"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
Initial thoughts: my god. It’s phenomenal. It is going to put about 200 million people out of a job. And this is before lunch
It is also potentially a Google killer. It will do all your net searching for you
chat.openai.com was down when I visited.
If I get a chance to chat with it, I will ask it why it doesn't f*** off. I'll report back on its reply. A simple enough question for such a complicated machine.
The statement by Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO, was embarrassingly juvenile and programmery. This is what he wrote:
"language interfaces are going to be a big deal, i think. talk to the computer (voice or text) and get what you want, for increasingly complex definitions of "want"!"
But yes, further leaps in tech-mediated mass deskilling - both intellectual and emotional - are planned.
AI has the potential to solve the worst human problems. Yet it will bring many more - including vast amounts of unemployment, esp in bourgeois jobs
I very tentatively welcome it, with grave reservations
This chatbot reminds me of early DALL-E. it’s on a leash, it’s repetitive and restricted. But you can sense the power. Within a year of DALL-E we had Stable Diffusion and Midjourney
If AI leads to mass unemployment, especially of permanent non shortterm contract jobs, then a universal basic income funded by a robot tax on the companies that bring in that AI is inevitable
Increasingly, I believe some of UBI is inevitable. AI will be that good. So it will soon displace hundreds of millions of workers. They won't all be able to retrain as masseurs or vicars
I'm interested in which jobs you think are specifically at risk from AI. Call centre jobs? Already happens to some extent with chat bots, but often leads or needs human intervention. I am not at all convinced of creativity from AI's - what we see is responses to human inputs, and then human appreciation and curation of the results. Are millions of jobs at risk? Or thousands? Genuine question.
Of course AI can be creative. I cite this excellent Spectator article. A couple of those images are absolutely chilling, and any graphic designer/artist would be delighted with these results, if they had made them. But a computer made them in 10 seconds. It took a human to prompt, but that one human - armed with skilful prompts - will eventually replace 20 humans who used to do the art-making
The same goes for anything that involves pictures, words, design - you can extrapolate for yourself. GPT4 will also replace tons of lower-mid-level white collar stuff like solicitors, editors, translators, news journalists, basic architects, designers and researchers, because GPT4 (and 5 and 6 and on) will be cheaper, faster, and better than humans
In fact the harder you think the harder it is to conceive of a white collar/creative job that is NOT threatened
Some high level art will remain desirably human, because people will want the human touch. Like artisanal bread over normal bread. Any job requiring physical and emotional interaction should be fine. For now
So, as I say, vicars and masseurs get lucky
I can't see it, but maybe I am the luddite. As a creative yourself, you surely know that the image is not the art? Would an AI create Tracey Emin's bed? Or a Gormley? Or put a shark in a tank of formaldehyde?
How is AI going to replace a solicitor? Editor?
I give you translators.
Which journalistic roles will be done by AI?
Ultimately as before with other revolutions jobs will change. We don't seem to be moving yet into the realms of not working, mainly because without money there is no fun in life. I also worry about a world without work - what purpose will people find in their lives? I know a lot of people hate work, or hate their job, but would they like the alternative? What level of life would be achieved if automation and AI took over all the jobs?
Much low level journalism is already generated by AI
Don't you actually work in tech? Apols if I've got that wrong. You are curiously Luddite, if that's the right word. Because I'm not sure it is. There should be a word for "someone unable to extrapolate the implications of new technology", not "someone who wants to smash up looms"
I'm gonna ask GPT4 for a new word
I work in science, not tech. I can operate state of the art scientific equipment, but I also know its limits. Over the years I've been in my current role automation has changed my day to day (less hands on required) and I now do more useful things. The job is still here, but it has changed.
You haven't really answered the creavity question - yes the outputs we have seen are great, but they also seem to be curated, and are as a result of prompts.
As a writer of the occasional piece yourself, do you really fear for the role in the future? Personally I think the human element will always be needed.
No doubt the world will keep changing, and people will adapt.
Yes, I genuinely fear for my "people with my role" in the future. I've seen, in my career, what the internet did to photography - basically destroyed it as a profession for most (and the new AI image generators will make this even worse) - and I reckon the exact same process will unfold across all the creative industries
There are still some photographers left. They are either very niche (like war photographers - it is hard to automate that), or famous portrait/design photographers, usually with an established name and a brand, or private income, or all of that
Most everyday togs have been driven out of the industry, the money isn't there any more
Read across for writers, designers, illustrators, and the rest. Those at the very top, the famous ones, or the highly specialised, will likely survive, the majority of jobs will go. I don't like this. It is arguably tragic. I fear it is inevitable
Some aspects of law are surely ripe for automation by AI. It's hard (for a non-lawyer like me) to imagine that conveyancing, for example, is reliant on the spark of human cogitation.
Perhaps, but if the AI doesn't notice something that needs to be addressed - like access rights, say - then who is liable when mistakes are made?
The company using the AI presumably. Just as when an employee fails to notice something.
Do we now have to introduce ourselves with name and heritage, to show that we're happy to discuss it?
Or would that be even more insidiously racist?
You mean "my preferred pronoun is mbongo".
Good lord, have we entered a time tunnel back to the Seventies?
A few people have gone a bit weird about this on here today, falling over themselves to defend a toff who did a racism, like the Apu/'weird nerds' Elon Musk meme. FWIW I think @BartholomewRoberts is pretty much spot on in his reading of it.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
Has anyone asked the AI about the origin of Covid?
I was watching a video about FTX, and perhaps I lack imagination, but even for apparently non crooked enterprises absurdly complex corporate structures and interrelated companies seems to be the norm, and is there an actual non dodgy need for such complexity? It seems like it makes it incredibly hard to do anything, particularly if anything goes wrong, as it is so unclear which entities are responsible for what, so it just makes things more convoluted for the people controlling it, as they may barely understand themselves what the situation is. Other than as a legal smokescreen and to avoid taxes, does it even really help run things?
Do we now have to introduce ourselves with name and heritage, to show that we're happy to discuss it?
Or would that be even more insidiously racist?
You mean "my preferred pronoun is mbongo".
Good lord, have we entered a time tunnel back to the Seventies?
A few people have gone a bit weird about this on here today, falling over themselves to defend a toff who did a racism, like the Apu/'weird nerds' Elon Musk meme. FWIW I think @BartholomewRoberts is pretty much spot on in his reading of it.
If geriatric unconscious bias is a big enough problem to be second on the news, do we really have a problem?
In the old days, taking a photo cost money. There was film. There were expensive lenses. There was the requirement to develop the film. And any retouching was hideously expensive.
Now everyone has a smartphone with a camera better than a Canon SLR with an L lens back in 2000. People can take photos as zero cost. And then algorithms will sort out any issues with photos.
The result is that there are now gazillions of photos available of everything for free.
AND THAT'S GOOD.
To be pedantic, an iPhone isn't a better camera. It's just that the software and processing power is so advanced that the average person can get better results.
Is there any other species on Earth, with specific gender roles, where a male decides to live the life of a female?
I had a vague recollection about hyenas, but in the opposite direction, but while that's not right a google search leads me to the concept of a pseudo-penis. Nature is fascinating.
As the topic of AI stuff is being discussed (and sorry if this was the spark that caused it - I haven't scrolled far enough back into the thread to find it) but I've been playing with the new GPT3 'ChatGPT' today and it's really quite impressive. Not always, but does make you do a double-take sometimes. A couple of little examples :
Can anyone enlighten me? I've always thought of myself as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but Ngozi Fulani's complaints seem way over the top to me.
Of course, a lot of it would depend on the exact words and the way in which they were said, but essentially Lady Hussey was asking where her family came from. That's such a commonplace topic of discussion among the English upper classes that I wonder if part of the outrage is just a cultural misunderstanding (certainly Ms Fulani doesn't seem to understand that "your people" would be synonymous with "your family" for someone like Lady Hussey).
Taken one way, "where do you really come from" could be read as "you're not really British". But couldn't it just as easily mean "where do your roots really lie?" Maybe Ms Fulani doesn't think in those terms, but to my mind it brought to mind something Julia Sawalha reminisced about (on "Who Do You Think You Are?" if I remember correctly). A friend said to her something like "I know you have Arab ancestry but you're not really Arab", and she thought about it and commented "Yes, I really am".
Fulani started with a satirical masterstroke ("they didn't leave records") but then lost it.
To be fair to her, anyone is going to feel flustered and out of their comfort zone at a Royal reception. But also, to be fair to lady H, I was at various social goings on at a Scottish university yesterday and pretty much every one of a dozen casual conversations with lots of nationalities converged rapidly on Where are you from? Where are your people from? (I was dressed in a kilt). These are hardwired into human encounters with strangers: who are you, where from, who was your dad, did he have a guest friendship with my dad?
I must say I thought the thought the thing Ngozi Fulani was quoted as saying that was clearly ridiculous was that people suggesting that allowance should be made for Lady Hussey's age were being disrespectful to her (Lady H) and "ageist". That seems too much like saying disability benefit should be abolished because it's "ableist".
What unmitigated bollocks. A bit like your covid19 rants.
If you're still working or functioning in an official capacity you need to be be held to professional standards which includes not being racist to those you're meeting in a professional capacity while representing the state.
No allowances should be made for saying someone is too old to know better. If you're so old that you can no longer function professionally without engaging in racist abuse you don't need to have allowances made for your abuse to be acceptable, you need to retire.
Yes, Barty. Fun as it is to shout at old ladies, this is fundamentally a HR issue. She has plainly been addled for decades and should have been taken off public facing duties, certainly post hmq demise. This is a cock up by Good But Thick King Charles. After his inkpot performance we can be confident some unfortunate underling is getting it hard in the neck.
And don't pointlessly exaggerate. Whatever this is, it isn't abuse of any kind.
Repeatedly demanding to know where people are from, even after they've told you, not taking Britain for an answer, absolutely is racist abuse.
Even thirty years ago people knew this sort of behaviour wasn't right. I seem to recall an advert on TV when I was a young child (late 80s or very early 90s) with from memory Frank Bruno for HP sauce where he gets asked in a supermarket where he's from by someone and he answers London.
Take the answer you're given. Pressing repeatedly afterwards would have been rude thirty years ago and is utterly unacceptable and beyond the pale today. Especially in a professional capacity.
I'm a woke leftie, and I thought it was terrible, obvious racism. But then, I would, wouldn't I. My wife, who is not very political at all and probably isn't entirely sure what woke means, read it last night, and was utterly appalled. When I got to work at lunchtime, I check with my Daily Mail-reading, proud Tory colleague. And she was incandescent about it.
Yep, it was racist.
I don't think anyone is denying that, are they?
Some people on here seem to think it an innocuous enquiry.
I think people have said that it was meant innocuously - I certainly think that's probably the case. That doesn't mean it wasn't racist.
Oh, absolutely. That is why we have unconscious bias training in order to reasses what we think is innocuous to uncover unexamined racist biases.
The lady that refused to answer the question has a conscious racial bias in assuming that the question is racist when asked by a white
She answered the question!
She knew what the geriatric was actually asking her
From the quoted exchange (the general gist of which I hear has been corroborated) she certainly did not initially, I think.
Lady SH: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space. [she, reasonably, thinks the question is which organisation.]
SH: No, where do you come from?
Me: We're based in Hackney. [she still thinks the question is about the organisation]
SH: No, what part of Africa are you from?
Me: I don't know, they didn't leave any records. [Here, she answers the actual question, as far as she is able]
SH: Well, you must know where you're from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, the UK. [yes, she does indeed know where she is from]
SH: No, but what nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British. [again, answering the question]
SH: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
SH: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you're from. When did you first come here?
Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when... [again, aswers the question]
SH: Oh, I knew we'd get there in the end, you're Caribbean!
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality. [Again, answers the question]
SH: Oh so you're from...
So, that's what - 7 times she directly and truthfully answered the question asked? 5 if you discount the first two responses where she seems to misinterpret the question (but in a reasonable way).
I don't think Hussey is being nasty, although she is rude to pursue it in the way she does. It rather seems to show that she cannot comprehend that someone black, dressed in what may be seen as a African style, is British.
This is why it's seen as a bigger problem. It's not one nasty/racist person, it reflects that probably many in similar positions have not the faintest clue about what being British encompasses today. I do feel a bit sorry for Hussey for being singled out here, as it could probably have been (and may well have been, on different occasions) any number of people. I also feel sorry for Fulani as any skeletons in her closet, irrelevant as they may be to the issue, will no doubt be shortly dug up by the media and paraded for all to see.
She does indeed answer the questions, I'll give her that
It certainly doesn't read as the five minutes of hostile interrogation that I heard she'd claimed was her ordeal
And if you dress up in African dress and meet a geriatric who's been to Africa many times..
I should give up if I were you Blanche, you know your heart's not really in it for defending the indefensible.
Do we now have to introduce ourselves with name and heritage, to show that we're happy to discuss it?
Or would that be even more insidiously racist?
You mean "my preferred pronoun is mbongo".
Good lord, have we entered a time tunnel back to the Seventies?
A few people have gone a bit weird about this on here today, falling over themselves to defend a toff who did a racism, like the Apu/'weird nerds' Elon Musk meme. FWIW I think @BartholomewRoberts is pretty much spot on in his reading of it.
"Did a racism?" Wtf sort of language is this?
Barty and apparently you are like dogs barking when the doorbell rings: stimulus to response, no cogitation required. How do you rate lady hussey against say the Stephen Lawrence murderers?
A talented player, and by all accounts a lovely person - which is probably his downfall. The best strikers have a decent dose of shithousery about them (Shearer, Drogba, etc.)
“When the stakes are this high, does it make more sense to hear our story from us?”
Maybe.
But a financial disclaimer might add to credibility.
They do tend to lay it on a bit thick, I find that makes me inclined to skepticism, which is also why I try to avoid tabloids. I prefer even my sensationalism to be muted in tone.
Can anyone enlighten me? I've always thought of myself as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but Ngozi Fulani's complaints seem way over the top to me.
Of course, a lot of it would depend on the exact words and the way in which they were said, but essentially Lady Hussey was asking where her family came from. That's such a commonplace topic of discussion among the English upper classes that I wonder if part of the outrage is just a cultural misunderstanding (certainly Ms Fulani doesn't seem to understand that "your people" would be synonymous with "your family" for someone like Lady Hussey).
Taken one way, "where do you really come from" could be read as "you're not really British". But couldn't it just as easily mean "where do your roots really lie?" Maybe Ms Fulani doesn't think in those terms, but to my mind it brought to mind something Julia Sawalha reminisced about (on "Who Do You Think You Are?" if I remember correctly). A friend said to her something like "I know you have Arab ancestry but you're not really Arab", and she thought about it and commented "Yes, I really am".
Fulani started with a satirical masterstroke ("they didn't leave records") but then lost it.
To be fair to her, anyone is going to feel flustered and out of their comfort zone at a Royal reception. But also, to be fair to lady H, I was at various social goings on at a Scottish university yesterday and pretty much every one of a dozen casual conversations with lots of nationalities converged rapidly on Where are you from? Where are your people from? (I was dressed in a kilt). These are hardwired into human encounters with strangers: who are you, where from, who was your dad, did he have a guest friendship with my dad?
I must say I thought the thought the thing Ngozi Fulani was quoted as saying that was clearly ridiculous was that people suggesting that allowance should be made for Lady Hussey's age were being disrespectful to her (Lady H) and "ageist". That seems too much like saying disability benefit should be abolished because it's "ableist".
What unmitigated bollocks. A bit like your covid19 rants.
If you're still working or functioning in an official capacity you need to be be held to professional standards which includes not being racist to those you're meeting in a professional capacity while representing the state.
No allowances should be made for saying someone is too old to know better. If you're so old that you can no longer function professionally without engaging in racist abuse you don't need to have allowances made for your abuse to be acceptable, you need to retire.
Yes, Barty. Fun as it is to shout at old ladies, this is fundamentally a HR issue. She has plainly been addled for decades and should have been taken off public facing duties, certainly post hmq demise. This is a cock up by Good But Thick King Charles. After his inkpot performance we can be confident some unfortunate underling is getting it hard in the neck.
And don't pointlessly exaggerate. Whatever this is, it isn't abuse of any kind.
Repeatedly demanding to know where people are from, even after they've told you, not taking Britain for an answer, absolutely is racist abuse.
Even thirty years ago people knew this sort of behaviour wasn't right. I seem to recall an advert on TV when I was a young child (late 80s or very early 90s) with from memory Frank Bruno for HP sauce where he gets asked in a supermarket where he's from by someone and he answers London.
Take the answer you're given. Pressing repeatedly afterwards would have been rude thirty years ago and is utterly unacceptable and beyond the pale today. Especially in a professional capacity.
I'm a woke leftie, and I thought it was terrible, obvious racism. But then, I would, wouldn't I. My wife, who is not very political at all and probably isn't entirely sure what woke means, read it last night, and was utterly appalled. When I got to work at lunchtime, I check with my Daily Mail-reading, proud Tory colleague. And she was incandescent about it.
Yep, it was racist.
I don't think anyone is denying that, are they?
Some people on here seem to think it an innocuous enquiry.
I think people have said that it was meant innocuously - I certainly think that's probably the case. That doesn't mean it wasn't racist.
Oh, absolutely. That is why we have unconscious bias training in order to reasses what we think is innocuous to uncover unexamined racist biases.
The lady that refused to answer the question has a conscious racial bias in assuming that the question is racist when asked by a white
She answered the question!
She knew what the geriatric was actually asking her
From the quoted exchange (the general gist of which I hear has been corroborated) she certainly did not initially, I think.
Lady SH: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space. [she, reasonably, thinks the question is which organisation.]
SH: No, where do you come from?
Me: We're based in Hackney. [she still thinks the question is about the organisation]
SH: No, what part of Africa are you from?
Me: I don't know, they didn't leave any records. [Here, she answers the actual question, as far as she is able]
SH: Well, you must know where you're from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, the UK. [yes, she does indeed know where she is from]
SH: No, but what nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British. [again, answering the question]
SH: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
SH: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you're from. When did you first come here?
Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when... [again, aswers the question]
SH: Oh, I knew we'd get there in the end, you're Caribbean!
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality. [Again, answers the question]
SH: Oh so you're from...
So, that's what - 7 times she directly and truthfully answered the question asked? 5 if you discount the first two responses where she seems to misinterpret the question (but in a reasonable way).
I don't think Hussey is being nasty, although she is rude to pursue it in the way she does. It rather seems to show that she cannot comprehend that someone black, dressed in what may be seen as a African style, is British.
This is why it's seen as a bigger problem. It's not one nasty/racist person, it reflects that probably many in similar positions have not the faintest clue about what being British encompasses today. I do feel a bit sorry for Hussey for being singled out here, as it could probably have been (and may well have been, on different occasions) any number of people. I also feel sorry for Fulani as any skeletons in her closet, irrelevant as they may be to the issue, will no doubt be shortly dug up by the media and paraded for all to see.
She does indeed answer the questions, I'll give her that
It certainly doesn't read as the five minutes of hostile interrogation that I heard she'd claimed was her ordeal
And if you dress up in African dress and meet a geriatric who's been to Africa many times..
"SH: Oh, I knew we'd get there in the end, you're Caribbean!
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality."
She is very patently of African heritage. Equally patently, proud of it.
What I find a little strange is why does she want to hide away from her Caribbean descendants? Is this some anger/shame at slavery roots that took her from Africa and needs to be obscured by not acknowledging where from the Caribbean her family moved?
As I am from a hundred generations of stout English yeoman, I have no experience whatsoever of this issue. Just trying to get an understanding of what the sensitivities are, so as not to fall foul of this issue myself.
A talented player, and by all accounts a lovely person - which is probably his downfall. The best strikers have a decent dose of shithousery about them (Shearer, Drogba, etc.)
He didn't look such a lovely person when he punched the side of the players' shelter in after the match.
Also, your premise that good strikers need to be nasty is flawed. Lineker, Klinsmann, Rashford, Kane, for example are not noted for their nastiness.
In the old days, taking a photo cost money. There was film. There were expensive lenses. There was the requirement to develop the film. And any retouching was hideously expensive.
Now everyone has a smartphone with a camera better than a Canon SLR with an L lens back in 2000. People can take photos as zero cost. And then algorithms will sort out any issues with photos.
The result is that there are now gazillions of photos available of everything for free.
AND THAT'S GOOD.
To be pedantic, an iPhone isn't a better camera. It's just that the software and processing power is so advanced that the average person can get better results.
More than that: A digital camera allows you to take five, six or more shots at a 'good' subject, allowing me to choose the best one. With film. that would be extremely costly. When I got my first digital camera 20 years ago, it was a little bit of a mindshift to just press the shutter rather than consider how many shots I had left on the roll.
As an utter amateur, I got some nice shots that I would simply not have got on film, for cost reasons.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
Has anyone asked the AI about the origin of Covid?
Actually, yes. The one I've seen is adamantly pro-zoonosis - but I suspect depending on the question, you'll get the answer you're looking for.
Which is the other point about quite a large proportion of AI output - sorting the wheat from the considerable chaff is going to be a skill in need. Efficient connoisseurs might find gainful employment.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Can anyone enlighten me? I've always thought of myself as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but Ngozi Fulani's complaints seem way over the top to me.
Of course, a lot of it would depend on the exact words and the way in which they were said, but essentially Lady Hussey was asking where her family came from. That's such a commonplace topic of discussion among the English upper classes that I wonder if part of the outrage is just a cultural misunderstanding (certainly Ms Fulani doesn't seem to understand that "your people" would be synonymous with "your family" for someone like Lady Hussey).
Taken one way, "where do you really come from" could be read as "you're not really British". But couldn't it just as easily mean "where do your roots really lie?" Maybe Ms Fulani doesn't think in those terms, but to my mind it brought to mind something Julia Sawalha reminisced about (on "Who Do You Think You Are?" if I remember correctly). A friend said to her something like "I know you have Arab ancestry but you're not really Arab", and she thought about it and commented "Yes, I really am".
Fulani started with a satirical masterstroke ("they didn't leave records") but then lost it.
To be fair to her, anyone is going to feel flustered and out of their comfort zone at a Royal reception. But also, to be fair to lady H, I was at various social goings on at a Scottish university yesterday and pretty much every one of a dozen casual conversations with lots of nationalities converged rapidly on Where are you from? Where are your people from? (I was dressed in a kilt). These are hardwired into human encounters with strangers: who are you, where from, who was your dad, did he have a guest friendship with my dad?
I must say I thought the thought the thing Ngozi Fulani was quoted as saying that was clearly ridiculous was that people suggesting that allowance should be made for Lady Hussey's age were being disrespectful to her (Lady H) and "ageist". That seems too much like saying disability benefit should be abolished because it's "ableist".
What unmitigated bollocks. A bit like your covid19 rants.
If you're still working or functioning in an official capacity you need to be be held to professional standards which includes not being racist to those you're meeting in a professional capacity while representing the state.
No allowances should be made for saying someone is too old to know better. If you're so old that you can no longer function professionally without engaging in racist abuse you don't need to have allowances made for your abuse to be acceptable, you need to retire.
Yes, Barty. Fun as it is to shout at old ladies, this is fundamentally a HR issue. She has plainly been addled for decades and should have been taken off public facing duties, certainly post hmq demise. This is a cock up by Good But Thick King Charles. After his inkpot performance we can be confident some unfortunate underling is getting it hard in the neck.
And don't pointlessly exaggerate. Whatever this is, it isn't abuse of any kind.
Repeatedly demanding to know where people are from, even after they've told you, not taking Britain for an answer, absolutely is racist abuse.
Even thirty years ago people knew this sort of behaviour wasn't right. I seem to recall an advert on TV when I was a young child (late 80s or very early 90s) with from memory Frank Bruno for HP sauce where he gets asked in a supermarket where he's from by someone and he answers London.
Take the answer you're given. Pressing repeatedly afterwards would have been rude thirty years ago and is utterly unacceptable and beyond the pale today. Especially in a professional capacity.
I'm a woke leftie, and I thought it was terrible, obvious racism. But then, I would, wouldn't I. My wife, who is not very political at all and probably isn't entirely sure what woke means, read it last night, and was utterly appalled. When I got to work at lunchtime, I check with my Daily Mail-reading, proud Tory colleague. And she was incandescent about it.
Yep, it was racist.
I don't think anyone is denying that, are they?
Some people on here seem to think it an innocuous enquiry.
I think people have said that it was meant innocuously - I certainly think that's probably the case. That doesn't mean it wasn't racist.
Oh, absolutely. That is why we have unconscious bias training in order to reasses what we think is innocuous to uncover unexamined racist biases.
The lady that refused to answer the question has a conscious racial bias in assuming that the question is racist when asked by a white
She answered the question!
She knew what the geriatric was actually asking her
From the quoted exchange (the general gist of which I hear has been corroborated) she certainly did not initially, I think.
Lady SH: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space. [she, reasonably, thinks the question is which organisation.]
SH: No, where do you come from?
Me: We're based in Hackney. [she still thinks the question is about the organisation]
SH: No, what part of Africa are you from?
Me: I don't know, they didn't leave any records. [Here, she answers the actual question, as far as she is able]
SH: Well, you must know where you're from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, the UK. [yes, she does indeed know where she is from]
SH: No, but what nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British. [again, answering the question]
SH: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
SH: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you're from. When did you first come here?
Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when... [again, aswers the question]
SH: Oh, I knew we'd get there in the end, you're Caribbean!
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality. [Again, answers the question]
SH: Oh so you're from...
So, that's what - 7 times she directly and truthfully answered the question asked? 5 if you discount the first two responses where she seems to misinterpret the question (but in a reasonable way).
I don't think Hussey is being nasty, although she is rude to pursue it in the way she does. It rather seems to show that she cannot comprehend that someone black, dressed in what may be seen as a African style, is British.
This is why it's seen as a bigger problem. It's not one nasty/racist person, it reflects that probably many in similar positions have not the faintest clue about what being British encompasses today. I do feel a bit sorry for Hussey for being singled out here, as it could probably have been (and may well have been, on different occasions) any number of people. I also feel sorry for Fulani as any skeletons in her closet, irrelevant as they may be to the issue, will no doubt be shortly dug up by the media and paraded for all to see.
She does indeed answer the questions, I'll give her that
It certainly doesn't read as the five minutes of hostile interrogation that I heard she'd claimed was her ordeal
And if you dress up in African dress and meet a geriatric who's been to Africa many times..
I should give up if I were you Blanche, you know your heart's not really in it for defending the indefensible.
Can anyone enlighten me? I've always thought of myself as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but Ngozi Fulani's complaints seem way over the top to me.
Of course, a lot of it would depend on the exact words and the way in which they were said, but essentially Lady Hussey was asking where her family came from. That's such a commonplace topic of discussion among the English upper classes that I wonder if part of the outrage is just a cultural misunderstanding (certainly Ms Fulani doesn't seem to understand that "your people" would be synonymous with "your family" for someone like Lady Hussey).
Taken one way, "where do you really come from" could be read as "you're not really British". But couldn't it just as easily mean "where do your roots really lie?" Maybe Ms Fulani doesn't think in those terms, but to my mind it brought to mind something Julia Sawalha reminisced about (on "Who Do You Think You Are?" if I remember correctly). A friend said to her something like "I know you have Arab ancestry but you're not really Arab", and she thought about it and commented "Yes, I really am".
Fulani started with a satirical masterstroke ("they didn't leave records") but then lost it.
To be fair to her, anyone is going to feel flustered and out of their comfort zone at a Royal reception. But also, to be fair to lady H, I was at various social goings on at a Scottish university yesterday and pretty much every one of a dozen casual conversations with lots of nationalities converged rapidly on Where are you from? Where are your people from? (I was dressed in a kilt). These are hardwired into human encounters with strangers: who are you, where from, who was your dad, did he have a guest friendship with my dad?
I must say I thought the thought the thing Ngozi Fulani was quoted as saying that was clearly ridiculous was that people suggesting that allowance should be made for Lady Hussey's age were being disrespectful to her (Lady H) and "ageist". That seems too much like saying disability benefit should be abolished because it's "ableist".
What unmitigated bollocks. A bit like your covid19 rants.
If you're still working or functioning in an official capacity you need to be be held to professional standards which includes not being racist to those you're meeting in a professional capacity while representing the state.
No allowances should be made for saying someone is too old to know better. If you're so old that you can no longer function professionally without engaging in racist abuse you don't need to have allowances made for your abuse to be acceptable, you need to retire.
Yes, Barty. Fun as it is to shout at old ladies, this is fundamentally a HR issue. She has plainly been addled for decades and should have been taken off public facing duties, certainly post hmq demise. This is a cock up by Good But Thick King Charles. After his inkpot performance we can be confident some unfortunate underling is getting it hard in the neck.
And don't pointlessly exaggerate. Whatever this is, it isn't abuse of any kind.
Repeatedly demanding to know where people are from, even after they've told you, not taking Britain for an answer, absolutely is racist abuse.
Even thirty years ago people knew this sort of behaviour wasn't right. I seem to recall an advert on TV when I was a young child (late 80s or very early 90s) with from memory Frank Bruno for HP sauce where he gets asked in a supermarket where he's from by someone and he answers London.
Take the answer you're given. Pressing repeatedly afterwards would have been rude thirty years ago and is utterly unacceptable and beyond the pale today. Especially in a professional capacity.
I'm a woke leftie, and I thought it was terrible, obvious racism. But then, I would, wouldn't I. My wife, who is not very political at all and probably isn't entirely sure what woke means, read it last night, and was utterly appalled. When I got to work at lunchtime, I check with my Daily Mail-reading, proud Tory colleague. And she was incandescent about it.
Yep, it was racist.
I don't think anyone is denying that, are they?
Some people on here seem to think it an innocuous enquiry.
I think people have said that it was meant innocuously - I certainly think that's probably the case. That doesn't mean it wasn't racist.
Oh, absolutely. That is why we have unconscious bias training in order to reasses what we think is innocuous to uncover unexamined racist biases.
The lady that refused to answer the question has a conscious racial bias in assuming that the question is racist when asked by a white
She answered the question!
She knew what the geriatric was actually asking her
From the quoted exchange (the general gist of which I hear has been corroborated) she certainly did not initially, I think.
Lady SH: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space. [she, reasonably, thinks the question is which organisation.]
SH: No, where do you come from?
Me: We're based in Hackney. [she still thinks the question is about the organisation]
SH: No, what part of Africa are you from?
Me: I don't know, they didn't leave any records. [Here, she answers the actual question, as far as she is able]
SH: Well, you must know where you're from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, the UK. [yes, she does indeed know where she is from]
SH: No, but what nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British. [again, answering the question]
SH: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
SH: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you're from. When did you first come here?
Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when... [again, aswers the question]
SH: Oh, I knew we'd get there in the end, you're Caribbean!
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality. [Again, answers the question]
SH: Oh so you're from...
So, that's what - 7 times she directly and truthfully answered the question asked? 5 if you discount the first two responses where she seems to misinterpret the question (but in a reasonable way).
I don't think Hussey is being nasty, although she is rude to pursue it in the way she does. It rather seems to show that she cannot comprehend that someone black, dressed in what may be seen as a African style, is British.
This is why it's seen as a bigger problem. It's not one nasty/racist person, it reflects that probably many in similar positions have not the faintest clue about what being British encompasses today. I do feel a bit sorry for Hussey for being singled out here, as it could probably have been (and may well have been, on different occasions) any number of people. I also feel sorry for Fulani as any skeletons in her closet, irrelevant as they may be to the issue, will no doubt be shortly dug up by the media and paraded for all to see.
She does indeed answer the questions, I'll give her that
It certainly doesn't read as the five minutes of hostile interrogation that I heard she'd claimed was her ordeal
And if you dress up in African dress and meet a geriatric who's been to Africa many times..
I should give up if I were you Blanche, you know your heart's not really in it for defending the indefensible.
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
Do we now have to introduce ourselves with name and heritage, to show that we're happy to discuss it?
Or would that be even more insidiously racist?
You mean "my preferred pronoun is mbongo".
Good lord, have we entered a time tunnel back to the Seventies?
A few people have gone a bit weird about this on here today, falling over themselves to defend a toff who did a racism, like the Apu/'weird nerds' Elon Musk meme. FWIW I think @BartholomewRoberts is pretty much spot on in his reading of it.
"Did a racism?" Wtf sort of language is this?
Barty and apparently you are like dogs barking when the doorbell rings: stimulus to response, no cogitation required. How do you rate lady hussey against say the Stephen Lawrence murderers?
It's an internet colloquialism.
To answer your disingenuous question with a straight bat, fairly obviously the Stephen Lawrence murderers committed a far, far worse act.
The institutional ignorance/disregard shown by LH is sympomatic of a *similar* (not the same) culture that caused the Met to do such a horrific job of bungling the Lawrence case. In the grand scheme of things, the Met's incompetence and institutional prejudices are many, many times worse than LH and what her actions may say about the institution she represents.
But ultimately that's whataboutery. It doesn't mean it's not notable.
Can anyone enlighten me? I've always thought of myself as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but Ngozi Fulani's complaints seem way over the top to me.
Of course, a lot of it would depend on the exact words and the way in which they were said, but essentially Lady Hussey was asking where her family came from. That's such a commonplace topic of discussion among the English upper classes that I wonder if part of the outrage is just a cultural misunderstanding (certainly Ms Fulani doesn't seem to understand that "your people" would be synonymous with "your family" for someone like Lady Hussey).
Taken one way, "where do you really come from" could be read as "you're not really British". But couldn't it just as easily mean "where do your roots really lie?" Maybe Ms Fulani doesn't think in those terms, but to my mind it brought to mind something Julia Sawalha reminisced about (on "Who Do You Think You Are?" if I remember correctly). A friend said to her something like "I know you have Arab ancestry but you're not really Arab", and she thought about it and commented "Yes, I really am".
Fulani started with a satirical masterstroke ("they didn't leave records") but then lost it.
To be fair to her, anyone is going to feel flustered and out of their comfort zone at a Royal reception. But also, to be fair to lady H, I was at various social goings on at a Scottish university yesterday and pretty much every one of a dozen casual conversations with lots of nationalities converged rapidly on Where are you from? Where are your people from? (I was dressed in a kilt). These are hardwired into human encounters with strangers: who are you, where from, who was your dad, did he have a guest friendship with my dad?
I must say I thought the thought the thing Ngozi Fulani was quoted as saying that was clearly ridiculous was that people suggesting that allowance should be made for Lady Hussey's age were being disrespectful to her (Lady H) and "ageist". That seems too much like saying disability benefit should be abolished because it's "ableist".
What unmitigated bollocks. A bit like your covid19 rants.
If you're still working or functioning in an official capacity you need to be be held to professional standards which includes not being racist to those you're meeting in a professional capacity while representing the state.
No allowances should be made for saying someone is too old to know better. If you're so old that you can no longer function professionally without engaging in racist abuse you don't need to have allowances made for your abuse to be acceptable, you need to retire.
Yes, Barty. Fun as it is to shout at old ladies, this is fundamentally a HR issue. She has plainly been addled for decades and should have been taken off public facing duties, certainly post hmq demise. This is a cock up by Good But Thick King Charles. After his inkpot performance we can be confident some unfortunate underling is getting it hard in the neck.
And don't pointlessly exaggerate. Whatever this is, it isn't abuse of any kind.
Repeatedly demanding to know where people are from, even after they've told you, not taking Britain for an answer, absolutely is racist abuse.
Even thirty years ago people knew this sort of behaviour wasn't right. I seem to recall an advert on TV when I was a young child (late 80s or very early 90s) with from memory Frank Bruno for HP sauce where he gets asked in a supermarket where he's from by someone and he answers London.
Take the answer you're given. Pressing repeatedly afterwards would have been rude thirty years ago and is utterly unacceptable and beyond the pale today. Especially in a professional capacity.
I'm a woke leftie, and I thought it was terrible, obvious racism. But then, I would, wouldn't I. My wife, who is not very political at all and probably isn't entirely sure what woke means, read it last night, and was utterly appalled. When I got to work at lunchtime, I check with my Daily Mail-reading, proud Tory colleague. And she was incandescent about it.
Yep, it was racist.
I don't think anyone is denying that, are they?
Some people on here seem to think it an innocuous enquiry.
I think people have said that it was meant innocuously - I certainly think that's probably the case. That doesn't mean it wasn't racist.
Oh, absolutely. That is why we have unconscious bias training in order to reasses what we think is innocuous to uncover unexamined racist biases.
The lady that refused to answer the question has a conscious racial bias in assuming that the question is racist when asked by a white
She answered the question!
She knew what the geriatric was actually asking her
From the quoted exchange (the general gist of which I hear has been corroborated) she certainly did not initially, I think.
Lady SH: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space. [she, reasonably, thinks the question is which organisation.]
SH: No, where do you come from?
Me: We're based in Hackney. [she still thinks the question is about the organisation]
SH: No, what part of Africa are you from?
Me: I don't know, they didn't leave any records. [Here, she answers the actual question, as far as she is able]
SH: Well, you must know where you're from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, the UK. [yes, she does indeed know where she is from]
SH: No, but what nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British. [again, answering the question]
SH: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
SH: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you're from. When did you first come here?
Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when... [again, aswers the question]
SH: Oh, I knew we'd get there in the end, you're Caribbean!
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality. [Again, answers the question]
SH: Oh so you're from...
So, that's what - 7 times she directly and truthfully answered the question asked? 5 if you discount the first two responses where she seems to misinterpret the question (but in a reasonable way).
I don't think Hussey is being nasty, although she is rude to pursue it in the way she does. It rather seems to show that she cannot comprehend that someone black, dressed in what may be seen as a African style, is British.
This is why it's seen as a bigger problem. It's not one nasty/racist person, it reflects that probably many in similar positions have not the faintest clue about what being British encompasses today. I do feel a bit sorry for Hussey for being singled out here, as it could probably have been (and may well have been, on different occasions) any number of people. I also feel sorry for Fulani as any skeletons in her closet, irrelevant as they may be to the issue, will no doubt be shortly dug up by the media and paraded for all to see.
She does indeed answer the questions, I'll give her that
It certainly doesn't read as the five minutes of hostile interrogation that I heard she'd claimed was her ordeal
And if you dress up in African dress and meet a geriatric who's been to Africa many times..
I should give up if I were you Blanche, you know your heart's not really in it for defending the indefensible.
Do we now have to introduce ourselves with name and heritage, to show that we're happy to discuss it?
Or would that be even more insidiously racist?
You mean "my preferred pronoun is mbongo".
Good lord, have we entered a time tunnel back to the Seventies?
A few people have gone a bit weird about this on here today, falling over themselves to defend a toff who did a racism, like the Apu/'weird nerds' Elon Musk meme. FWIW I think @BartholomewRoberts is pretty much spot on in his reading of it.
I think everyone has responded to the issue completely in line with where they stood on such things before this discussion. Nobody has convinced or been convinced either way.
It implies the need for a full defence review in the near future, as we need to spend our limited cash prioritising quite different kit to that which is headlined now. And implies a rather different force structure, too.
Don't know that fat Wallace is up to fighting the battles with the defence establishment that are going to be needed.
What we probably shouldn't be cutting: ... One area where the British Army at present appears particularly strong is in its maintaining large training establishments disproportionate to the size of the force. The British Army maintains dedicated training schools for many of its military specialisms, which all require permanent staff and instructors. As demonstrated by the large-scale training to Ukrainian troops – carried out in parallel to the ongoing training of British forces – there is considerable slack capacity in this system. While this is a disproportionate cost on a small army in peacetime, its importance during any major conflict should not be underappreciated. Even assuming that British forces remain highly survivable, the rate of injury combined with the very small overall size of the British armed forces must see troop levels in frontline units decline in any major war. The UK must therefore be able to train a second echelon...
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
A talented player, and by all accounts a lovely person - which is probably his downfall. The best strikers have a decent dose of shithousery about them (Shearer, Drogba, etc.)
He didn't look such a lovely person when he punched the side of the players' shelter in after the match.
Also, your premise that good strikers need to be nasty is flawed. Lineker, Klinsmann, Rashford, Kane, for example are not noted for their nastiness.
Hmm... Klinsmann definitely played with a wee devil on his shoulder (causing him to trip often).
Kane for England is dropping deeper and creating more. He's not scoring goals. Lineker was a poacher, not an all-in wrecking ball striker.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Actually for once I kind of agree about this. We have had no end of trouble with open book, online exams as students cut and paste material, including lecturers own slides. Now to an extent they have a point, as to answer the question, repeating the lecturers answer is the right answer. We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully. Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics. Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
TBH it's one of very few positive things I've heard about him. Taking a bit of time to stay in decent physical shape is pretty much always a good idea.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Actually for once I kind of agree about this. We have had no end of trouble with open book, online exams as students cut and paste material, including lecturers own slides. Now to an extent they have a point, as to answer the question, repeating the lecturers answer is the right answer. We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully. Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics. Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Actually for once I kind of agree about this. We have had no end of trouble with open book, online exams as students cut and paste material, including lecturers own slides. Now to an extent they have a point, as to answer the question, repeating the lecturers answer is the right answer. We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully. Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics. Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
And remember, this is Day 1 of GPT4 (it is presumed, they haven't actually said) and it is in Beta mode
And next year will be GPT5 (if they can find enough data to feed it). Ooof
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Actually for once I kind of agree about this. We have had no end of trouble with open book, online exams as students cut and paste material, including lecturers own slides. Now to an extent they have a point, as to answer the question, repeating the lecturers answer is the right answer. We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully. Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics. Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
TBH it's one of very few positive things I've heard about him. Taking a bit of time to stay in decent physical shape is pretty much always a good idea.
I’m pleased to hear this. It’s time for fresh leadership & tolerance of debate & diverse viewpoints. I hope @theSNP Westminster group will be now be left to choose our new leader without outside interference & in accordance with our standing orders.
Imelda will be giving orders as to who should win. Will be interesting to see if the sheep follow orders or if Cherry gets it. Will show how shoogly Sturgeon's peg is or not.
Hello all, I'm embroiled so not posting much but just a quickie on the WC -
I'm liking our chances. I think we have 2 great performances in us from here and we'll need to use one to get by France in the quarters. This will leave one for either the semi or the final, meaning we'll have to win one of those with just a good solid performance (as against Wales). Plus the breaks of course. You can't win a WC without the breaks. We're going to need things to fall our way in one or two crucial moments in one or two of the knockout games, both regulation play and if necessary in the pens.
The key England game so far imo was against the USA. That 0/0 draw to skilled readers of international tournament football was perfect. The middle group game, having won the 1st, is 'mustn't lose' not 'must win' and we did exactly what was required. Conserved energy, turned the temp down, took no risks, kept a clean sheet, trousered the draw to ensure progression and provide the platform for the rest of the tournament. It also had the useful side benefit of lowering public expectations, which might have run riot with another 6/2 nonsense or similar.
Who knows from here, there are some very good teams apart from us, and Senegal up next are no joke, but I'm quite bullish. We are genuine contenders. Not even thinking about laying @ 11.
Ian Blackford has resigned as Scottish National Party leader at Westminster two weeks after a party rival aborted a coup attempt at the eleventh hour.
In a move that was accelerated after The Times learnt of plans to rekindle plots to oust Blackford, the Ross, Skye & Lochaber MP abruptly announced he had quit the role this morning.
He is expected to be replaced by Stephen Flynn, the energy spokesman, who two weeks ago said he had “no intention of standing” for the top job.
Times
Flynn looks as impressive as that Welsh guy who stood against Corbyn
Has anyone ever heard of Flynn, he is the invisible man, I have never heard any speech , opinion or any topic from him ever.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Actually for once I kind of agree about this. We have had no end of trouble with open book, online exams as students cut and paste material, including lecturers own slides. Now to an extent they have a point, as to answer the question, repeating the lecturers answer is the right answer. We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully. Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics. Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
Much of Medical Education has moved to application rather than regurgitation of facts.
There is a limit to this, in that the Doctor has to be aware there is something that needs to be looked up. A hinterland of facts is needed for application to be effective.
Can't AI be used to check whether someone's work is their own and not generated by computers?
We already check against online for plagiarism, so I suspect the answer is yes.
We thought we could switch easily to online exams, but in reality it’s caused no end of problems. We have a cohort of students who have been found to have colluded in answers on one of the exams, likely because they live together and did the exam in the same room. Many have been forced to retake the year, at huge cost.
I’m pleased to hear this. It’s time for fresh leadership & tolerance of debate & diverse viewpoints. I hope @theSNP Westminster group will be now be left to choose our new leader without outside interference & in accordance with our standing orders.
Imelda will be giving orders as to who should win. Will be interesting to see if the sheep follow orders or if Cherry gets it. Will show how shoogly Sturgeon's peg is or not.
I think Cherry would make a formidable leader of the SNP in Westminster to hold the government to account. None of the others inspire much confidence - but I suspect “direction has been given”…
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
TBH it's one of very few positive things I've heard about him. Taking a bit of time to stay in decent physical shape is pretty much always a good idea.
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
TBH it's one of very few positive things I've heard about him. Taking a bit of time to stay in decent physical shape is pretty much always a good idea.
I mentor a young lad with poor literacy skills who is starting a landscaping business. He struggles to communicate with clients in a professional manner.
I created a GPT3-powered Gmail account to which he sends a message. It responds with the text to send to the client.
"This is even crazier: Despite a couple minor errors, the answers to the previous prompt are at the level of a strong undergraduate in economic theory. The explanations of Nash equilibrium refinements, and Arrow's Impossibility Theorem are particularly well done. Great work!"
"I have helped run an AI-based entrepreneurship program for years, written papers on the econ of AI, and follow the field quite closely. Nonetheless, I am *shocked* by how good OpenAI's new chat (https://chat.openai.com/chat) is. E.g., you can no longer give take-home exams/homework."
Every schooldchild/student will be able to tap their essay question into GPT4 and get excellent results. How on earth do you stop that? This is a revolution in education
For pure assessment, we're back to unseen exams with no computer access. Anything else is fatally compromised.
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
The implications for education are in fact pretty devastating, the more you ponder it. Why bother learning anything?
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
Actually for once I kind of agree about this. We have had no end of trouble with open book, online exams as students cut and paste material, including lecturers own slides. Now to an extent they have a point, as to answer the question, repeating the lecturers answer is the right answer. We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully. Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics. Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
Much of Medical Education has moved to application rather than regurgitation of facts.
There is a limit to this, in that the Doctor has to be aware there is something that needs to be looked up. A hinterland of facts is needed for application to be effective.
Completely agree. You need to have a decent foundation to then find out the things you don’t know. When I was being treated for leukaemia I was able to read and understand the papers relating to my condition, the studies suggesting the best regime etc. I can do that because of my scientific training and experience. Less easy for a someone, however bright, without the basics of medical and pharmacological knowledge.
Hello all, I'm embroiled so not posting much but just a quickie on the WC -
I'm liking our chances. I think we have 2 great performances in us from here and we'll need to use one to get by France in the quarters. This will leave one for either the semi or the final, meaning we'll have to win one of those with just a good solid performance (as against Wales). Plus the breaks of course. You can't win a WC without the breaks. We're going to need things to fall our way in one or two crucial moments in one or two of the knockout games, both regulation play and if necessary in the pens.
The key England game so far imo was against the USA. That 0/0 draw to skilled readers of international tournament football was perfect. The middle group game, having won the 1st, is 'mustn't lose' not 'must win' and we did exactly what was required. Conserved energy, turned the temp down, took no risks, kept a clean sheet, trousered the draw to ensure progression and provide the platform for the rest of the tournament. It also had the useful side benefit of lowering public expectations, which might have run riot with another 6/2 nonsense or similar.
Who knows from here, there are some very good teams apart from us, and Senegal up next are no joke, but I'm quite bullish. We are genuine contenders. Not even thinking about laying @ 11.
Our defence against the really top sides is going to struggle, I fear. We could outscore them, though, if Southgate is bold enough.
Can't AI be used to check whether someone's work is their own and not generated by computers?
We already check against online for plagiarism, so I suspect the answer is yes.
We thought we could switch easily to online exams, but in reality it’s caused no end of problems. We have a cohort of students who have been found to have colluded in answers on one of the exams, likely because they live together and did the exam in the same room. Many have been forced to retake the year, at huge cost.
Twitter seems to think the answer is No
GPT3.5 generates a new essay every time. Phrased differently, and articulately, and not obviously scraped from one site on the Net
I predict they will have a certain "sameness" tho, like some AI art. At least at first
I used to think that being racist meant thinking that people of other races were inferior
Does it actually mean noticing that someone is of a different race and then having that affect one's behaviour in any way?
I think in this it’s some one who feels she is British, was born and raised here being asked where she is really from. Bit rude. BUT I think said lady is also strongly inhabit her heritage, indeed did so on the day, so you can see the confusion.
I mentor a young lad with poor literacy skills who is starting a landscaping business. He struggles to communicate with clients in a professional manner.
I created a GPT3-powered Gmail account to which he sends a message. It responds with the text to send to the client.
I mentor a young lad with poor literacy skills who is starting a landscaping business. He struggles to communicate with clients in a professional manner.
I created a GPT3-powered Gmail account to which he sends a message. It responds with the text to send to the client.
A talented player, and by all accounts a lovely person - which is probably his downfall. The best strikers have a decent dose of shithousery about them (Shearer, Drogba, etc.)
He didn't look such a lovely person when he punched the side of the players' shelter in after the match.
Also, your premise that good strikers need to be nasty is flawed. Lineker, Klinsmann, Rashford, Kane, for example are not noted for their nastiness.
In fairness. He was aiming for the players' tunnel.
Can't AI be used to check whether someone's work is their own and not generated by computers?
We already check against online for plagiarism, so I suspect the answer is yes.
We thought we could switch easily to online exams, but in reality it’s caused no end of problems. We have a cohort of students who have been found to have colluded in answers on one of the exams, likely because they live together and did the exam in the same room. Many have been forced to retake the year, at huge cost.
Twitter seems to think the answer is No
GPT3.5 generates a new essay every time. Phrased differently, and articulately, and not obviously scraped from one site on the Net
I predict they will have a certain "sameness" tho, like some AI art. At least at first
Ultimately there are only a certain number of ways to answer a question.
Can anyone enlighten me? I've always thought of myself as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but Ngozi Fulani's complaints seem way over the top to me.
Of course, a lot of it would depend on the exact words and the way in which they were said, but essentially Lady Hussey was asking where her family came from. That's such a commonplace topic of discussion among the English upper classes that I wonder if part of the outrage is just a cultural misunderstanding (certainly Ms Fulani doesn't seem to understand that "your people" would be synonymous with "your family" for someone like Lady Hussey).
Taken one way, "where do you really come from" could be read as "you're not really British". But couldn't it just as easily mean "where do your roots really lie?" Maybe Ms Fulani doesn't think in those terms, but to my mind it brought to mind something Julia Sawalha reminisced about (on "Who Do You Think You Are?" if I remember correctly). A friend said to her something like "I know you have Arab ancestry but you're not really Arab", and she thought about it and commented "Yes, I really am".
Fulani started with a satirical masterstroke ("they didn't leave records") but then lost it.
To be fair to her, anyone is going to feel flustered and out of their comfort zone at a Royal reception. But also, to be fair to lady H, I was at various social goings on at a Scottish university yesterday and pretty much every one of a dozen casual conversations with lots of nationalities converged rapidly on Where are you from? Where are your people from? (I was dressed in a kilt). These are hardwired into human encounters with strangers: who are you, where from, who was your dad, did he have a guest friendship with my dad?
I must say I thought the thought the thing Ngozi Fulani was quoted as saying that was clearly ridiculous was that people suggesting that allowance should be made for Lady Hussey's age were being disrespectful to her (Lady H) and "ageist". That seems too much like saying disability benefit should be abolished because it's "ableist".
What unmitigated bollocks. A bit like your covid19 rants.
If you're still working or functioning in an official capacity you need to be be held to professional standards which includes not being racist to those you're meeting in a professional capacity while representing the state.
No allowances should be made for saying someone is too old to know better. If you're so old that you can no longer function professionally without engaging in racist abuse you don't need to have allowances made for your abuse to be acceptable, you need to retire.
Yes, Barty. Fun as it is to shout at old ladies, this is fundamentally a HR issue. She has plainly been addled for decades and should have been taken off public facing duties, certainly post hmq demise. This is a cock up by Good But Thick King Charles. After his inkpot performance we can be confident some unfortunate underling is getting it hard in the neck.
And don't pointlessly exaggerate. Whatever this is, it isn't abuse of any kind.
Repeatedly demanding to know where people are from, even after they've told you, not taking Britain for an answer, absolutely is racist abuse.
Even thirty years ago people knew this sort of behaviour wasn't right. I seem to recall an advert on TV when I was a young child (late 80s or very early 90s) with from memory Frank Bruno for HP sauce where he gets asked in a supermarket where he's from by someone and he answers London.
Take the answer you're given. Pressing repeatedly afterwards would have been rude thirty years ago and is utterly unacceptable and beyond the pale today. Especially in a professional capacity.
I'm a woke leftie, and I thought it was terrible, obvious racism. But then, I would, wouldn't I. My wife, who is not very political at all and probably isn't entirely sure what woke means, read it last night, and was utterly appalled. When I got to work at lunchtime, I check with my Daily Mail-reading, proud Tory colleague. And she was incandescent about it.
Yep, it was racist.
I don't think anyone is denying that, are they?
Some people on here seem to think it an innocuous enquiry.
I think people have said that it was meant innocuously - I certainly think that's probably the case. That doesn't mean it wasn't racist.
They got shot of her pretty damn quickly if it was just an innocuous comment from an amiable old dear.
I suspect she has form and it certainly makes Megan's accusations look more plausible.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me, staying fit and healthy probably helps him with his job. The only issue of complaint seems to be officials being forced to stay at their desks 'late into the evening', but it doesn't rung true to me - for one thing it says he books out an hour a day, so it wouldn't be that much later than 'normal', and I highly doubt everyone has to do so even if it is true.
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
TBH it's one of very few positive things I've heard about him. Taking a bit of time to stay in decent physical shape is pretty much always a good idea.
What's wroing with that? I know I'm defending Mr Raab C. Nesbit, but his excuse is perfectly possible in principle. Algae, jellyfish, or he forgot his money to pay for the gate to the beach.
A talented player, and by all accounts a lovely person - which is probably his downfall. The best strikers have a decent dose of shithousery about them (Shearer, Drogba, etc.)
He didn't look such a lovely person when he punched the side of the players' shelter in after the match.
Also, your premise that good strikers need to be nasty is flawed. Lineker, Klinsmann, Rashford, Kane, for example are not noted for their nastiness.
Hmm... Klinsmann definitely played with a wee devil on his shoulder (causing him to trip often).
Kane for England is dropping deeper and creating more. He's not scoring goals. Lineker was a poacher, not an all-in wrecking ball striker.
Yes, I'm clutching at straws.
Rashford's a social campaigner who plays football in his spare time?
A talented player, and by all accounts a lovely person - which is probably his downfall. The best strikers have a decent dose of shithousery about them (Shearer, Drogba, etc.)
He didn't look such a lovely person when he punched the side of the players' shelter in after the match.
Also, your premise that good strikers need to be nasty is flawed. Lineker, Klinsmann, Rashford, Kane, for example are not noted for their nastiness.
Hmm... Klinsmann definitely played with a wee devil on his shoulder (causing him to trip often).
Kane for England is dropping deeper and creating more. He's not scoring goals. Lineker was a poacher, not an all-in wrecking ball striker.
Yes, I'm clutching at straws.
Rashford's a social campaigner who plays football in his spare time?
No, no. Surely he's the solution to all of our problems.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
Someone creating a black hole in the lab and dropping the vacuum flask on the floor?
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
O/T Trying to renew my 3 year Disabled Person's Railcard which has just expired.
Slightly pissed off that there was no extension despite the fact that the 3 year period of the last card included 2 years of covid.
Rather more pissed off by the fact that, having completed all the renewal details, uploaded a passport photo (new requirement) and tried to pay, I get the message: "We’re sincerely sorry, it would appear that our systems have encountered an unexpected issue. If you would like to clear your basket and try again, please click on the link below."
Said 'link below' takes you round the same failure loop of course. Still at least they are 'sincerely sorry'.
I've got a Z name on my route that I obviously can't say
But in a roundabout way, they might have sons called James and John
I met Mrs Z the other day. She seemed delighted when I told her that Z was my favourite name on my whole route and laughed when I told her that I didn't know that Z was a real name before seeing her post. Then she told me all about where it was from, before I asked her
I'd never ask someone where they're really from
Unless I thought they were obviously taking the piss
O/T Trying to renew my 3 year Disabled Person's Railcard which has just expired.
Slightly pissed off that there was no extension despite the fact that the 3 year period of the last card included 2 years of covid.
Rather more pissed off by the fact that, having completed all the renewal details, uploaded a passport photo (new requirement) and tried to pay, I get the message: "We’re sincerely sorry, it would appear that our systems have encountered an unexpected issue. If you would like to clear your basket and try again, please click on the link below."
Said 'link below' takes you round the same failure loop of course. Still at least they are 'sincerely sorry'.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
IT'S NOT EXTRAORDINARY, you pathetic, navel-gazing fool!
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
When I was growing up -- I turned 79 in August -- offenses, ranging all the way from a minor insult to murder, were ranked in importance by American journalists roughly as follows:
1. white attacks white 2. black attacks white 3. white attacks black . . . 100. (approximately) black attacks black
Now the ranking is something like this:
1. white attacks black . . . 5. (aproximately) white attacks white . . . 10. (aproximately) black attacks white . . . 100. (approximately) black attacks black
That last ranking has always struck me as racist, though now it is more often of the "liberal" or "leftist" variety, what George W. Bush called the "soft bigotry of low expectations".
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
IT'S NOT EXTRAORDINARY, you pathetic, navel-gazing fool!
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
Leon likes drama, but isn't also the case that some periods are more eventful than others, though ? The late '90s seemed much quieter than now, for instance, at least in Western Europe and U.S.
O/T Trying to renew my 3 year Disabled Person's Railcard which has just expired.
Slightly pissed off that there was no extension despite the fact that the 3 year period of the last card included 2 years of covid.
Rather more pissed off by the fact that, having completed all the renewal details, uploaded a passport photo (new requirement) and tried to pay, I get the message: "We’re sincerely sorry, it would appear that our systems have encountered an unexpected issue. If you would like to clear your basket and try again, please click on the link below."
Said 'link below' takes you round the same failure loop of course. Still at least they are 'sincerely sorry'.
Rant over, thanks - that feels better.
Had that with our two together railcard.
Went to station and renewed it there.
You and your train spotting wing man, travelling the rails together.
Initial thoughts: my god. It’s phenomenal. It is going to put about 200 million people out of a job. And this is before lunch
It is also potentially a Google killer. It will do all your net searching for you
chat.openai.com was down when I visited.
If I get a chance to chat with it, I will ask it why it doesn't f*** off. I'll report back on its reply. A simple enough question for such a complicated machine.
The statement by Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO, was embarrassingly juvenile and programmery. This is what he wrote:
"language interfaces are going to be a big deal, i think. talk to the computer (voice or text) and get what you want, for increasingly complex definitions of "want"!"
But yes, further leaps in tech-mediated mass deskilling - both intellectual and emotional - are planned.
AI has the potential to solve the worst human problems. Yet it will bring many more - including vast amounts of unemployment, esp in bourgeois jobs
I very tentatively welcome it, with grave reservations
This chatbot reminds me of early DALL-E. it’s on a leash, it’s repetitive and restricted. But you can sense the power. Within a year of DALL-E we had Stable Diffusion and Midjourney
All technological innovations have brought the threat of vast unemployment. When farming mechanised, what were all the farm labourers to do? And yet we don't see armies of unemployed yokels still mooching sadly around the countryside. What will those replaced by AI do? I dunno. It could cause some pain in the short term, particularly given the speed of change AI could bring, But I'm fairly confident humanity will adapt and, importantly, find higher value uses of its time.
That's all very well if you think AI won't be capable of outperforming the average human being at most economically useful tasks. That's been the case up to now, but I don't see any reason to think it will continue to be the case.
Well it's getting there. Look at self service tills.
Customers doing for free what staff were previously paid to do.
I bet you'd have said the same thing when the first Piggly Wiggly opened.
Thing is, give me a hand held scanner to use as I pick the stuff off the shelves and I can scan better than an employee sitting behind a checkout. Just like then, the innovation is better for the customer.
There is clearly a demand for a 'full service' supermarket. See the popularity of click & collect and home delivery.
Sure. And now we have the full range of options. You use what works best for you, and I won't suggest anyone takes it away from you. I'll use what works best for me.
Proof is in the pudding. In my local supermarket I'd say now the vast majority of customers choose the self checkout while very few, predominantly elderly, customers use staffed checkouts.
Let people have a choice.
Proof OF pudding is IN eating.
Yes and in order to eat it, you need to go into the pudding, I'd like to know how you eat a pudding without either biting into it, or putting a utensil into it, which is why the proof is in the pudding.
The expression the proof is in the pudding dates back to the 19th century.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
IT'S NOT EXTRAORDINARY, you pathetic, navel-gazing fool!
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
Leon likes drama, but isn't also the case that some periods are more eventful than others, though ? The late '90s seemed much quieter than now, for instance, at least in Western Europe and U.S,
Oh indeed, but we had Gulf War 1, and in 1995 we had Yeltsin grasping the nuclear briefcasebecause his own people mucked up over a Norwegian rocket launch. The Norwegians did everything correctly and reported the launch to the Russians, but the Russian authorities did not tell their radar people, who told Yeltsin a nuclear attack might be on the way. The last occasion we were really on the brink of nuclear war, whatever Leon says.
We live in busy times, but they are not unprecedented.
And the Internet changed a great deal of life in the 1990s as well.
I've got a Z name on my route that I obviously can't say
But in a roundabout way, they might have sons called James and John
I met Mrs Z the other day. She seemed delighted when I told her that Z was my favourite name on my whole route and laughed when I told her that I didn't know that Z was a real name before seeing her post. Then she told me all about where it was from, before I asked her
I'd never ask someone where they're really from
Unless I thought they were obviously taking the piss
No but you are not a million years old
Bored of this topic now but the last thing to say is how ridiculous twitter is piling on the RF and saying it shows Meghan was right all along.
It's a reflection almost entirely on Charles stupidity and mismanagement. Old bat should have been put out to grass.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
IT'S NOT EXTRAORDINARY, you pathetic, navel-gazing fool!
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
Leon likes drama, but isn't also the case that some periods are more eventful than others, though ? The late '90s seemed much quieter than now, for instance, at least in Western Europe and U.S,
Oh indeed, but we had Gulf War 1, and in 1995 we had Yeltsin grasping the nuclear briefcasebecause his own people mucked up over a Norwegian rocket launch. The Norwegians did everything correctly and reported the launch to the Russians, but the Russian authorities did not tell their radar people, who told Yeltsin a nuclear attack might be on the way. The last occasion we were really on the brink of nuclear war, whatever Leon says.
We live in busy times, but they are not unprecedented.
And the Internet changed a great deal of life in the 1990s as well.
That's true, I remember a real sense of change around the 1999 era to do with the internet. The really strikingly quiet patch in the West was between about 1995 and 1999, I think. A lot was overconfidence no doubt, but it was all quite different from now.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
IT'S NOT EXTRAORDINARY, you pathetic, navel-gazing fool!
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
I mentor a young lad with poor literacy skills who is starting a landscaping business. He struggles to communicate with clients in a professional manner.
I created a GPT3-powered Gmail account to which he sends a message. It responds with the text to send to the client.
Leon is, again, threatening the end of the world as we know it.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
It's just the case that we are going through an extraordinary period in human history, when momentous events seem to arrive almost daily
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
IT'S NOT EXTRAORDINARY, you pathetic, navel-gazing fool!
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
Leon likes drama, but isn't also the case that some periods are more eventful than others, though ? The late '90s seemed much quieter than now, for instance, at least in Western Europe and U.S,
Oh indeed, but we had Gulf War 1, and in 1995 we had Yeltsin grasping the nuclear briefcasebecause his own people mucked up over a Norwegian rocket launch. The Norwegians did everything correctly and reported the launch to the Russians, but the Russian authorities did not tell their radar people, who told Yeltsin a nuclear attack might be on the way. The last occasion we were really on the brink of nuclear war, whatever Leon says.
We live in busy times, but they are not unprecedented.
And the Internet changed a great deal of life in the 1990s as well.
That's true, I remember a real sense of change around the 1999 era to do with the internet. The really strikingly quiet patch in the West was between about 1995 and 1999, I think. A lot was overconfidence no doubt, but it was all quite different from now.
On another issue: gay rights. I reckon the real sea change on homosexual rights occurred in the 1990s. Witness Edwina Currie's attempt to get the age of consent equalised in 1994. The process gained momentum in the 1990s. Or for another example, the (if you listened to some) world-ending ordination of female clergy to the CofE.
Some changes are fast and obvious; some are slow and go unnoticed. But some of the unnoticed one effect our lives just as much as the obvious ones.
Hindsight might give a rather different view on 2022 to Leon's doom-mongering. See China, or Iran, for just two potential examples.
Do we now have to introduce ourselves with name and heritage, to show that we're happy to discuss it?
Or would that be even more insidiously racist?
You mean "my preferred pronoun is mbongo".
Good lord, have we entered a time tunnel back to the Seventies?
A few people have gone a bit weird about this on here today, falling over themselves to defend a toff who did a racism, like the Apu/'weird nerds' Elon Musk meme. FWIW I think @BartholomewRoberts is pretty much spot on in his reading of it.
I think everyone has responded to the issue completely in line with where they stood on such things before this discussion. Nobody has convinced or been convinced either way.
I almost agree.
But a hat tip to @pillsbury who earlier today made the argument that not only was this not racist when it self evidently is, but that there is "no racism in the middle class" in this country. None at all.
That convinced me that they are not serious and not to engage any further so that's something.
Comments
Is there any other species on Earth, with specific gender roles, where a male decides to live the life of a female?
The harder question is- how to motivate students to prepare for exams? The joy of learning is a beautiful thing, but a lot of education has always been transactional. Study this to get that qualification opening the door over there.
If even the best academic essays have all the quality of my secondary school woodwork, we have a motivational problem for a lot of people.
Maybe we should get an AI to come up with some answers.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t1WJTwy8I7c
The money?
“When the stakes are this high, does it make more sense to hear our story from us?”
Maybe.
But a financial disclaimer might add to credibility.
I was thinking of something like, female lions hunt, while the males sit around waiting for dinner.
Does a male ever decide to join the hunt permanently?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-penis
https://www.veed.io/view/4ec5c7d8-4921-40da-83b9-4267c0b1631b?sharingWidget=true&panel=share
https://www.veed.io/view/82ed569b-c801-4358-b7c4-731fd6dad1ef?sharingWidget=true&panel=share
The original OpenAI blogpost about it is here https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/
Barty and apparently you are like dogs barking when the doorbell rings: stimulus to response, no cogitation required. How do you rate lady hussey against say the Stephen Lawrence murderers?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pfel/25856895210/in/faves-129813845@N08/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dikefalos/25324053299/
These two greek photographers used to have PRO attached to their name with details and a portfolio, but have since either given up or retired.
Me: No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality."
She is very patently of African heritage. Equally patently, proud of it.
What I find a little strange is why does she want to hide away from her Caribbean descendants? Is this some anger/shame at slavery roots that took her from Africa and needs to be obscured by not acknowledging where from the Caribbean her family moved?
As I am from a hundred generations of stout English yeoman, I have no experience whatsoever of this issue. Just trying to get an understanding of what the sensitivities are, so as not to fall foul of this issue myself.
Also, your premise that good strikers need to be nasty is flawed. Lineker, Klinsmann, Rashford, Kane, for example are not noted for their nastiness.
As an utter amateur, I got some nice shots that I would simply not have got on film, for cost reasons.
But there's all sorts of crabs and things that actually full on transition.
The one I've seen is adamantly pro-zoonosis - but I suspect depending on the question, you'll get the answer you're looking for.
Which is the other point about quite a large proportion of AI output - sorting the wheat from the considerable chaff is going to be a skill in need. Efficient connoisseurs might find gainful employment.
KANYE: I see good things about Hitler, also.
(just now on Infowars)
https://twitter.com/MarisaKabas/status/1598366271090921488
If you are pessimistically inclined, we are about to become weird pointless meat-blobs. Some are in despair. Here's a philosophy academic at Boston Uni. You'd think he would be more philosophical, but no
"The thought that I could be carefully grading & commenting on a paper written by a computer is almost unspeakably demoralizing. It goes beyond the idea that it’s merely an utterly futile waste of time to something much deeper that I can’t yet put in words."
https://twitter.com/DavidDecosimo/status/1598310295881060353?s=20&t=4SiW1rEhKs5LzRY7e_dt7w
In any case, when they change sex they change sex. Not gender.. No human changes sex
With all the Raab stuff I get the impression he would be frustrating to work for and he's probably an arsehole, but I'm not seeing the sort of thing that would sink him.
To answer your disingenuous question with a straight bat, fairly obviously the Stephen Lawrence murderers committed a far, far worse act.
The institutional ignorance/disregard shown by LH is sympomatic of a *similar* (not the same) culture that caused the Met to do such a horrific job of bungling the Lawrence case. In the grand scheme of things, the Met's incompetence and institutional prejudices are many, many times worse than LH and what her actions may say about the institution she represents.
But ultimately that's whataboutery. It doesn't mean it's not notable.
... One area where the British Army at present appears particularly strong is in its maintaining large training establishments disproportionate to the size of the force. The British Army maintains dedicated training schools for many of its military specialisms, which all require permanent staff and instructors. As demonstrated by the large-scale training to Ukrainian troops – carried out in parallel to the ongoing training of British forces – there is considerable slack capacity in this system. While this is a disproportionate cost on a small army in peacetime, its importance during any major conflict should not be underappreciated. Even assuming that British forces remain highly survivable, the rate of injury combined with the very small overall size of the British armed forces must see troop levels in frontline units decline in any major war.
The UK must therefore be able to train a second echelon...
We’re witnessing the death of the college essay in realtime. Here’s the response to a prompt from one of my 200-level history classes at Amherst
Solid A- work in 10 seconds"
https://twitter.com/corry_wang/status/1598176074604507136?s=20&t=Wt7UObYmKyfSOCOAvzqeTA
Kane for England is dropping deeper and creating more. He's not scoring goals. Lineker was a poacher, not an all-in wrecking ball striker.
Yes, I'm clutching at straws.
We also need to think what knowledge needs to be learnt and what not. When you can Google the whole of human knowledge, why learn stuff? And yet can you trust what you Google? I would suggest you need to consider your sources carefully.
Examinations perhaps need to be more about the application of knowledge, not regurgitating facts. It’s not easy. My first year unit is easy to set questions for that require understanding. My third year cancer unit less so, as much of what is taught is facts about how current treatments work. Do pharmacists need to know this? Juries out, although someone in the medical system ought to, and it won’t be the medics.
Ultimately the ability to find, interpret and use information is the skills people need.
And as for gender change but not sex, look at salmonid fishes.
Maybe a bit more Borges's Library of Babel. And he would've been fascinated by this stuff.
And next year will be GPT5 (if they can find enough data to feed it). Ooof
I'm liking our chances. I think we have 2 great performances in us from here and we'll need to use one to get by France in the quarters. This will leave one for either the semi or the final, meaning we'll have to win one of those with just a good solid performance (as against Wales). Plus the breaks of course. You can't win a WC without the breaks. We're going to need things to fall our way in one or two crucial moments in one or two of the knockout games, both regulation play and if necessary in the pens.
The key England game so far imo was against the USA. That 0/0 draw to skilled readers of international tournament football was perfect. The middle group game, having won the 1st, is 'mustn't lose' not 'must win' and we did exactly what was required. Conserved energy, turned the temp down, took no risks, kept a clean sheet, trousered the draw to ensure progression and provide the platform for the rest of the tournament. It also had the useful side benefit of lowering public expectations, which might have run riot with another 6/2 nonsense or similar.
Who knows from here, there are some very good teams apart from us, and Senegal up next are no joke, but I'm quite bullish. We are genuine contenders. Not even thinking about laying @ 11.
There is a limit to this, in that the Doctor has to be aware there is something that needs to be looked up. A hinterland of facts is needed for application to be effective.
We thought we could switch easily to online exams, but in reality it’s caused no end of problems. We have a cohort of students who have been found to have colluded in answers on one of the exams, likely because they live together and did the exam in the same room. Many have been forced to retake the year, at huge cost.
Does it actually mean noticing that someone is of a different race and then having that affect one's behaviour in any way?
I mentor a young lad with poor literacy skills who is starting a landscaping business. He struggles to communicate with clients in a professional manner.
I created a GPT3-powered Gmail account to which he sends a message. It responds with the text to send to the client.
https://twitter.com/DannyRichman/status/1598254671591723008
When I was being treated for leukaemia I was able to read and understand the papers relating to my condition, the studies suggesting the best regime etc. I can do that because of my scientific training and experience. Less easy for a someone, however bright, without the basics of medical and pharmacological knowledge.
GPT3.5 generates a new essay every time. Phrased differently, and articulately, and not obviously scraped from one site on the Net
I predict they will have a certain "sameness" tho, like some AI art. At least at first
BUT I think said lady is also strongly inhabit her heritage, indeed did so on the day, so you can see the confusion.
I suspect she has form and it certainly makes Megan's accusations look more plausible.
A few months ago it was nuclear annihilation. Now it's the end of all jobs.
I reckon the thing that will end the world is the thing that Leon doesn't talk about. There must be one thing? Meteorite strike? Carrington Event? Vacuum decay?
One thing's clear, we should all be in PANIC MODE!!!!
In reality he's just a front for some money.
Did we suffer a once in a century global plague, with 20m dead? Yes
Have we come horribly close to nuclear war, the closest since the Cuban Missile Crisis if not WW2? Again, yes
Has AI advanced at frightening speed these last two years, with the latest iterations sending people into despair for the future of their professions? Yep
Slightly pissed off that there was no extension despite the fact that the 3 year period of the last card included 2 years of covid.
Rather more pissed off by the fact that, having completed all the renewal details, uploaded a passport photo (new requirement) and tried to pay, I get the message: "We’re sincerely sorry, it would appear that our systems have encountered an unexpected issue. If you would like to clear your basket and try again, please click on the link below."
Said 'link below' takes you round the same failure loop of course. Still at least they are 'sincerely sorry'.
Rant over, thanks - that feels better.
But in a roundabout way, they might have sons called James and John
I met Mrs Z the other day. She seemed delighted when I told her that Z was my favourite name on my whole route and laughed when I told her that I didn't know that Z was a real name before seeing her post. Then she told me all about where it was from, before I asked her
I'd never ask someone where they're really from
Unless I thought they were obviously taking the piss
Went to station and renewed it there.
A little over a century ago, we had an unprecedented world war. Followed by a plague that killed 25-50 million. At a time when cars were a couple of decades old, and planes little over one decade.
My great-grandfather lived from roughly the 1870s to the 1960s. Just think of the way the world changed in all that time: cars, planes, space travel, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, world wars, telephony... the list is nearly endless. Hos world changed beyond recognition, but he, and his children, adapted and coped.
Your world-ending misery is just pathetic. We shall survive, however much you prefer to think of everything ending. You may be a hopeless depressive with a brainless desire for the dramatic, but life goes on.
1. white attacks white
2. black attacks white
3. white attacks black
.
.
.
100. (approximately) black attacks black
Now the ranking is something like this:
1. white attacks black
.
.
.
5. (aproximately) white attacks white
.
.
.
10. (aproximately) black attacks white
.
.
.
100. (approximately) black attacks black
That last ranking has always struck me as racist, though now it is more often of the "liberal" or "leftist" variety, what George W. Bush called the "soft bigotry of low expectations".
The expression the proof is in the pudding dates back to the 19th century.
We live in busy times, but they are not unprecedented.
And the Internet changed a great deal of life in the 1990s as well.
Bored of this topic now but the last thing to say is how ridiculous twitter is piling on the RF and saying it shows Meghan was right all along.
It's a reflection almost entirely on Charles stupidity and mismanagement. Old bat should have been put out to grass.
Some changes are fast and obvious; some are slow and go unnoticed. But some of the unnoticed one effect our lives just as much as the obvious ones.
Hindsight might give a rather different view on 2022 to Leon's doom-mongering. See China, or Iran, for just two potential examples.
But a hat tip to @pillsbury who earlier today made the argument that not only was this not racist when it self evidently is, but that there is "no racism in the middle class" in this country. None at all.
That convinced me that they are not serious and not to engage any further so that's something.
Leading the BBC News with a woman being slighted by a confused 84 year old no one has ever heard of is a keeper!
Thank God she didn't bump into Ali G!