“Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight. I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered. To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
Barton is awful, but the judge was a bit off on this. Calling someone a "bike nonce" is just a nastier way of saying "bike wanker". You could argue that nonce is such a bad allegation that it doesn't matter, but the "plain meaning" of "Piss off Jeremy, you bike nonce.", for example. is not "Jeremy Vine is a pedophile.". Which, IIRC is what the judge found.
He didn't just say that. He followed it up with other imputations of "defending" paedophiles which, in context, makes the first words defamatory. He made some shit up about Vine and vaccines too. Here's the judgment -
Key paras, especially para 45 which puts it in context, which cannot be faulted IMHO, are -
"43. The word “nonce” is a slang term in common use, currently. Its meaning may depend on the context in which it is used, but for persons of ordinary knowledge it is known and understood, primarily, to be synonymous with the word “paedophile”, and to indicate that the person who is labelled a “nonce” has a sexual interest in children.
44. The strong impression gained by the assertion the Claimant is known as (“aka”) “Bike Nonce”, followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as (again, “Aka”) “Pedo defender”, is that the term “nonce” was being used in its primary meaning to allege the Claimant has a sexual interest in children. While I do not consider that the hypothetical reader, who would read the post quickly and move on, would infer a causative link (i.e. that the Claimant defends paedophiles because he shares the same propensity), the juxtaposition of the words “Nonce” and “Pedo” is striking and would reinforce the impression that the former was used in the sense of “paedophile”. The reader would have understood that the word “Bike” was a meaningless aspect of the accusation, serving only as an indication that this was a label attached to the Claimant, who was known as a cyclist, without detracting from the operative word “nonce”.
45. I also agree with the Claimant that the reader would draw the meaning that the Claimant has a tendency or propensity to defend paedophiles. This is the impression gained from the assertion he is known as (“Aka”) a “Pedo defender”, and from the word “defender” which suggests this is something he actively engages in on an on-going basis. While the hypothetical reader would have drawn a connection between this allegation and the Claimant’s reference in the video clip to the Defendant’s “attack on Philip Schofield”, it would not have diluted the meaning gained from reading the post. First, there is nothing within the post that would give the reader the impression that this accusation was restricted to what the Claimant had said about Mr Schofield. Secondly, those he is said to have defended are clearly accused of being paedophiles. I agree with the Claimant that there is nothing capable of reducing the meaning to the level of suspicion."
The context is clear, I agree.
On 'nonce' it's worth noting however that among younger people, it's a synonym for idiot. A PhD student in our group got some odd looks one lunchtime when we were discussing some analysis and realising her mistake she said "I'm such a nonce!". After those of us aged about 30-35 or above said "I don't think that term means what you think it means" she explained that it means idiot and produced some examples on the web. We countered with the (likely apocryphal) "not on normal courtyard exercises" derivation and she was a bit shocked.
But here, as you say, the context and other uses clarify the meaning.
Nonce is a term used in cryptography, but I'd come across the more insulting meaning much earlier.
True. Maybe he meant Vine is a binary interface key exchange nonce? Still false, but is it defamatory?
What is the fecking point of that? What does it mean? Why say it now? What's the relevance, today? It's like he is someone almost brain dead who is being zapped with 3000 volts so they will just say anything, then relapse into a coma. It's.......... truly weird
I honestly wonder if his social media account is run by a bunch of giggling Labour moles
We've already done that.
Conclusion is he's prepping for a worse-than-WWII class cataclysm. (For his party, possibly.)
Go back to your constituencies and prepare to grow peas.
“Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight. I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered. To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
Barton is awful, but the judge was a bit off on this. Calling someone a "bike nonce" is just a nastier way of saying "bike wanker". You could argue that nonce is such a bad allegation that it doesn't matter, but the "plain meaning" of "Piss off Jeremy, you bike nonce.", for example. is not "Jeremy Vine is a pedophile.". Which, IIRC is what the judge found.
He didn't just say that. He followed it up with other imputations of "defending" paedophiles which, in context, makes the first words defamatory. He made some shit up about Vine and vaccines too. Here's the judgment -
Key paras, especially para 45 which puts it in context, which cannot be faulted IMHO, are -
"43. The word “nonce” is a slang term in common use, currently. Its meaning may depend on the context in which it is used, but for persons of ordinary knowledge it is known and understood, primarily, to be synonymous with the word “paedophile”, and to indicate that the person who is labelled a “nonce” has a sexual interest in children.
44. The strong impression gained by the assertion the Claimant is known as (“aka”) “Bike Nonce”, followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as (again, “Aka”) “Pedo defender”, is that the term “nonce” was being used in its primary meaning to allege the Claimant has a sexual interest in children. While I do not consider that the hypothetical reader, who would read the post quickly and move on, would infer a causative link (i.e. that the Claimant defends paedophiles because he shares the same propensity), the juxtaposition of the words “Nonce” and “Pedo” is striking and would reinforce the impression that the former was used in the sense of “paedophile”. The reader would have understood that the word “Bike” was a meaningless aspect of the accusation, serving only as an indication that this was a label attached to the Claimant, who was known as a cyclist, without detracting from the operative word “nonce”.
45. I also agree with the Claimant that the reader would draw the meaning that the Claimant has a tendency or propensity to defend paedophiles. This is the impression gained from the assertion he is known as (“Aka”) a “Pedo defender”, and from the word “defender” which suggests this is something he actively engages in on an on-going basis. While the hypothetical reader would have drawn a connection between this allegation and the Claimant’s reference in the video clip to the Defendant’s “attack on Philip Schofield”, it would not have diluted the meaning gained from reading the post. First, there is nothing within the post that would give the reader the impression that this accusation was restricted to what the Claimant had said about Mr Schofield. Secondly, those he is said to have defended are clearly accused of being paedophiles. I agree with the Claimant that there is nothing capable of reducing the meaning to the level of suspicion."
The context is clear, I agree.
On 'nonce' it's worth noting however that among younger people, it's a synonym for idiot. A PhD student in our group got some odd looks one lunchtime when we were discussing some analysis and realising her mistake she said "I'm such a nonce!". After those of us aged about 30-35 or above said "I don't think that term means what you think it means" she explained that it means idiot and produced some examples on the web. We countered with the (likely apocryphal) "not on normal courtyard exercises" derivation and she was a bit shocked.
But here, as you say, the context and other uses clarify the meaning.
Similarly: an Australian family member recently expressed horror when senior in-laws told her that the word 'knackered' specifically meant 'exhausted from sexual exertion' and that 'buggered' meant, well, buggered. In Australia both mean tired. She had been cheerfully using both in slightly too formal situations. Although for those of us under 60 'knackered' was a coarse though not vulgar expression without necessarily any sexual connotations.
You urgently need to introduce her to phrases such as "this computer is literally f*cked".
McDonald's is removing artificial intelligence (AI) powered ordering technology from its drive-through restaurants in the US, after customers shared its comical mishaps online.
A trial of the system - which uses voice recognition software to process orders - was announced in 2019.
It has not proved entirely reliable however - resulting in viral videos of bizarre misinterpreted orders. ranging from bacon-topped ice cream to hundreds of dollars worth of chicken nuggets.
McDonald's told franchisees it would remove the tech from the more than 100 restaurants it’s been testing it in by the end of July, according to a trade publication, external.
This is why I find Leon’s paranoia about AI so pointless, the current version of AI is in many sectors a complete dead-end because until it knows when it is hallucinating it can’t be trusted
AI is good at doing boring things. There's a ton of useful development happening now of tedious tasks that humans can't do at the same scale because they can't be everywhere at once.
AI is not on the whole good at doing interesting things. People are interested in interesting things obviously. Hence the AI hype and disconnect.
Yes. My mother's death was due, in part, to a misreading of a chest X-ray by an inexperienced and desperately overworked radiographer. In areas like this - boring tasks that, nevertheless, require skilled interpretation and in which 100% accuracy is impossible - AI could make a very valuable contribution.
Condolences on your loss. My colleague was working with a company on an AI system in this area. There’s still a requirement for all X-rays to be examined by a human, but an AI can prioritise cases before a human has had a chance to look at them, and provide a second opinion. In some medical imaging areas (cervical cancer screening, retinopathy screening), we’re moving to some images only ever being seen by the AI.
McDonald's is removing artificial intelligence (AI) powered ordering technology from its drive-through restaurants in the US, after customers shared its comical mishaps online.
A trial of the system - which uses voice recognition software to process orders - was announced in 2019.
It has not proved entirely reliable however - resulting in viral videos of bizarre misinterpreted orders. ranging from bacon-topped ice cream to hundreds of dollars worth of chicken nuggets.
McDonald's told franchisees it would remove the tech from the more than 100 restaurants it’s been testing it in by the end of July, according to a trade publication, external.
This is why I find Leon’s paranoia about AI so pointless, the current version of AI is in many sectors a complete dead-end because until it knows when it is hallucinating it can’t be trusted
Just like Leon.
I am not allowed to to talk on certain topics, but rest assured If I was allowed, these same debates would take a very different turn
But I will obey the rules, and stay shtum, but do not read it as acquiescence
Indeed, I would like to make a request of @TheScreamingEagles and @rcs1000 - I have agreed not to talk about this subject, as you asked, and I will stick to that. But could you therefore ask people not to address me by name or tag me into these debates, as it is quite unfair that I am then unable to respond
Thankyou
If you had thought about it for even just a moment, you would have realised that my post wasn’t about AI, at all.
I find that, in general, even "just a moment" spent thinking about your comments leaves me with time to spare, as half a moment is enough to exhaust any wit or insight therein
“Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight. I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered. To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
Barton is awful, but the judge was a bit off on this. Calling someone a "bike nonce" is just a nastier way of saying "bike wanker". You could argue that nonce is such a bad allegation that it doesn't matter, but the "plain meaning" of "Piss off Jeremy, you bike nonce.", for example. is not "Jeremy Vine is a pedophile.". Which, IIRC is what the judge found.
He didn't just say that. He followed it up with other imputations of "defending" paedophiles which, in context, makes the first words defamatory. He made some shit up about Vine and vaccines too. Here's the judgment -
Key paras, especially para 45 which puts it in context, which cannot be faulted IMHO, are -
"43. The word “nonce” is a slang term in common use, currently. Its meaning may depend on the context in which it is used, but for persons of ordinary knowledge it is known and understood, primarily, to be synonymous with the word “paedophile”, and to indicate that the person who is labelled a “nonce” has a sexual interest in children.
44. The strong impression gained by the assertion the Claimant is known as (“aka”) “Bike Nonce”, followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as (again, “Aka”) “Pedo defender”, is that the term “nonce” was being used in its primary meaning to allege the Claimant has a sexual interest in children. While I do not consider that the hypothetical reader, who would read the post quickly and move on, would infer a causative link (i.e. that the Claimant defends paedophiles because he shares the same propensity), the juxtaposition of the words “Nonce” and “Pedo” is striking and would reinforce the impression that the former was used in the sense of “paedophile”. The reader would have understood that the word “Bike” was a meaningless aspect of the accusation, serving only as an indication that this was a label attached to the Claimant, who was known as a cyclist, without detracting from the operative word “nonce”.
45. I also agree with the Claimant that the reader would draw the meaning that the Claimant has a tendency or propensity to defend paedophiles. This is the impression gained from the assertion he is known as (“Aka”) a “Pedo defender”, and from the word “defender” which suggests this is something he actively engages in on an on-going basis. While the hypothetical reader would have drawn a connection between this allegation and the Claimant’s reference in the video clip to the Defendant’s “attack on Philip Schofield”, it would not have diluted the meaning gained from reading the post. First, there is nothing within the post that would give the reader the impression that this accusation was restricted to what the Claimant had said about Mr Schofield. Secondly, those he is said to have defended are clearly accused of being paedophiles. I agree with the Claimant that there is nothing capable of reducing the meaning to the level of suspicion."
The context is clear, I agree.
On 'nonce' it's worth noting however that among younger people, it's a synonym for idiot. A PhD student in our group got some odd looks one lunchtime when we were discussing some analysis and realising her mistake she said "I'm such a nonce!". After those of us aged about 30-35 or above said "I don't think that term means what you think it means" she explained that it means idiot and produced some examples on the web. We countered with the (likely apocryphal) "not on normal courtyard exercises" derivation and she was a bit shocked.
But here, as you say, the context and other uses clarify the meaning.
Nonce is a term used in cryptography, but I'd come across the more insulting meaning much earlier.
True. Maybe he meant Vine is a binary interface key exchange nonce? Still false, but is it defamatory?
It does suggest that Vine is only good for a single-use, which is a bit demeaning.
“Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight. I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered. To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
Barton is awful, but the judge was a bit off on this. Calling someone a "bike nonce" is just a nastier way of saying "bike wanker". You could argue that nonce is such a bad allegation that it doesn't matter, but the "plain meaning" of "Piss off Jeremy, you bike nonce.", for example. is not "Jeremy Vine is a pedophile.". Which, IIRC is what the judge found.
He didn't just say that. He followed it up with other imputations of "defending" paedophiles which, in context, makes the first words defamatory. He made some shit up about Vine and vaccines too. Here's the judgment -
Key paras, especially para 45 which puts it in context, which cannot be faulted IMHO, are -
"43. The word “nonce” is a slang term in common use, currently. Its meaning may depend on the context in which it is used, but for persons of ordinary knowledge it is known and understood, primarily, to be synonymous with the word “paedophile”, and to indicate that the person who is labelled a “nonce” has a sexual interest in children.
44. The strong impression gained by the assertion the Claimant is known as (“aka”) “Bike Nonce”, followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as (again, “Aka”) “Pedo defender”, is that the term “nonce” was being used in its primary meaning to allege the Claimant has a sexual interest in children. While I do not consider that the hypothetical reader, who would read the post quickly and move on, would infer a causative link (i.e. that the Claimant defends paedophiles because he shares the same propensity), the juxtaposition of the words “Nonce” and “Pedo” is striking and would reinforce the impression that the former was used in the sense of “paedophile”. The reader would have understood that the word “Bike” was a meaningless aspect of the accusation, serving only as an indication that this was a label attached to the Claimant, who was known as a cyclist, without detracting from the operative word “nonce”.
45. I also agree with the Claimant that the reader would draw the meaning that the Claimant has a tendency or propensity to defend paedophiles. This is the impression gained from the assertion he is known as (“Aka”) a “Pedo defender”, and from the word “defender” which suggests this is something he actively engages in on an on-going basis. While the hypothetical reader would have drawn a connection between this allegation and the Claimant’s reference in the video clip to the Defendant’s “attack on Philip Schofield”, it would not have diluted the meaning gained from reading the post. First, there is nothing within the post that would give the reader the impression that this accusation was restricted to what the Claimant had said about Mr Schofield. Secondly, those he is said to have defended are clearly accused of being paedophiles. I agree with the Claimant that there is nothing capable of reducing the meaning to the level of suspicion."
The context is clear, I agree.
On 'nonce' it's worth noting however that among younger people, it's a synonym for idiot. A PhD student in our group got some odd looks one lunchtime when we were discussing some analysis and realising her mistake she said "I'm such a nonce!". After those of us aged about 30-35 or above said "I don't think that term means what you think it means" she explained that it means idiot and produced some examples on the web. We countered with the (likely apocryphal) "not on normal courtyard exercises" derivation and she was a bit shocked.
But here, as you say, the context and other uses clarify the meaning.
Nonce is a term used in cryptography, but I'd come across the more insulting meaning much earlier.
True. Maybe he meant Vine is a binary interface key exchange nonce? Still false, but is it defamatory?
“Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight. I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered. To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
Barton is awful, but the judge was a bit off on this. Calling someone a "bike nonce" is just a nastier way of saying "bike wanker". You could argue that nonce is such a bad allegation that it doesn't matter, but the "plain meaning" of "Piss off Jeremy, you bike nonce.", for example. is not "Jeremy Vine is a pedophile.". Which, IIRC is what the judge found.
He didn't just say that. He followed it up with other imputations of "defending" paedophiles which, in context, makes the first words defamatory. He made some shit up about Vine and vaccines too. Here's the judgment -
Key paras, especially para 45 which puts it in context, which cannot be faulted IMHO, are -
"43. The word “nonce” is a slang term in common use, currently. Its meaning may depend on the context in which it is used, but for persons of ordinary knowledge it is known and understood, primarily, to be synonymous with the word “paedophile”, and to indicate that the person who is labelled a “nonce” has a sexual interest in children.
44. The strong impression gained by the assertion the Claimant is known as (“aka”) “Bike Nonce”, followed immediately by the further assertion that he is known as (again, “Aka”) “Pedo defender”, is that the term “nonce” was being used in its primary meaning to allege the Claimant has a sexual interest in children. While I do not consider that the hypothetical reader, who would read the post quickly and move on, would infer a causative link (i.e. that the Claimant defends paedophiles because he shares the same propensity), the juxtaposition of the words “Nonce” and “Pedo” is striking and would reinforce the impression that the former was used in the sense of “paedophile”. The reader would have understood that the word “Bike” was a meaningless aspect of the accusation, serving only as an indication that this was a label attached to the Claimant, who was known as a cyclist, without detracting from the operative word “nonce”.
45. I also agree with the Claimant that the reader would draw the meaning that the Claimant has a tendency or propensity to defend paedophiles. This is the impression gained from the assertion he is known as (“Aka”) a “Pedo defender”, and from the word “defender” which suggests this is something he actively engages in on an on-going basis. While the hypothetical reader would have drawn a connection between this allegation and the Claimant’s reference in the video clip to the Defendant’s “attack on Philip Schofield”, it would not have diluted the meaning gained from reading the post. First, there is nothing within the post that would give the reader the impression that this accusation was restricted to what the Claimant had said about Mr Schofield. Secondly, those he is said to have defended are clearly accused of being paedophiles. I agree with the Claimant that there is nothing capable of reducing the meaning to the level of suspicion."
The context is clear, I agree.
On 'nonce' it's worth noting however that among younger people, it's a synonym for idiot. A PhD student in our group got some odd looks one lunchtime when we were discussing some analysis and realising her mistake she said "I'm such a nonce!". After those of us aged about 30-35 or above said "I don't think that term means what you think it means" she explained that it means idiot and produced some examples on the web. We countered with the (likely apocryphal) "not on normal courtyard exercises" derivation and she was a bit shocked.
But here, as you say, the context and other uses clarify the meaning.
Similarly: an Australian family member recently expressed horror when senior in-laws told her that the word 'knackered' specifically meant 'exhausted from sexual exertion' and that 'buggered' meant, well, buggered. In Australia both mean tired. She had been cheerfully using both in slightly too formal situations. Although for those of us under 60 'knackered' was a coarse though not vulgar expression without necessarily any sexual connotations.
I thought knackered came from the knackers yard, where old or injured horses are slaughtered?
McDonald's is removing artificial intelligence (AI) powered ordering technology from its drive-through restaurants in the US, after customers shared its comical mishaps online.
A trial of the system - which uses voice recognition software to process orders - was announced in 2019.
It has not proved entirely reliable however - resulting in viral videos of bizarre misinterpreted orders. ranging from bacon-topped ice cream to hundreds of dollars worth of chicken nuggets.
McDonald's told franchisees it would remove the tech from the more than 100 restaurants it’s been testing it in by the end of July, according to a trade publication, external.
This is why I find Leon’s paranoia about AI so pointless, the current version of AI is in many sectors a complete dead-end because until it knows when it is hallucinating it can’t be trusted
Just like Leon.
I am not allowed to to talk on certain topics, but rest assured If I was allowed, these same debates would take a very different turn
But I will obey the rules, and stay shtum, but do not read it as acquiescence
Indeed, I would like to make a request of @TheScreamingEagles and @rcs1000 - I have agreed not to talk about this subject, as you asked, and I will stick to that. But could you therefore ask people not to address me by name or tag me into these debates, as it is quite unfair that I am then unable to respond
Thankyou
If you had thought about it for even just a moment, you would have realised that my post wasn’t about AI, at all.
I find that, in general, even "just a moment" spent thinking about your comments leaves me with time to spare, as half a moment is enough to exhaust any wit or insight therein
You’ve either been drinking or are off colour; that was pitiful.
And there is a political point. One of Biden's problems is that Democrats in places like LA have not always been good on issues such as crime. For more, see Nicholas Kristof's column, in the Sunday NYT.
(Kristof is one of the last remaining "bleeding heart" liberals, who were once common in the US, especially among Democrats. They have been replaced by harder, more cynical types.)
So, this was billed as an hour-long. Anonymous and to help etc. It had a running % on the taskbar beneath so you could track how far through the course you'd got. Run by Hemisphere.
Much of it initially was just good management stuff. Don't judge people by whether they have a firm handshake or not, or whether they make good eye contact. Don't organise social events that exclusively centre on alcohol etc. Listen carefully to context. Determine what questions are important in an interview or not. So far, so fair.
It then put up a 13 minute video on the history of Britain and black people in Britain. This is where it got really interesting as it was presented as an entirely factual "did you know?" education piece presented by a softly-spoken Scottish lady.
Started off with a big play on Cheddar Man's predicted dark skin colour as the earliest black Briton, where skin colour then became lighter over time due to subsquent migration and the lattitude. Then, it jumped to the Celts and how the Romans displaced the Celts, and how black people formed some of the guards on Hadrians Wall. Suggested the Roman Empire was very inclusive. After that it jumped to the Tudors and how a few black people were in the Royal Navy at the time. Not an issue at all.
It then went on to say "this all changed" with the start of the transatlantic slave trade. And how attitudes to black people then changed to being seen as commodities. It practically suggested racism was invented here. It only very briefly touched on abolition, and didn't mention at all the Royal Navy's role in suppressing the slave trade. It then moved on to how in WWI minorities were never promoted and then into Windrush. After that, it moved onto Stephen Lawrence and the Windrush Scandal. Much to my amazement it finished with a 2-minute clip (verbatim) of David Lammy's speech in the Commons to Amber Rudd on the Windrush Scandal. Pretty much the whole thing. Ends by saying he won the Parliamentarian of the Year award.
Since I couldn't complete the mandatory training without watching this video in full, I was required to do so. The % complete then inexplicably jumped from 28% to 90% (and I couldn't navigate back) the bit being missed supposedly about interview scenarios and dos and donts, which might actually have been half-useful. But I couldn't get back to it. So I finished the course. And then I gave my feedback, which was not at all positive on the "history" video as I felt it was highly partial in both its selection and presentation of facts and how it framed them as truth. The end bit was nakedly party political.
All done now. 2/10. Something about it suggested to me that even my employer thinks it's somehow about going through the motions. But I hope in years to come such training, if it really is needed, becomes depoliticised entirely because taking amateur crowbars to history like this won't stand up to much scrutiny, even in the medium-term, and risks a backlash.
*I should also add it strongly suggested that all of Britain's wealth was founded on the slave trade, framing the reparations argument.
Well, it was (your last paragraph) because it was the foundation of foreign trade. You go from exporting a bit of wool to slaves themselves and sugar and rum and coffee and cotton and made cotton goods and stuff all in one go. The National Trust gets a lot of stick but I bet 9 houses out of 10 they control has a splendid new West Wing dating from spookily close to the date of abolition and reparations.
It was the industrial revolution which was a function of energy, technology, trade and labour.
What really backfires is all the millions of Britons who worked very long and unsafe hours in the dark satanic mills - who made that happen by actually manufacturing all the products - being told today they had white privilege.
Not only that but we have to pay reparations to their descendants. A few in labour active support this.
My family in the dim and distant past would have worked in these factories and although not slaves would have been exploited and led miserable,lives.
These absolute moronic halfwits that bring up these mentally deranged ideas on reparations for things that happened in the distant past should be put in public stocks and pelted with rotten vegetables for a very long time and then tarred and teathered and run out of town.
Would you say the same about Jewish people having art or other valuables returned to them from the German or Austrian states, or private individuals, that were lost due to the Holocaust? It's the same principle, just on a longer scale. There are clearly individuals and entire countries that have the wealth they have now due to a foundation that was built (even if only partly) on the unpaid labour of slaves. The descendants of those slaves do not have the benefit of that wealth; the descendants of those individuals and the citizens of those countries do. You can say that it is too long ago to matter now - and people like to hand wave the Roman Empire or the Vikings doing the same in history - but the thing is that slavery (and colonialization) is clearly still materially impacting those descended from those it affected even now. Hell, the island of Ireland only recently got over the population loss (via death and migration) of the Great Hunger!
It is mainly bollox unless very recent, ie any living person. Where do you stop at the stone age, there are no slaves still alive. Why the F**k should anyone have to pay because some knobhead did something 200 years ago. There is no correlation that those countries woudl ever have done anything to have any wealth, ie money has been poured into Africa by the billions for the whole of my life and has all been squandered and they live mainly in poverty still. Bleeding hearts like you would give all our money away so that we are all inpoverty , mental. You cannot change teh past and the whingers and snowflakes need to waken up smell teh coffee and get on with making their own way in life rather than trying to blame something from 200 years ago for their fecklessness and woes.
I mean we can take a single family - the Cumberbatches. The Cumberbatches are independently wealthy, and live very nice lives as actors, having benefited from private schooling and good education and wealthy living in the UK. The Cumberbatch family also made a lot of its wealth due to a family member owning slaves who did labour for him and he made profit. You can see the direct line of wealth and comfort and privilege through the lineage of one family. Indeed, Benedict's mother even told him not to do slave films because the issue of the family money and reparations will come up (instead Benedict felt the need to be in multiple films that dealt with slavery).
The thing is, there is another Cumberbatch family who can trace their lineage back to the same ancestor - because they were given that surname when that man bought them. They can look back to the point where the labour their ancestors did labour, for the profit of the Cumberbatch family, against their will. And they can trace how emancipation was followed by further oppression and how they could not escape a generational cycle of poverty due to racism and the fact that emancipation didn't come with an acre and a mule, or any reparations to speak of.
So yeah, actually, we can show direct impact on literal individuals and families when it comes to slavery. And if you scale that up to the macro you get the impact on countries. It's not hard.
Cumberbatch is a very common surname in Barbados. You can still see the vast Drax Hall plantation too, owned by a Conservative MP who still bears the name. History is all around you if you're willing to look.
I see Royal Ascot is this week, someone should do a straw poll, if the Tories can't even win with that crowd we know they are facing meltdown!
Is it a particularly Tory constituency? The ratio of poshos to proles at Ascot is very low. Most people there are ordinary joes on the piss for a grand day out (less so on the Tuesday, granted, but for most of the week). I reckon it would vote broadly in line with the national profile.
McDonald's is removing artificial intelligence (AI) powered ordering technology from its drive-through restaurants in the US, after customers shared its comical mishaps online.
A trial of the system - which uses voice recognition software to process orders - was announced in 2019.
It has not proved entirely reliable however - resulting in viral videos of bizarre misinterpreted orders. ranging from bacon-topped ice cream to hundreds of dollars worth of chicken nuggets.
McDonald's told franchisees it would remove the tech from the more than 100 restaurants it’s been testing it in by the end of July, according to a trade publication, external.
This is why I find Leon’s paranoia about AI so pointless, the current version of AI is in many sectors a complete dead-end because until it knows when it is hallucinating it can’t be trusted
AI is good at doing boring things. There's a ton of useful development happening now of tedious tasks that humans can't do at the same scale because they can't be everywhere at once.
AI is not on the whole good at doing interesting things. People are interested in interesting things obviously. Hence the AI hype and disconnect.
Yes. My mother's death was due, in part, to a misreading of a chest X-ray by an inexperienced and desperately overworked radiographer. In areas like this - boring tasks that, nevertheless, require skilled interpretation and in which 100% accuracy is impossible - AI could make a very valuable contribution.
“Between 8 and 12 January 2024 I published 11 posts which accused Jeremy Vine of having a sexual interest in children, and created a hashtag which made the same allegations, which were viewed millions of times.
I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight. I also published posts during the same period in which I referred to Mr Vine having advocated forced vaccination during the Covid 19 pandemic, based upon a video clip of his TV programme.
I accept that he did not advocate this policy and that the video clip has been edited to give a misleading impression of what he was in fact saying.
I then taunted and abused Mr Vine for bringing a legal complaint against me. I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered. To resolve his claims against me in defamation and harassment, I have agreed to pay Mr Vine £75,000 in damages and his legal costs.”
Barton is awful, but the judge was a bit off on this. Calling someone a "bike nonce" is just a nastier way of saying "bike wanker". You could argue that nonce is such a bad allegation that it doesn't matter, but the "plain meaning" of "Piss off Jeremy, you bike nonce.", for example. is not "Jeremy Vine is a pedophile.". Which, IIRC is what the judge found.
If the judge was right then the BBC would have suspended Vine immediately. It would have been cheaper for Barton to deck Vine but this is 21st Century Britain where insulting the professional middle classes is far more serious than causing physical injury.
McDonald's is removing artificial intelligence (AI) powered ordering technology from its drive-through restaurants in the US, after customers shared its comical mishaps online.
A trial of the system - which uses voice recognition software to process orders - was announced in 2019.
It has not proved entirely reliable however - resulting in viral videos of bizarre misinterpreted orders. ranging from bacon-topped ice cream to hundreds of dollars worth of chicken nuggets.
McDonald's told franchisees it would remove the tech from the more than 100 restaurants it’s been testing it in by the end of July, according to a trade publication, external.
This is why I find Leon’s paranoia about AI so pointless, the current version of AI is in many sectors a complete dead-end because until it knows when it is hallucinating it can’t be trusted
AI is good at doing boring things. There's a ton of useful development happening now of tedious tasks that humans can't do at the same scale because they can't be everywhere at once.
AI is not on the whole good at doing interesting things. People are interested in interesting things obviously. Hence the AI hype and disconnect.
Yes. My mother's death was due, in part, to a misreading of a chest X-ray by an inexperienced and desperately overworked radiographer. In areas like this - boring tasks that, nevertheless, require skilled interpretation and in which 100% accuracy is impossible - AI could make a very valuable contribution.
Maybe, but an earlier AI hookup with America's top cancer hospitals was dropped, so...
So, this was billed as an hour-long. Anonymous and to help etc. It had a running % on the taskbar beneath so you could track how far through the course you'd got. Run by Hemisphere.
Much of it initially was just good management stuff. Don't judge people by whether they have a firm handshake or not, or whether they make good eye contact. Don't organise social events that exclusively centre on alcohol etc. Listen carefully to context. Determine what questions are important in an interview or not. So far, so fair.
It then put up a 13 minute video on the history of Britain and black people in Britain. This is where it got really interesting as it was presented as an entirely factual "did you know?" education piece presented by a softly-spoken Scottish lady.
Started off with a big play on Cheddar Man's predicted dark skin colour as the earliest black Briton, where skin colour then became lighter over time due to subsquent migration and the lattitude. Then, it jumped to the Celts and how the Romans displaced the Celts, and how black people formed some of the guards on Hadrians Wall. Suggested the Roman Empire was very inclusive. After that it jumped to the Tudors and how a few black people were in the Royal Navy at the time. Not an issue at all.
It then went on to say "this all changed" with the start of the transatlantic slave trade. And how attitudes to black people then changed to being seen as commodities. It practically suggested racism was invented here. It only very briefly touched on abolition, and didn't mention at all the Royal Navy's role in suppressing the slave trade. It then moved on to how in WWI minorities were never promoted and then into Windrush. After that, it moved onto Stephen Lawrence and the Windrush Scandal. Much to my amazement it finished with a 2-minute clip (verbatim) of David Lammy's speech in the Commons to Amber Rudd on the Windrush Scandal. Pretty much the whole thing. Ends by saying he won the Parliamentarian of the Year award.
Since I couldn't complete the mandatory training without watching this video in full, I was required to do so. The % complete then inexplicably jumped from 28% to 90% (and I couldn't navigate back) the bit being missed supposedly about interview scenarios and dos and donts, which might actually have been half-useful. But I couldn't get back to it. So I finished the course. And then I gave my feedback, which was not at all positive on the "history" video as I felt it was highly partial in both its selection and presentation of facts and how it framed them as truth. The end bit was nakedly party political.
All done now. 2/10. Something about it suggested to me that even my employer thinks it's somehow about going through the motions. But I hope in years to come such training, if it really is needed, becomes depoliticised entirely because taking amateur crowbars to history like this won't stand up to much scrutiny, even in the medium-term, and risks a backlash.
*I should also add it strongly suggested that all of Britain's wealth was founded on the slave trade, framing the reparations argument.
Well, it was (your last paragraph) because it was the foundation of foreign trade. You go from exporting a bit of wool to slaves themselves and sugar and rum and coffee and cotton and made cotton goods and stuff all in one go. The National Trust gets a lot of stick but I bet 9 houses out of 10 they control has a splendid new West Wing dating from spookily close to the date of abolition and reparations.
It was the industrial revolution which was a function of energy, technology, trade and labour.
What really backfires is all the millions of Britons who worked very long and unsafe hours in the dark satanic mills - who made that happen by actually manufacturing all the products - being told today they had white privilege.
Not only that but we have to pay reparations to their descendants. A few in labour active support this.
My family in the dim and distant past would have worked in these factories and although not slaves would have been exploited and led miserable,lives.
These absolute moronic halfwits that bring up these mentally deranged ideas on reparations for things that happened in the distant past should be put in public stocks and pelted with rotten vegetables for a very long time and then tarred and teathered and run out of town.
Would you say the same about Jewish people having art or other valuables returned to them from the German or Austrian states, or private individuals, that were lost due to the Holocaust? It's the same principle, just on a longer scale. There are clearly individuals and entire countries that have the wealth they have now due to a foundation that was built (even if only partly) on the unpaid labour of slaves. The descendants of those slaves do not have the benefit of that wealth; the descendants of those individuals and the citizens of those countries do. You can say that it is too long ago to matter now - and people like to hand wave the Roman Empire or the Vikings doing the same in history - but the thing is that slavery (and colonialization) is clearly still materially impacting those descended from those it affected even now. Hell, the island of Ireland only recently got over the population loss (via death and migration) of the Great Hunger!
It is mainly bollox unless very recent, ie any living person. Where do you stop at the stone age, there are no slaves still alive. Why the F**k should anyone have to pay because some knobhead did something 200 years ago. There is no correlation that those countries woudl ever have done anything to have any wealth, ie money has been poured into Africa by the billions for the whole of my life and has all been squandered and they live mainly in poverty still. Bleeding hearts like you would give all our money away so that we are all inpoverty , mental. You cannot change teh past and the whingers and snowflakes need to waken up smell teh coffee and get on with making their own way in life rather than trying to blame something from 200 years ago for their fecklessness and woes.
I mean we can take a single family - the Cumberbatches. The Cumberbatches are independently wealthy, and live very nice lives as actors, having benefited from private schooling and good education and wealthy living in the UK. The Cumberbatch family also made a lot of its wealth due to a family member owning slaves who did labour for him and he made profit. You can see the direct line of wealth and comfort and privilege through the lineage of one family. Indeed, Benedict's mother even told him not to do slave films because the issue of the family money and reparations will come up (instead Benedict felt the need to be in multiple films that dealt with slavery).
The thing is, there is another Cumberbatch family who can trace their lineage back to the same ancestor - because they were given that surname when that man bought them. They can look back to the point where the labour their ancestors did labour, for the profit of the Cumberbatch family, against their will. And they can trace how emancipation was followed by further oppression and how they could not escape a generational cycle of poverty due to racism and the fact that emancipation didn't come with an acre and a mule, or any reparations to speak of.
So yeah, actually, we can show direct impact on literal individuals and families when it comes to slavery. And if you scale that up to the macro you get the impact on countries. It's not hard.
Cumberbatch is a very common surname in Barbados. You can still see the vast Drax Hall plantation too, owned by a Conservative MP who still bears the name. History is all around you if you're willing to look.
Fortunately, Drax's space station is no more, destroyed by one of Britain's finest.
Thank God the UK is no longer chained to those sick men of Europe, France and Germany...
We should be kind and offer them a place in the United Kingdom. Five MPs each and then can keep their Parliaments and legal jurisdictions to a large degree. Seems fair.
I have long advocated swapping Scotland for Flanders. Scotland can re-enter the EU as part of Belgium and I am sure they will get on fine with the Walloons. We get the bit with most of the best beer.
You think Flanders would be stupid enough to tie itself to a deadbeat. Knowing they would be forced to drink Carling on it's own would be enough.
I'd like to see the SNP below 10 seats come the election. But we'll see how it goes.
You will be well disappointed. I woudl like to see ZERO unionist seats in Scotland but will also be disappointed as the morons will vote for the same shit Westminster goons due to stupidity
I know you don't like the unionist parties but I thought you had no love lost for the SNP too nowadays?
Are you back on board with the SNP under Swinney? Or is Alba more your vibe?
No chance, Swinney is one of the biggest rats in the nest. No way I will vote SNP whilst teh current bunch of shysters are in control. I have only Alba or ISP as the only real Independence parties left and so looks likely that I will have no-one to vote for this time.
Comments
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/literally
I'm literally wrong to correct him then?
NEW THREAD
source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/06/18/secret-service-agent-robbed-biden-los-angeles/
And there is a political point. One of Biden's problems is that Democrats in places like LA have not always been good on issues such as crime. For more, see Nicholas Kristof's column, in the Sunday NYT.
(Kristof is one of the last remaining "bleeding heart" liberals, who were once common in the US, especially among Democrats. They have been replaced by harder, more cynical types.)
https://jamesbond.fandom.com/wiki/Drax's_Space_Station
Labour: 43% (+1)
Conservative: 21% (-3)
Reform UK: 16% (+1)
Liberal Democrats: 10% (+1)
Green: 5% (-)
Fieldwork conducted 14–17 June
2,604 respondents (GB)
They are so utterly fucked 42 polls since a like for like increase
https://x.com/focaldataHQ/status/1803059872390353022?s=19