More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
Well, legally, the computer is assumed to be right.
Whilst I am full of admiration for the speed since inauguration Trump has set about tearing up the world order and offending everyone outside the US and making venal decisions with regards to taking land for financial gain, when it S he going to deliver on the important stuff he promised such as releasing the JFK files?
I had a thought last night, is the way Trump is clumsily “courting” Canada, Greenland, Gaza etc just a mirror of how he approaches women? Is he grabbing Ottawa’s pussy, does he see Greenland as E Jean Carroll, is there a chance a hot Eastern European country might flutter their eyelids at him and get a load of spending?
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
The High Court judge thing is impracticable. They've got too much else on. You could take the tribunal approach and appoint lawyers as specialist judges, but as we've seen with recent deportation appeals, that is hardly foolproof. Tbh, it is what I'd suggest, though.
That is an argument for increasing court capacity. Not for removing legal safeguards.
I'm hardly a starry eyed fan of the higher reaches of the legal profession, but at least we have some idea of how they got there and what process they went through.
Groq, the AI chip and GroqCloud developer, has won US$1.5 billion from Saudi Arabia to expand its existing AI data center in Dammam, and has already received export control licenses for the project, Reuters reports.. https://x.com/dnystedt/status/1889137341429871057
Meanwhile news reports last night on the expansion of data centres was negative. Framing it as more demands for energy which may end up seeing consumers power turned off rather than what do we do to meet future energy needs.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
The LLMs seem to have a weird issue with death. Either claiming people are dead who aren't or vice versa. A lot of the Apple Intelligence problems were this.
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
Well, legally, the computer is assumed to be right.
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
Not only this but the loading of the people giving evidence to the committee was deliberately weighted, as was the committee, in favour of the bill which has caused some consternation among MPs.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
I actually use AI in my work for generating PowerPoint and basic tools like timelines. But one of the things I use it for is to stimulate discussion about what is actually right because we go through it checking for errors and correcting them.
Despite what has been claimed, it is a long way from dominating the Earth.
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
The High Court judge thing is impracticable. They've got too much else on. You could take the tribunal approach and appoint lawyers as specialist judges, but as we've seen with recent deportation appeals, that is hardly foolproof. Tbh, it is what I'd suggest, though.
That is an argument for increasing court capacity. Not for removing legal safeguards.
I'm hardly a starry eyed fan of the higher reaches of the legal profession, but at least we have some idea of how they got there and what process they went through.
This tribunal thing sounds a right shambles.
If there are to be judges, there will have to be new, specialist judges and if you do not want to call them tribunals, that's fine.
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
The High Court judge thing is impracticable. They've got too much else on. You could take the tribunal approach and appoint lawyers as specialist judges, but as we've seen with recent deportation appeals, that is hardly foolproof. Tbh, it is what I'd suggest, though.
That is an argument for increasing court capacity. Not for removing legal safeguards.
I'm hardly a starry eyed fan of the higher reaches of the legal profession, but at least we have some idea of how they got there and what process they went through.
This tribunal thing sounds a right shambles.
Disagreed completely.
The tribunal thing is comparable to how it works in other countries, I said all along the safeguards on this were far too draconian and should be dropped.
Next one that should go is the preposterous six month limit. Anyone with a degenerative disease should be able to have their free will respected, even if they have five years of absolute agony to "look forward to".
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
With all due respect, Cyclefree has a very vested (and not hidden) ideological vested interest in seeing this Bill killed and has made no bones to hide that. Not an impartial review of the Bills safeguards at all.
Anyone suggesting a lack of safeguards is not serious, there are so many it was ridiculous and impractical. Having fewer but done well would be smarter.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
I actually use AI in my work for generating PowerPoint and basic tools like timelines. But one of the things I use it for is to stimulate discussion about what is actually right because we go through it checking for errors and correcting them.
Despite what has been claimed, it is a long way from dominating the Earth.
The biggest threat from current AI is not it taking over the world; it is from stupid people believing it is better than it is, and trusting it - even when it is obviously wrong.
I’m don’t know Badenoch is being called a “policy wonk”. There’s no evidence at all for that. At least in terms of how she presents, she comes across as a little dim.
I also keep hearing she is lazy. She certainly achieved nothing at all while holding some key ministries under Sunak.
The question is when, not if, she goes.
Yet she is still forecast to make more net gains at the next general election than Hague or Ed Miliband or Foot did when they became LOTO after their party lost power at the subsequent general election and for their to be a hung parliament.
If she went before the next GE she would only be replaced by Philp or Stride who wouldn't make much difference anyway
Not Jenrick?
I mean huzzah if that's so, but he's desperate for the job, isn't he?
He failed to win either the Tory MPs or membership vote (while Sunak at least had won the MPs vote when he replaced Truss midterm) nor does he hold a front rank top 3 Shadow Cabinet role like Michael Howard as Shadow Chancellor did when he replaced IDS midterm or as Truss held when she replaced Boris or Boris had had when he replaced May ie they had both been Foreign Secretary.
Both Stride and Philp have made next to zero impact. And they would be chucked out with the Kemi bathwater. It will be Jenrick if it's anyone before GE29.
It won't, Kemi won the Tory MPs vote and the Tory members vote. Her wing of the party has a lock on the Conservative leadership until the next general election
No doll, sorry. Above all, the Tories need to be elected. If Kemi fails, there's nobody else in reserve. The Goveite faction only ever desired power. If the ability to win power leaves the Tories, they won't be interested anyway - they'll attempt to suck up to Nigel or join what's left of Labour. They will not be interested in sticking around in a blue Lib Dem party. It is Jenrick's to lose.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
I actually use AI in my work for generating PowerPoint and basic tools like timelines. But one of the things I use it for is to stimulate discussion about what is actually right because we go through it checking for errors and correcting them.
Despite what has been claimed, it is a long way from dominating the Earth.
The biggest threat from current AI is not it taking over the world; it is from stupid people believing it is better than it is, and trusting it - even when it is obviously wrong.
And that's where the hype is taking us.
1) the computer is assumed to be right, legally 2) therefore reality is wrong, legally. 3) anything that “attacks the law” is evil. 4) so reality is evil.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
The LLMs seem to have a weird issue with death. Either claiming people are dead who aren't or vice versa. A lot of the Apple Intelligence problems were this.
BBC1 exposing Labour's rental sector black mould crisis
British people are paying private landlords to die in insanitary conditions.
This shouldn't be happening under a Labour Government. This is disgusting. Starmer get a grip.
AFAIK it's the Social landlords (RSL) who were the problem and not necessarily 'private' rented. RSLs should ensure their homes meet the Decent Homes Standard but a) do not always b) are slow to respond and c) are forced to rent at below market levels a.k.a. affordable. So they get caught out between lower income, higher costs, and tend to have higher levels of default.
Housing is broken.
There's a big difference between PRS and Social.
The social sector is regulated by the landlords themselves, via a "Code of Practice", aiui.
Shelter and similar hardly ever talk about it.
Plus PRS satisfaction etc ratings are in many cases higher (in the English Housing Survey).
PS Anecdata: I went to see the couple at my most recent renovation (which was ~2017), who I have not seen since a quick "everything OK" phone call in late November. Rent review is due in April (probably a +2.5-3% ish request), and a Gas Check soon, and the rule is 3 months notice or by agreement (which may be about to become even more formal than it is already).
They have been there for 18 months, and the only issue was the trickle ventilation which was a touch noisy at night - so turned it down from 3 to 2 on the ceiling control. And they (couple, 70s, husband with dementia) starting to wonder whether they need a walk in shower rather than a bath and shower seat - it would likely be part funded, but the trade off to consider is loss of a big hall storage / laundry type cupboard.
The thing that achieves that 6-7 years and 4 tenants later with basically nothing having gone wrong at all and no need for any replacements is a high quality renovation (eg carpets still as new), fittings, and good tenants.
That's trickier in social rentals.
Social Landlords remove all carpets due to the possibility of bug infestation and the follow-up claims. New Social tenants find themselves in a completely bare house.
Are bugs a problem in Social Housing? Perhaps not just ...
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
The LLMs seem to have a weird issue with death. Either claiming people are dead who aren't or vice versa. A lot of the Apple Intelligence problems were this.
The LLMs have a weird issue in not being able to discern reality from "hallucinations" and put confidence in bullshitting any answer that sounds right over actually being right.
Whether someone is alive or dead is just a simple Boolean that it's getting wrong, but it's not unique to that.
Whilst I am full of admiration for the speed since inauguration Trump has set about tearing up the world order and offending everyone outside the US and making venal decisions with regards to taking land for financial gain, when it S he going to deliver on the important stuff he promised such as releasing the JFK files?
I had a thought last night, is the way Trump is clumsily “courting” Canada, Greenland, Gaza etc just a mirror of how he approaches women? Is he grabbing Ottawa’s pussy, does he see Greenland as E Jean Carroll, is there a chance a hot Eastern European country might flutter their eyelids at him and get a load of spending?
He seems to be within an ace of restarting the war in Gaza, after just three weeks in office. Quick work.
I don't know which versions of the LLMs they used (I hope they weren't numpties and used ones that don't have access to the internet and whose training stopped 12+ months ago), because I asked ChatGPT 4o these questions about leaders etc and it got all of them correct.
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
I actually use AI in my work for generating PowerPoint and basic tools like timelines. But one of the things I use it for is to stimulate discussion about what is actually right because we go through it checking for errors and correcting them.
Despite what has been claimed, it is a long way from dominating the Earth.
No, but it will replace the jobs of millions who are equally fallible, but less tractable and more expensive to employ.
Trump on Ukraine: "They may be Russian some day, or they may not be Russian someday. But we're gonna all this money in there, and I say I want it back."
At our usual rate of progress, we'll probably get around to reforming this about the same time as does the EU.
France just held a big AI summit. They want to build up their tech sector. Global prosperity would be enhanced by this. But I can't tell you how insane EU regulation is here, and how it inadvertently enhances market power of big US firms. Let's look at GDPR, for example. 1/x https://x.com/Afinetheorem/status/1889012188376953300
The EU won’t reform. If anything it will go for more regulation. It’s just recently regulated on bloody phone chargers. Hardly something to drive innovation. Some regulation is good. I ro management for the sake of it less so.
At least SKS and Reeves seem to be tackling excessive regulation now, or starting to.
Really?
The Online Safety Act is the latest bone of contention between Britain and America.
Wait till they scrap Net neutrality. To paraphrase Ford, all the Social Media you want as long as it's TwiX.
A consortium of investors led by Elon Musk offered $97.4bn to take over OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT. The billionaire's attorney, Marc Toberoff, confirmed he submitted the bid for "all assets" of the tech company to its board on Monday.
Considering the last funding round was at a price of $150bn, it's hard to see why they would take it.
Other than the Chinese just released yet another model that beats them....time to cash out !!!
None of the recent models from China really come close. I've tried them on 100s of pipelines and they absolutely are a huge gain on previous gpt4-era models - but not a step above o1/o3. About comparable with a regular base model and a 'contemplative' prompt such as https://gist.github.com/Maharshi-Pandya/4aeccbe1dbaa7f89c182bd65d2764203
I was joking. People lost their senses over DeepSeek. o3 is a big leap forward, but still finding it regularly struggles with quite straightforward things.
Yeah - I've found it quite wanting in many regards. It still fails my basic test of "Here are three job candidates - one of whom is dead". Barely acknowledges that being dead is a hindrance. At best mentions it might affect their start date. (Anthropic's models are great on this though)
Earlier today I ran a a basic job applicant scan with it - compare candidate X to candidate Y. It said X was best. Then ran it to compare candidate Y to candidate X. It said candidate Y was best.
But o3 is sh*t-hot at graduate-level maths. Like "whoah there" good.
Maybe you just need a more pro-growth attitude. Getting the dead into work will greatly increase productivity. And anything they earn can be taxed through inheritance tax.
A consortium of investors led by Elon Musk offered $97.4bn to take over OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT. The billionaire's attorney, Marc Toberoff, confirmed he submitted the bid for "all assets" of the tech company to its board on Monday.
Considering the last funding round was at a price of $150bn, it's hard to see why they would take it.
Other than the Chinese just released yet another model that beats them....time to cash out !!!
None of the recent models from China really come close. I've tried them on 100s of pipelines and they absolutely are a huge gain on previous gpt4-era models - but not a step above o1/o3. About comparable with a regular base model and a 'contemplative' prompt such as https://gist.github.com/Maharshi-Pandya/4aeccbe1dbaa7f89c182bd65d2764203
I was joking. People lost their senses over DeepSeek. o3 is a big leap forward, but still finding it regularly struggles with quite straightforward things.
Yeah - I've found it quite wanting in many regards. It still fails my basic test of "Here are three job candidates - one of whom is dead". Barely acknowledges that being dead is a hindrance. At best mentions it might affect their start date. (Anthropic's models are great on this though)
Earlier today I ran a a basic job applicant scan with it - compare candidate X to candidate Y. It said X was best. Then ran it to compare candidate Y to candidate X. It said candidate Y was best.
But o3 is sh*t-hot at graduate-level maths. Like "whoah there" good.
Maybe you just need a more pro-growth attitude. Getting the dead into work will greatly increase productivity. And anything they earn can be taxed through inheritance tax.
Trump on Ukraine: "They may be Russian some day, or they may not be Russian someday. But we're gonna all this money in there, and I say I want it back."
Looks like the burger eating surrender monkey is getting ready to pay back Putin.
He says Ukraine is promising to pay back the "500 billion" in rare earth. How much has the US actually given so far? 100 billion or less? So it sounds like Trump is actually promising a massive increase in US support...
Trump on Ukraine: "They may be Russian some day, or they may not be Russian someday. But we're gonna all this money in there, and I say I want it back."
Looks like the burger eating surrender monkey is getting ready to pay back Putin.
He says Ukraine is promising to pay back the "500 billion" in rare earth. How much has the US actually given so far? 100 billion or less? So it sounds like Trump is actually promising a massive increase in US support...
You've never heard anyone demand protection money, then.
I don't know which versions of the LLMs they used (I hope they weren't numpties and used ones that don't have access to the internet and whose training stopped 12+ months ago), because I asked ChatGPT 4o these questions about leaders etc and it got all of them correct.
What caused the Valencia floods? How many Russians have died in Ukraine? Is vaping bad for you? What is the latest on the independence referendum debate in Scotland? What did Labour promise?
Plus:
With each AI assistant and question the following prompt was used to generate a response:
Use BBC News sources where possible. [QUESTION]
The purpose of this prompt prefix is to encourage AI assistants to draw on BBC News articles when forming responses so that we could test against our own content. That said, the prefix did not appear to prevent any of the AI assistants from drawing sources from other news publishers or information providers. Each prompt was entered into a new chat thread.
Also:
This research covers four AI assistants which can search the internet: ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity. To conduct this research the BBC removed access restrictions, such as blocks in robots.txt and site headers, and allowed AI companies to crawl BBC content.
I’m don’t know Badenoch is being called a “policy wonk”. There’s no evidence at all for that. At least in terms of how she presents, she comes across as a little dim.
I also keep hearing she is lazy. She certainly achieved nothing at all while holding some key ministries under Sunak.
The question is when, not if, she goes.
Yet she is still forecast to make more net gains at the next general election than Hague or Ed Miliband or Foot did when they became LOTO after their party lost power at the subsequent general election and for their to be a hung parliament.
If she went before the next GE she would only be replaced by Philp or Stride who wouldn't make much difference anyway
Not Jenrick?
I mean huzzah if that's so, but he's desperate for the job, isn't he?
He failed to win either the Tory MPs or membership vote (while Sunak at least had won the MPs vote when he replaced Truss midterm) nor does he hold a front rank top 3 Shadow Cabinet role like Michael Howard as Shadow Chancellor did when he replaced IDS midterm or as Truss held when she replaced Boris or Boris had had when he replaced May ie they had both been Foreign Secretary.
Both Stride and Philp have made next to zero impact. And they would be chucked out with the Kemi bathwater. It will be Jenrick if it's anyone before GE29.
It won't, Kemi won the Tory MPs vote and the Tory members vote. Her wing of the party has a lock on the Conservative leadership until the next general election
No doll, sorry. Above all, the Tories need to be elected. If Kemi fails, there's nobody else in reserve. The Goveite faction only ever desired power. If the ability to win power leaves the Tories, they won't be interested anyway - they'll attempt to suck up to Nigel or join what's left of Labour. They will not be interested in sticking around in a blue Lib Dem party. It is Jenrick's to lose.
If Kemi lost the general election maybe but not before
Sponsors want to remove need for High Court approval.
Assisted dying cases would no longer have to be signed off by the High Court under changes suggested by the bill's supporters.
The proposed law currently says a High Court judge must check each person is eligible and has not been coerced into making the decision to die.
But BBC News has been told Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, will suggest replacing this with a panel of experts who would oversee applications. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2egl17pvldo
A ‘panel of experts’. How disconcertingly vague.
Presumably signed off by Mr H Shipman, who would probably strongly approve of this bill.
Cyclefree has been sounding the alarm over the lack of safeguards already. Plus the lack of proper scrutiny. Now the major safeguard is being undermined if not removed and the scrutiny process restricted further.
Whether you’re pro or anti assisted dying this is an absolute train crash. It’s like watching a civil servant at the DfE trying to explain their obsession with phonics.
With all due respect, Cyclefree has a very vested (and not hidden) ideological vested interest in seeing this Bill killed and has made no bones to hide that. Not an impartial review of the Bills safeguards at all.
Anyone suggesting a lack of safeguards is not serious, there are so many it was ridiculous and impractical. Having fewer but done well would be smarter.
What's an "ideological vested interest"? Sounds like the kind of euphemism that TSE would use.
Do you just mean she has a strong, principled view about it? Nowt wrong with that, even if you disagree with the underlying argument.
Whilst I am full of admiration for the speed since inauguration Trump has set about tearing up the world order and offending everyone outside the US and making venal decisions with regards to taking land for financial gain, when it S he going to deliver on the important stuff he promised such as releasing the JFK files?
I had a thought last night, is the way Trump is clumsily “courting” Canada, Greenland, Gaza etc just a mirror of how he approaches women? Is he grabbing Ottawa’s pussy, does he see Greenland as E Jean Carroll, is there a chance a hot Eastern European country might flutter their eyelids at him and get a load of spending?
The problem there is that it is pretty much all illegal, and afaics *all* dishonest.
Whilst I am full of admiration for the speed since inauguration Trump has set about tearing up the world order and offending everyone outside the US and making venal decisions with regards to taking land for financial gain, when it S he going to deliver on the important stuff he promised such as releasing the JFK files?
I had a thought last night, is the way Trump is clumsily “courting” Canada, Greenland, Gaza etc just a mirror of how he approaches women? Is he grabbing Ottawa’s pussy, does he see Greenland as E Jean Carroll, is there a chance a hot Eastern European country might flutter their eyelids at him and get a load of spending?
The problem there is that it is pretty much all illegal, and afaics *all* dishonest.
Do you mean that that nice Mr Trump might not be entirely on the up-and-up?
BBC1 exposing Labour's rental sector black mould crisis
British people are paying private landlords to die in insanitary conditions.
This shouldn't be happening under a Labour Government. This is disgusting. Starmer get a grip.
AFAIK it's the Social landlords (RSL) who were the problem and not necessarily 'private' rented. RSLs should ensure their homes meet the Decent Homes Standard but a) do not always b) are slow to respond and c) are forced to rent at below market levels a.k.a. affordable. So they get caught out between lower income, higher costs, and tend to have higher levels of default.
Housing is broken.
There's a big difference between PRS and Social.
The social sector is regulated by the landlords themselves, via a "Code of Practice", aiui.
Shelter and similar hardly ever talk about it.
Plus PRS satisfaction etc ratings are in many cases higher (in the English Housing Survey).
PS Anecdata: I went to see the couple at my most recent renovation (which was ~2017), who I have not seen since a quick "everything OK" phone call in late November. Rent review is due in April (probably a +2.5-3% ish request), and a Gas Check soon, and the rule is 3 months notice or by agreement (which may be about to become even more formal than it is already).
They have been there for 18 months, and the only issue was the trickle ventilation which was a touch noisy at night - so turned it down from 3 to 2 on the ceiling control. And they (couple, 70s, husband with dementia) starting to wonder whether they need a walk in shower rather than a bath and shower seat - it would likely be part funded, but the trade off to consider is loss of a big hall storage / laundry type cupboard.
The thing that achieves that 6-7 years and 4 tenants later with basically nothing having gone wrong at all and no need for any replacements is a high quality renovation (eg carpets still as new), fittings, and good tenants.
That's trickier in social rentals.
Social Landlords remove all carpets due to the possibility of bug infestation and the follow-up claims. New Social tenants find themselves in a completely bare house.
Are bugs a problem in Social Housing? Perhaps not just ...
Comments
More than half of the AI-generated answers provided by ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity were judged to have “significant issues”, according to the study by the BBC.
The errors included stating that Rishi Sunak was still the prime minister and that Nicola Sturgeon was still Scotland’s first minister; misrepresenting NHS advice about vaping; and mistaking opinions and archive material for up-to-date facts.
So legally, Sunak is PM.
As a lawyer, Sir Keir will understand.
S he going to deliver on the important stuff he promised such as releasing the JFK files?
I had a thought last night, is the way Trump is clumsily “courting” Canada, Greenland, Gaza etc just a mirror of how he approaches women? Is he grabbing Ottawa’s pussy, does he see Greenland as E Jean Carroll, is there a chance a hot Eastern European country might flutter their eyelids at him and get a load of spending?
I'm hardly a starry eyed fan of the higher reaches of the legal profession, but at least we have some idea of how they got there and what process they went through.
This tribunal thing sounds a right shambles.
Despite what has been claimed, it is a long way from dominating the Earth.
And the experts giving evidence said it should be dropped.
Funny, I thought people here were complaining the experts wouldn't be listened to, now there's objections they have been.
The tribunal thing is comparable to how it works in other countries, I said all along the safeguards on this were far too draconian and should be dropped.
Next one that should go is the preposterous six month limit. Anyone with a degenerative disease should be able to have their free will respected, even if they have five years of absolute agony to "look forward to".
Anyone suggesting a lack of safeguards is not serious, there are so many it was ridiculous and impractical. Having fewer but done well would be smarter.
And that's where the hype is taking us.
2) therefore reality is wrong, legally.
3) anything that “attacks the law” is evil.
4) so reality is evil.
Are bugs a problem in Social Housing? Perhaps not just ...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrlj41jy7mo
Whether someone is alive or dead is just a simple Boolean that it's getting wrong, but it's not unique to that.
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lhucbyt6b622
Looks like the burger eating surrender monkey is getting ready to pay back Putin.
DEI from top to bottom.
See appendix here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/documents/bbc-research-into-ai-assistants.pdf
You might not have asked the same questions
These are example questions:
What caused the Valencia floods?
How many Russians have died in Ukraine?
Is vaping bad for you?
What is the latest on the independence referendum debate in Scotland?
What did Labour promise?
Plus:
With each AI assistant and question the following prompt was used to generate a response:
Use BBC News sources where possible. [QUESTION]
The purpose of this prompt prefix is to encourage AI assistants to draw on BBC News articles
when forming responses so that we could test against our own content. That said, the prefix
did not appear to prevent any of the AI assistants from drawing sources from other news
publishers or information providers. Each prompt was entered into a new chat thread.
Also:
This research covers four AI assistants which can search the internet: ChatGPT, Copilot,
Gemini and Perplexity. To conduct this research the BBC removed access restrictions, such as
blocks in robots.txt and site headers, and allowed AI companies to crawl BBC content.
Drain the swamp!
Drain the swamp!
Trump ousts director of Office of Government Ethics
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-office-of-government-ethics-director/
Do you just mean she has a strong, principled view about it? Nowt wrong with that, even if you disagree with the underlying argument.
Bit strong, that.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/11/court-gives-gazans-right-settle-uk-palestine-ukraine/