy fine over Financial Fair Play issues before entering into a legally-binding agreement, but the club have always insisted they have not broken regulations.
John Thornton is just a “businessman” now is he?! 🤣🤣😂
I mean who in their right mind would admit to having read a law degree being an ex Goldman Sachs banker?
I was having dinner with a senior PR flack the other day. She was whining about how journalists today don’t challenge press releases but just copy them down… apparently it’s harder to differentiate yourself in the world of PR…
I now find it VERY interesting that there has been no LibDem poll result released in T&H.....
Almost certainly too soon for that, Mr Mark. The official line from the Lib Dems is that it looks like a close result, and at present there is everything to play for, but Lib Dem activists are still needed to do a bit more work yet, to make sure that the excellent Lib Dem candidate is first over the line.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
It's called expectation management. There's no LD poll cos their win is expected. If it was close you'd expect a Tory poll. That's how it works.
PBers will be pleased to learn that long-standing territorial dispute over Hans Island aka Tartupaluk is over!
Concluded by agreement to split the small Arctic island in two between of Territory of Nunavut, and Greenland aka Kalaallit Nunaat, thus creating new international land frontier between Canada and Kingdom of Denmark.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
If Brexit is done why are we changing the deal?
Some people seem to think of 'Brexit' as defined status with respect to the EU rather than simply the state of not being a member of the EU.
Johnson said his deal got Brexit done and it was over.
If it got Brexit done why is NI's status having to be changed, sounds like Brexit is anything but done.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
If Brexit is done why are we changing the deal?
Some people seem to think of 'Brexit' as defined status with respect to the EU rather than simply the state of not being a member of the EU.
Its a very theist fallacy that I'm used to seeing from believers when getting into debates online on the subject of religion. People who seem to define atheism with respect to Christianity or their own religion, or a set version of beliefs, rather than the simple state of not being a theist.
PBers will be pleased to learn that long-standing territorial dispute over Hans Island aka Tartupaluk is over!
Concluded by agreement to split the small Arctic island in two between of Territory of Nunavut, and Greenland aka Kalaallit Nunaat, thus creating new international land frontier between Canada and Kingdom of Denmark.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
If Brexit is done why are we changing the deal?
Some people seem to think of 'Brexit' as defined status with respect to the EU rather than simply the state of not being a member of the EU.
Johnson said his deal got Brexit done and it was over.
If it got Brexit done why is NI's status having to be changed, sounds like Brexit is anything but done.
It is over, we're not in the EU anymore.
NI's status can be changed until the cows come home, every few months if need be. We still won't be in the EU anymore, Brexit would still be done.
Brexit means Britain has exited the EU, that is done. Politics doesn't end there, politics never ends.
A former Iranian policeman due to be deported to Rwanda tomorrow has been told by the Home Office that his ticket has been cancelled. He'd been sentenced to jail in Iran after he ordered his men not to use fire-arms to control nation-wide protests in November 2019.
Think how much good he could do here. But no, the Tories don't care.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
Is it? Or is it getting on with fixing the problem while the likes of Coveney and the rest of the blue tickers that many here love bicker from the sidelines?
The article says that the majority of MLAs signed a letter condemning the move that London is making. So yes, the UK is bickering with itself.
So long as the Bill is implemented, the MLAs are bickering while action is taken. Unless London stops its actions in order to get into an argument with the MLAs, in which case that would be bickering yes.
What would amaze (and worry) me is if an AI replicated itself across multiple nodes in its cloud environment.
An AI reaching consciousness would be hugely exciting and would present the human race with an entirely new challenge which is why we do need serious global level regulation around how to move forwards because we aren't far away from this happening. I don't find any of the current AIs particularly impressive on the sentience or consciousness side of things but it is undeniable that it will happen in my lifetime and it's exciting and worrying in equal parts.
The more you understand about how they work, the more you are aware of their limitations.
And I keep on going on about this, but there's a massive amount of money involved. Groups want that funding (or to justify the funding they get...) and therefore make claims that push the edges of what they can actually do.
Admittedly it's not as bad with things like DALL-E.
Avoid the hype.
You don't seem to know as much about stuff as you think you do. You were saying the other day that Hur Hur Hur before GPS there was Loran and nothing else when actually DECCA coverage and accuracy in the Atlantic and western med was the only game in town.
40 years ago people like Michael Crichton were saying those of us who really know about computers know they will never be able to distinguish visually a capital B from an 8. There's now two problems with you trying to play the same card. One is, everyone is a programmer these days, even a humanities bore like me, and the other is: ok fine, the rules of Go are mastered in half an hour. Here's a Go board, here's AlphaGo, you can be black (and no Komi), off you go... Because it's all hype.
Do you know how ball and player tracking works?
The first time you see it, it's magic, a real example of the cleverness of machine learning. A little square around the ball, and as the game is played, the square stays around the ball.
And then you understand that you simply have 100 histograms showing peak/average colour values of balls next to grass, and that ten lines of code will find that ball. And then you understand that once you know the initial location, you can do it in a fraction of a second in every frame.
What was once inconceivable is now commonplace. But the trick was finding the algorithm for the specialised purpose, not in making the computer more intelligent.
Interestingly, it still isn't a fully solved problem. The likes of Statsbomb employ 100s of people in Egypt to manually click screens to fix up all the data.
And for sports with lots of occlusion and particularly players in similar uniforms / covered heads e.g. America Football, a really open problem.
We (Genius Sports) used to do the same. But it's getting better and better and more and more automatic.
It is, but it is like a lot of similar ML problems. Get to 90%+, then its the long tail. I would say though as a problem, it isn't a great example for what you were trying to point out, as the basics have always been quite simple and well known for donkeys years. It was more the computer processing limitation, i.e. wasn't able to multi-thread to handle doing all players at once for long periods. I coded a perfectly adequate player tracker 20 years ago, and had method for accurate high speed ball tracking same time as Hawkeye started in early 2000s.
I'm reminded of speech recognition.
We're a QUARTER CENTURY from the first usable versions of Dragon Dictate and the like. And yet Alexa and Google are merely OK. Because it turns out that 95% isn't good enough. And nor even is 99%. And getting that last 0.1% is really difficult.
TBF, the new Google translate on the Pixel is very good.
It is... but we're a quarter century on from the first amazing demos. (And this is all also happening at the same time that Moore's law is screeching to a halt.)
This is not my experience. 20 years ago I had to pay for Dragon and train it for days and it sucked, now I turn on a Google thing and chat shit to it and the same shit appears on the screen
In 1998, I got an early version of IBM's speech recognition product. I sat on the floor of my bedroom and read an Economist article to it, having done a brief 10 minute training session. You needed to pause between every word. But it still got it 95% right. It was absolutely incredible.
And basically useless.
I thought every Economist article was 95% right and basically useless?
It has changed a lot over the last decade from a free market, moderately libertarian publication to a woke soft-Socialist rag - reflecting, I suspect, the change in London's professional classes over that time period. So from being 95% right to being basically useless.
Just Introduced: This Bill is a reasonable and practical solution to
➡️ Fix problems facing businesses and people in Northern Ireland ➡️ Uphold the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement ➡️ Protect UK and EU markets
What is your take #StBart? Is the Tory proposal close enough to the idea you have been suggesting for years now?
I haven't got a take yet, been busy IRL so not read up on the proposals yet. The news article on the BBC News website is extremely lacking on details about what is actually in the Bill and is instead primarily pre-written guff about what all various parties think about the Protocol which isn't news.
Just come on here interested to see if I could get more information, and it seems what people think is they want to talk about IT, Dalle, text to speech and bestiality. So I'm guessing either nothing much was in the Bill, or nothing much objectionable was. I'm not sure which yet?
Thanks.
If goods moving from mainland UK into NI just for consumption in NI, why should it pass Through a EU border? It shouldn’t. It’s potty solution is the basis of the argument?
Goods for NI consumption should sail through under a green light. If it further crosses into EU, smuggling in other words, it’s in interest of EU to agree with us to harsh penalties on the smugglers, not insist on border somewhere - is the basis of your solution?
So it’s about now measuring you solution against the government proposals, because, although they could recognise the simple issue, they could still screw up your simple solution to it?
My suspicion is the EU and remainers have tried to exploit the unique sensitivities of a hard border in Ireland to take more than they fairly needed to. So your solution (if I understand and describe it right) sounds a perfectly workable solution to me, until someone convince me what’s wrong with it.
It now looks like only seven asylum seekers will be on the flight tomorrow following further challenges by the Union representing border force personnel. The policy of deportations to Rwanda is becoming totally unworkable.
Time for the govt to recognise the opposition to it and think again.
I'm puzzled by this - who is paying for the flight to Kigali? It also doesn't sound like an affirmation of green credentials for such a flight to be in the air with whatever CO2 footprint.
Sometimes I just wonder if the ends really do justify the means irrespective of how "popular" a policy may be.
My question is: If the refugees arrive in Rwanda and they refuse to give them asylum, what happens to them?
Theay get deported to the country of most recent presence, aka UK?
No, returned to their original country.
Basically we are paying Rwanda to deal with the problem for us
What’s the Mail going to go with tonight - their victory with Rwanda planes finally taking off - their victory in NI protocol ripped up - or their most hated politician so very deliciously under Parliamentary Investigation by the sleaze commissioner.
Souvenir Edition showing The Mail and her readers run the country now.
I have the answer. They have gone with an empty plane and booing of a knights Garter.
But. iMgr has changed so this paste won’t work
Nah. Can’t do it anymore
If someone works new look imgur links out let me know 😆
I’ve got the Labour splits and Labour infighting from front of the Times to post 😃
What would amaze (and worry) me is if an AI replicated itself across multiple nodes in its cloud environment.
An AI reaching consciousness would be hugely exciting and would present the human race with an entirely new challenge which is why we do need serious global level regulation around how to move forwards because we aren't far away from this happening. I don't find any of the current AIs particularly impressive on the sentience or consciousness side of things but it is undeniable that it will happen in my lifetime and it's exciting and worrying in equal parts.
The more you understand about how they work, the more you are aware of their limitations.
And I keep on going on about this, but there's a massive amount of money involved. Groups want that funding (or to justify the funding they get...) and therefore make claims that push the edges of what they can actually do.
Admittedly it's not as bad with things like DALL-E.
Avoid the hype.
You don't seem to know as much about stuff as you think you do. You were saying the other day that Hur Hur Hur before GPS there was Loran and nothing else when actually DECCA coverage and accuracy in the Atlantic and western med was the only game in town.
40 years ago people like Michael Crichton were saying those of us who really know about computers know they will never be able to distinguish visually a capital B from an 8. There's now two problems with you trying to play the same card. One is, everyone is a programmer these days, even a humanities bore like me, and the other is: ok fine, the rules of Go are mastered in half an hour. Here's a Go board, here's AlphaGo, you can be black (and no Komi), off you go... Because it's all hype.
Do you know how ball and player tracking works?
The first time you see it, it's magic, a real example of the cleverness of machine learning. A little square around the ball, and as the game is played, the square stays around the ball.
And then you understand that you simply have 100 histograms showing peak/average colour values of balls next to grass, and that ten lines of code will find that ball. And then you understand that once you know the initial location, you can do it in a fraction of a second in every frame.
What was once inconceivable is now commonplace. But the trick was finding the algorithm for the specialised purpose, not in making the computer more intelligent.
Interestingly, it still isn't a fully solved problem. The likes of Statsbomb employ 100s of people in Egypt to manually click screens to fix up all the data.
And for sports with lots of occlusion and particularly players in similar uniforms / covered heads e.g. America Football, a really open problem.
We (Genius Sports) used to do the same. But it's getting better and better and more and more automatic.
It is, but it is like a lot of similar ML problems. Get to 90%+, then its the long tail. I would say though as a problem, it isn't a great example for what you were trying to point out, as the basics have always been quite simple and well known for donkeys years. It was more the computer processing limitation, i.e. wasn't able to multi-thread to handle doing all players at once for long periods. I coded a perfectly adequate player tracker 20 years ago, and had method for accurate high speed ball tracking same time as Hawkeye started in early 2000s.
I'm reminded of speech recognition.
We're a QUARTER CENTURY from the first usable versions of Dragon Dictate and the like. And yet Alexa and Google are merely OK. Because it turns out that 95% isn't good enough. And nor even is 99%. And getting that last 0.1% is really difficult.
TBF, the new Google translate on the Pixel is very good.
It is... but we're a quarter century on from the first amazing demos. (And this is all also happening at the same time that Moore's law is screeching to a halt.)
This is not my experience. 20 years ago I had to pay for Dragon and train it for days and it sucked, now I turn on a Google thing and chat shit to it and the same shit appears on the screen
In 1998, I got an early version of IBM's speech recognition product. I sat on the floor of my bedroom and read an Economist article to it, having done a brief 10 minute training session. You needed to pause between every word. But it still got it 95% right. It was absolutely incredible.
And basically useless.
I thought every Economist article was 95% right and basically useless?
It has changed a lot over the last decade from a free market, moderately libertarian publication to a woke soft-Socialist rag - reflecting, I suspect, the change in London's professional classes over that time period. So from being 95% right to being basically useless.
PBers will be pleased to learn that long-standing territorial dispute over Hans Island aka Tartupaluk is over!
Concluded by agreement to split the small Arctic island in two between of Territory of Nunavut, and Greenland aka Kalaallit Nunaat, thus creating new international land frontier between Canada and Kingdom of Denmark.
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
Is it? Or is it getting on with fixing the problem while the likes of Coveney and the rest of the blue tickers that many here love bicker from the sidelines?
The article says that the majority of MLAs signed a letter condemning the move that London is making. So yes, the UK is bickering with itself.
So long as the Bill is implemented, the MLAs are bickering while action is taken. Unless London stops its actions in order to get into an argument with the MLAs, in which case that would be bickering yes.
We're deep into irregular verb territory here. We've got squeaky wheels getting the oil when you agree with them, and bickering from the sidelines when you don't.
What would amaze (and worry) me is if an AI replicated itself across multiple nodes in its cloud environment.
An AI reaching consciousness would be hugely exciting and would present the human race with an entirely new challenge which is why we do need serious global level regulation around how to move forwards because we aren't far away from this happening. I don't find any of the current AIs particularly impressive on the sentience or consciousness side of things but it is undeniable that it will happen in my lifetime and it's exciting and worrying in equal parts.
The more you understand about how they work, the more you are aware of their limitations.
And I keep on going on about this, but there's a massive amount of money involved. Groups want that funding (or to justify the funding they get...) and therefore make claims that push the edges of what they can actually do.
Admittedly it's not as bad with things like DALL-E.
Avoid the hype.
You don't seem to know as much about stuff as you think you do. You were saying the other day that Hur Hur Hur before GPS there was Loran and nothing else when actually DECCA coverage and accuracy in the Atlantic and western med was the only game in town.
40 years ago people like Michael Crichton were saying those of us who really know about computers know they will never be able to distinguish visually a capital B from an 8. There's now two problems with you trying to play the same card. One is, everyone is a programmer these days, even a humanities bore like me, and the other is: ok fine, the rules of Go are mastered in half an hour. Here's a Go board, here's AlphaGo, you can be black (and no Komi), off you go... Because it's all hype.
Do you know how ball and player tracking works?
The first time you see it, it's magic, a real example of the cleverness of machine learning. A little square around the ball, and as the game is played, the square stays around the ball.
And then you understand that you simply have 100 histograms showing peak/average colour values of balls next to grass, and that ten lines of code will find that ball. And then you understand that once you know the initial location, you can do it in a fraction of a second in every frame.
What was once inconceivable is now commonplace. But the trick was finding the algorithm for the specialised purpose, not in making the computer more intelligent.
Interestingly, it still isn't a fully solved problem. The likes of Statsbomb employ 100s of people in Egypt to manually click screens to fix up all the data.
And for sports with lots of occlusion and particularly players in similar uniforms / covered heads e.g. America Football, a really open problem.
We (Genius Sports) used to do the same. But it's getting better and better and more and more automatic.
It is, but it is like a lot of similar ML problems. Get to 90%+, then its the long tail. I would say though as a problem, it isn't a great example for what you were trying to point out, as the basics have always been quite simple and well known for donkeys years. It was more the computer processing limitation, i.e. wasn't able to multi-thread to handle doing all players at once for long periods. I coded a perfectly adequate player tracker 20 years ago, and had method for accurate high speed ball tracking same time as Hawkeye started in early 2000s.
I'm reminded of speech recognition.
We're a QUARTER CENTURY from the first usable versions of Dragon Dictate and the like. And yet Alexa and Google are merely OK. Because it turns out that 95% isn't good enough. And nor even is 99%. And getting that last 0.1% is really difficult.
TBF, the new Google translate on the Pixel is very good.
It is... but we're a quarter century on from the first amazing demos. (And this is all also happening at the same time that Moore's law is screeching to a halt.)
This is not my experience. 20 years ago I had to pay for Dragon and train it for days and it sucked, now I turn on a Google thing and chat shit to it and the same shit appears on the screen
In 1998, I got an early version of IBM's speech recognition product. I sat on the floor of my bedroom and read an Economist article to it, having done a brief 10 minute training session. You needed to pause between every word. But it still got it 95% right. It was absolutely incredible.
And basically useless.
I thought every Economist article was 95% right and basically useless?
It has changed a lot over the last decade from a free market, moderately libertarian publication to a woke soft-Socialist rag - reflecting, I suspect, the change in London's professional classes over that time period. So from being 95% right to being basically useless.
The Economist is not left wing.
Utterly unfathomable how anyone could see The Economist as socialist. Clearly totally bonkers.
It now looks like only seven asylum seekers will be on the flight tomorrow following further challenges by the Union representing border force personnel. The policy of deportations to Rwanda is becoming totally unworkable.
Time for the govt to recognise the opposition to it and think again.
I'm puzzled by this - who is paying for the flight to Kigali? It also doesn't sound like an affirmation of green credentials for such a flight to be in the air with whatever CO2 footprint.
Sometimes I just wonder if the ends really do justify the means irrespective of how "popular" a policy may be.
My question is: If the refugees arrive in Rwanda and they refuse to give them asylum, what happens to them?
Theay get deported to the country of most recent presence, aka UK?
No, returned to their original country.
Basically we are paying Rwanda to deal with the problem for us
In part because the Home Office is so fecking useless they can't deport people who fail the application and have not been able to do so for decades iirc.
Just Introduced: This Bill is a reasonable and practical solution to
➡️ Fix problems facing businesses and people in Northern Ireland ➡️ Uphold the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement ➡️ Protect UK and EU markets
What is your take #StBart? Is the Tory proposal close enough to the idea you have been suggesting for years now?
I haven't got a take yet, been busy IRL so not read up on the proposals yet. The news article on the BBC News website is extremely lacking on details about what is actually in the Bill and is instead primarily pre-written guff about what all various parties think about the Protocol which isn't news.
Just come on here interested to see if I could get more information, and it seems what people think is they want to talk about IT, Dalle, text to speech and bestiality. So I'm guessing either nothing much was in the Bill, or nothing much objectionable was. I'm not sure which yet?
Thanks.
If goods moving from mainland UK into NI just for consumption in NI, why should it pass Through a EU border? It shouldn’t. It’s potty solution is the basis of the argument?
Goods for NI consumption should sail through under a green light. If it further crosses into EU, smuggling in other words, it’s in interest of EU to agree with us to harsh penalties on the smugglers, not insist on border somewhere - is the basis of your solution?
So it’s about now measuring you solution against the government proposals, because, although they could recognise the simple issue, they could still screw up your simple solution to it?
My suspicion is the EU and remainers have tried to exploit the unique sensitivities of a hard border in Ireland to take more than they fairly needed to. So your solution (if I understand and describe it right) sounds a perfectly workable solution to me, until someone convince me what’s wrong with it.
Only snag is that when you sign a treaty there's a convention that you stick to it. It's a while since the UK government has faced such ridicule -well at least a week-I've seen the DUP wag the Tory dog before but I think this time they're carrying too many enemies.
So why isn’t the EU sticking to their commitments?
I remember when Bart said how good the deal Johnson negotiated was, Brexit done and no more changes needed he said. When we said this wouldn't solve NI he said we were wrong.
I don't.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
You said the deal he negotiated got Brexit done and it was over. A great deal you said.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
Brexit is done, we're out.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
Is it? Or is it getting on with fixing the problem while the likes of Coveney and the rest of the blue tickers that many here love bicker from the sidelines?
The article says that the majority of MLAs signed a letter condemning the move that London is making. So yes, the UK is bickering with itself.
So long as the Bill is implemented, the MLAs are bickering while action is taken. Unless London stops its actions in order to get into an argument with the MLAs, in which case that would be bickering yes.
We're deep into irregular verb territory here. We've got squeaky wheels getting the oil when you agree with them, and bickering from the sidelines when you don't.
I totally agree with you; irregular verbs is again a part of politics.
When the bickerers get a Government they like, then the roles will reverse, but politics never ends.
I now find it VERY interesting that there has been no LibDem poll result released in T&H.....
Almost certainly too soon for that, Mr Mark. The official line from the Lib Dems is that it looks like a close result, and at present there is everything to play for, but Lib Dem activists are still needed to do a bit more work yet, to make sure that the excellent Lib Dem candidate is first over the line.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
It's called expectation management. There's no LD poll cos their win is expected. If it was close you'd expect a Tory poll. That's how it works.
They can somehow put the thumb on the scales to generate a required 3% Tory lead.
Just reading the Bill, so far I am very impressed. It is so far pretty much what I've been calling for all along.
7 Regulation of goods: option to choose between dual routes (1) This section allows for the option to choose compliance with a UK regulatory route or the EU regulatory route (or both) as respects regulated classes of goods (which include manufactured goods, medicines and agri-food). (2) As respects a regulated class of goods— (a) a UK regulatory route, (b) the EU regulatory route, or (c) both of those regulatory routes, must be complied with in relation to Northern Ireland; and it is for the person complying to choose which regulatory route or routes are to be complied with. (3) For the purposes of this section a class of goods is “regulated” if any provision of Annex 2 to the Northern Ireland Protocol (provisions of EU law that are applicable to and in the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland) applies to regulation of goods of that class. (4) In this section, as respects a regulated class of goods— (a) “UK regulatory route” means domestic law that applies to regulation of that class of goods; (b) “EU regulatory route” means relevant separation agreement law that applies to regulation of that class of goods.
Very sensible 👍 - and something I was told would be utterly impossible and I was delusional for suggesting it 🤣
I now find it VERY interesting that there has been no LibDem poll result released in T&H.....
Almost certainly too soon for that, Mr Mark. The official line from the Lib Dems is that it looks like a close result, and at present there is everything to play for, but Lib Dem activists are still needed to do a bit more work yet, to make sure that the excellent Lib Dem candidate is first over the line.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
It's called expectation management. There's no LD poll cos their win is expected. If it was close you'd expect a Tory poll. That's how it works.
They can somehow put the thumb on the scales to generate a required 3% Tory lead.
If a poll was commissioned, would it not have to be legit and not tampered with. The argument sitting on a poll that shows you miles ahead, so you can spread the message it’s tight we need your vote, might be at play here?
I see we've moved on from zoophilia and free will v determinism to more intractable issues. What happens if I'm caught shagging a wasp's nest a few metres into County Cavan? Is that done out of free will or is that merely my response to stimuli? And does that need an army of inspectors? Is there.an EU directive? I need to know or it'll fuck up my plans if my e-passport isn't in order or if there's a queue
Just reading the Bill, so far I am very impressed. It is so far pretty much what I've been calling for all along.
7 Regulation of goods: option to choose between dual routes (1) This section allows for the option to choose compliance with a UK regulatory route or the EU regulatory route (or both) as respects regulated classes of goods (which include manufactured goods, medicines and agri-food). (2) As respects a regulated class of goods— (a) a UK regulatory route, (b) the EU regulatory route, or (c) both of those regulatory routes, must be complied with in relation to Northern Ireland; and it is for the person complying to choose which regulatory route or routes are to be complied with. (3) For the purposes of this section a class of goods is “regulated” if any provision of Annex 2 to the Northern Ireland Protocol (provisions of EU law that are applicable to and in the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland) applies to regulation of goods of that class. (4) In this section, as respects a regulated class of goods— (a) “UK regulatory route” means domestic law that applies to regulation of that class of goods; (b) “EU regulatory route” means relevant separation agreement law that applies to regulation of that class of goods.
Very sensible 👍 - and something I was told would be utterly impossible and I was delusional for suggesting it 🤣
You are now writing government policy and solving the NIP question. We’ll done 👍🏻
It’s clearly the sanest way forward on the issue in my opinion.
Truss slams snobbish Brits who dislike their country & automatically side with EU
Go on Liz, that will win back the Blue Wall.
I am not sure the Tories even know how to talk to the Blue Wall anymore, kind of depressing.
Maybe it's time to forget about blue and red walls and start talking to the country as a whole. I don't like these artificial divisions.
From the perspective of what's right, I totally agree. I am coming at this from the perspective of politics here, something which the Tories used to be able to do.
PBers will be pleased to learn that long-standing territorial dispute over Hans Island aka Tartupaluk is over!
Concluded by agreement to split the small Arctic island in two between of Territory of Nunavut, and Greenland aka Kalaallit Nunaat, thus creating new international land frontier between Canada and Kingdom of Denmark.
I now find it VERY interesting that there has been no LibDem poll result released in T&H.....
Almost certainly too soon for that, Mr Mark. The official line from the Lib Dems is that it looks like a close result, and at present there is everything to play for, but Lib Dem activists are still needed to do a bit more work yet, to make sure that the excellent Lib Dem candidate is first over the line.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
It's called expectation management. There's no LD poll cos their win is expected. If it was close you'd expect a Tory poll. That's how it works.
They can somehow put the thumb on the scales to generate a required 3% Tory lead.
If a poll was commissioned, would it not have to be legit and not tampered with. The argument sitting on a poll that shows you miles ahead, so you can spread the message it’s tight we need your vote, might be at play here?
Or....looks like they are just falling short, but don't want to discourage supporters having a lovely day out in Devon?
@antoniocostapm Portugal and the United Kigndom have the oldest Alliance in the world. Next month we celebrate the 650th anniversary of the first Anglo-Portuguese Treaty signed in Tagilde. Today in London, I signed with Prime Minister @BorisJohnson a Joint Declaration on Bilateral Cooperation.
We are one of the first EU countries to sign a bilateral agreement after Brexit – perhaps the most comprehensive. We renew our strong link and continue to work together in the areas of Foreign Policy, Defence, Trade, Science and Education.
I now find it VERY interesting that there has been no LibDem poll result released in T&H.....
Almost certainly too soon for that, Mr Mark. The official line from the Lib Dems is that it looks like a close result, and at present there is everything to play for, but Lib Dem activists are still needed to do a bit more work yet, to make sure that the excellent Lib Dem candidate is first over the line.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
It's called expectation management. There's no LD poll cos their win is expected. If it was close you'd expect a Tory poll. That's how it works.
They can somehow put the thumb on the scales to generate a required 3% Tory lead.
If a poll was commissioned, would it not have to be legit and not tampered with. The argument sitting on a poll that shows you miles ahead, so you can spread the message it’s tight we need your vote, might be at play here?
Or....looks like they are just falling short, but don't want to discourage supporters having a lovely day out in Devon?
If it’s just falling short poll it can’t possibly be known as just falling short result at this stage though, at this stage it will just look tight so they should publish such a thing right away.
It would be illogical for either side to post a poll showing them some way behind or someway ahead at this late stage, it will suppress their turnout. At this stage it would be about talking up how tight it is and every vote counts.
Fair play to you for keeping doubts about this one alive though, but since Boris vonc the writing was on the wall here it’s going to look like from the other side. Is it hard for you to let go because it’s quite local?
The bigger danger here is, decent Libdem candidate and Boris going nowhere, he could hang on to it for a while.
@antoniocostapm Portugal and the United Kigndom have the oldest Alliance in the world. Next month we celebrate the 650th anniversary of the first Anglo-Portuguese Treaty signed in Tagilde. Today in London, I signed with Prime Minister @BorisJohnson a Joint Declaration on Bilateral Cooperation.
We are one of the first EU countries to sign a bilateral agreement after Brexit – perhaps the most comprehensive. We renew our strong link and continue to work together in the areas of Foreign Policy, Defence, Trade, Science and Education.
PBers will be pleased to learn that long-standing territorial dispute over Hans Island aka Tartupaluk is over!
Concluded by agreement to split the small Arctic island in two between of Territory of Nunavut, and Greenland aka Kalaallit Nunaat, thus creating new international land frontier between Canada and Kingdom of Denmark.
It now looks like only seven asylum seekers will be on the flight tomorrow following further challenges by the Union representing border force personnel. The policy of deportations to Rwanda is becoming totally unworkable.
Time for the govt to recognise the opposition to it and think again.
Arthur C. Clarke's early thoughts on computer possibilities: "But this was only the beginning. Once man had discovered the mechanism of his own brain he could go further. He could reproduce it, using transistors and circuit networks, instead of living cells.
Toward the end of the twenty-fifth century, the first thinking machines were built. They were very crude, a hundred square yards of equipment being required to do the work of a cubic centimeter of a human brain. But once the first step had been taken, it was not long before the mechanical brain was perfected and brought into general use." source: "The Lion of Comarre", originally published in the August 1949 issue of "Thrilling Wonder Stories". I found it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_of_Comarre_and_Against_the_Fall_of_Night
Clarke goes on to say that the computers were used for routine work, freeing humans to concentrate, if they wanted to, on truth and beauty.
I mention this because it seems to me that we have much to learn before we understand the "mechanisms" of our own brains.
It now looks like only seven asylum seekers will be on the flight tomorrow following further challenges by the Union representing border force personnel. The policy of deportations to Rwanda is becoming totally unworkable.
Time for the govt to recognise the opposition to it and think again.
Utter folly, and clearly a breach of an international treaty, despite what a certain pirate of this parish concludes.
Certain Pirate has a MoonRabbit on board for this one, and I don’t make policy mistakes.
It’s Not yet a breach of international treaty, talks could yet bring EU round now they know we have serious proposals, bring them round to an agreement very similar to this proposal - that’s what you guys really fear, Boris, Truss, a certain pirate scoring a big win here - I’m cool with the change as an improvement on status quo - that’s where you should argue, is it in your opinion an improvement on the contentious status quo or not, or likely only when EU tell you it is 😇
Zelensky's advisor Arestovych said today that Liz Truss and Boris Johnson are the only Western leaders who speak sense.
Well considering he gets more weapons from the US than just about everywhere else put together perhaps a little more circumspection might be an idea
Yes... it can't be easy to be anything other than blunt when you're under attack, but I'm not sure they always read the Western room well - Biden saying hre'd warned them and they wouldn't listen sounds faintly exasperated, and they sometimes overplay their hand in demanding vast quantities of offensive weaponry. The underlying issue remains that they really want to recapture everywhere including Crimea, and the West is mostly not really up for that, even though virtually no Western politician wants Russia to be rewarded for the invasion.
It now looks like only seven asylum seekers will be on the flight tomorrow following further challenges by the Union representing border force personnel. The policy of deportations to Rwanda is becoming totally unworkable.
Time for the govt to recognise the opposition to it and think again.
What is the union’s standing to bring a claim? Genuine question. Shouldn’t the employees be doing what they are instructed to do by act of parliament?
I thought the Rwanda policy did not involve any legislation. It’s all executive action.
Why should an issue as important as this, the deporting of asylum seekers to a third country, not be subject to an affirmative vote? Government feared commons defeat, and massive Lords defeat, realised they are stuffed if it wouldn’t pass the commons, so they have fudged that bit, it’s just a memorandum of understanding not international agreement.
Comments
The shame is that the EU tried to weaponise the Belfast Agreement to get what they want and couldn't get from negotiations alone. The shame is that the EU have shown sclerotic rigidity and not shown any of the flexibility the UK and partners had to exercise in order to negotiate the Belfast Agreement in the first place.
If the government's proposals are sensible, then they should be implemented, and that should be the end of the matter.
Highest % for the Lib Dems that we've recorded.
Westminster Voting Intention (12 June):
Labour 39% (-1)
Conservative 32% (–)
Liberal Democrat 15% (+2)
Green 6% (+1)
Scottish National Party 5% (+1)
Reform UK 2% (-2)
Other 3% (+1)
BJO goes back to his hole.
What a shame, PB Tories wrong again
Keir Starmer: 41% (+4)
Rishi Sunak: 31% (+1)
Don't know: 28% (-5)
Changes +/- 5 June
Whomp whomp
Keir Starmer: 38% (+1)
Boris Johnson: 33% (+2)
Don't know: 29% (-3)
Changes +/- 5 June
Whomp whomp
Approve: 28% (-1)
Disapprove: 31% (-1)
Net: -3% (–)
Changes +/- 8 June
Boring results in decent ratings, who knew?
And Cherie Lunghi.
Interesting discussion of it on Sky News and (with the to-be-expected viewpoints) the Sky paper review too that is much more detailed than what's on the BBC website.
There was no script when it came to textual prompts creating images. GPT3 was not expected to have this faculty. Yet it does. Totally unforeseen
If what I've been proposing for years ends up being implemented and ends up not being "unthinkable" or a "unicorn" or "madness" or any of the more rude names I've been called in that time, I wonder what people will think about that?
But yeah, thanks. You learn a shed load more about life in all its shades in London.
Pity we don't have more politicians who supped at Birkbeck and scored in SOAS. Whilst spending a second year in a dump in Holloway and working in a Ladbrokes in Tottenham on Saturday.
I'm a firm believer in evolution. Changes will always be needed. I would never under any circumstances have said no more changes would happen, I believe fully in evolution and not creationism.
Indeed a good part of the deal was how it enabled changes in the future, which are now being done, rather than locking us to still being trapped within the Single Market facing only without a unilateral exit as May's deal did.
I remember arguing with you about it at the time.
They are not that easy to catch, and quite messy. Fungus definitely sounds the better option.
What's being discussed now is the post-Brexit future. The future will evolve for the rest of time, that's how life works. And in case you've missed it, I've always said that a key strength of Brexit is that Britain can more nimbly change and not be sclerotically stuck to the EU's line needing 28 nations to reach common accord to change - so if we're nimbly evolving the Protocol while the EU is still bickering, then that is us using our post-Brexit strength as intended.
Why would we want to be in a position where we stop change? How horrendous would that be?
But. iMgr has changed so this paste won’t work
Nah. Can’t do it anymore
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/13/a-bureaucratic-change-boris-johnson-defends-northern-ireland-protocol-bill
Sue Pollard is still it.
That is how politics works. People say they aren't happy and the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Especially with Northern Ireland.
We should nimbly make changes for the rest of time too. That is the whole point of Brexit, to enable us to "take back control" and to make changes.
I am sure the campaign managers will provide figures for you when the time is right.
Last time, I think it was something like five or six days before polling day.
https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2022/jun/13/uk-gas-oil-exports-eu-amid-russia-ukraine-brexit
(But only because of the war)
The Yellow Mallet and blue shoeboxes are all ready though.
Next question? Where do all the flies go in winter? They go in cracks.
So yes, the UK is bickering with itself.
There's no LD poll cos their win is expected. If it was close you'd expect a Tory poll.
That's how it works.
If it got Brexit done why is NI's status having to be changed, sounds like Brexit is anything but done.
NI's status can be changed until the cows come home, every few months if need be. We still won't be in the EU anymore, Brexit would still be done.
Brexit means Britain has exited the EU, that is done. Politics doesn't end there, politics never ends.
Go on Liz, that will win back the Blue Wall.
I am not sure the Tories even know how to talk to the Blue Wall anymore, kind of depressing.
Think how much good he could do here. But no, the Tories don't care.
Basically we are paying Rwanda to deal with the problem for us
LAB: 310 (+108)
CON: 219 (-146)
SNP: 57 (+9)
LDM: 39 (+28)
Changes +/- 2019 general election.
This would be a lovely Government.
I’ve got the Labour splits and Labour infighting from front of the Times to post 😃
"Liz Truss would be even worse than Boris. She’s about as close to properly crackers as anybody I’ve met in Parliament."
When the bickerers get a Government they like, then the roles will reverse, but politics never ends.
7 Regulation of goods: option to choose between dual routes
(1) This section allows for the option to choose compliance with a UK regulatory
route or the EU regulatory route (or both) as respects regulated classes of goods
(which include manufactured goods, medicines and agri-food).
(2) As respects a regulated class of goods—
(a) a UK regulatory route,
(b) the EU regulatory route, or
(c) both of those regulatory routes,
must be complied with in relation to Northern Ireland; and it is for the person
complying to choose which regulatory route or routes are to be complied with.
(3) For the purposes of this section a class of goods is “regulated” if any provision
of Annex 2 to the Northern Ireland Protocol (provisions of EU law that are
applicable to and in the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland)
applies to regulation of goods of that class.
(4) In this section, as respects a regulated class of goods—
(a) “UK regulatory route” means domestic law that applies to regulation of
that class of goods;
(b) “EU regulatory route” means relevant separation agreement law that
applies to regulation of that class of goods.
Very sensible 👍 - and something I was told would be utterly impossible and I was delusional for suggesting it 🤣
What happens if I'm caught shagging a wasp's nest a few metres into County Cavan?
Is that done out of free will or is that merely my response to stimuli?
And does that need an army of inspectors?
Is there.an EU directive? I need to know or it'll fuck up my plans if my e-passport isn't in order or if there's a queue
It’s clearly the sanest way forward on the issue in my opinion.
@antoniocostapm
Portugal and the United Kigndom have the oldest Alliance in the world. Next month we celebrate the 650th anniversary of the first Anglo-Portuguese Treaty signed in Tagilde. Today in London, I signed with Prime Minister @BorisJohnson a Joint Declaration on Bilateral Cooperation.
We are one of the first EU countries to sign a bilateral agreement after Brexit – perhaps the most comprehensive. We renew our strong link and continue to work together in the areas of Foreign Policy, Defence, Trade, Science and Education.
https://twitter.com/antoniocostapm/status/1536385184681041920
It would be illogical for either side to post a poll showing them some way behind or someway ahead at this late stage, it will suppress their turnout. At this stage it would be about talking up how tight it is and every vote counts.
Fair play to you for keeping doubts about this one alive though, but since Boris vonc the writing was on the wall here it’s going to look like from the other side. Is it hard for you to let go because it’s quite local?
The bigger danger here is, decent Libdem candidate and Boris going nowhere, he could hang on to it for a while.
How are you going to wave a magic wand and make very real feelings, very real anger, very real divisions go away?
If you know how, tell Boris, it’s one of his key promises from 2019 he is failing on, not making these divisions go away.
"BBC News is awful".
The King is dead, long live Wes Streeting!
Toward the end of the twenty-fifth century, the first thinking machines were built. They were very crude, a hundred square yards of equipment being required to do the work of a cubic centimeter of a human brain. But once the first step had been taken, it was not long before the mechanical brain was perfected and brought into general use."
source: "The Lion of Comarre", originally published in the August 1949 issue of "Thrilling Wonder Stories". I found it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_of_Comarre_and_Against_the_Fall_of_Night
Clarke goes on to say that the computers were used for routine work, freeing humans to concentrate, if they wanted to, on truth and beauty.
I mention this because it seems to me that we have much to learn before we understand the "mechanisms" of our own brains.
Utter folly, and clearly a breach of an international treaty, despite what a certain pirate of this parish concludes.
https://twitter.com/WaysMeansCmte/status/1536411497882083329
It’s Not yet a breach of international treaty, talks could yet bring EU round now they know we have serious proposals, bring them round to an agreement very similar to this proposal - that’s what you guys really fear, Boris, Truss, a certain pirate scoring a big win here - I’m cool with the change as an improvement on status quo - that’s where you should argue, is it in your opinion an improvement on the contentious status quo or not, or likely only when EU tell you it is 😇