The descriptions of Salmonds offences are unbelievable including attempted rape in Bute house and offences in Stirling Castle, all when he was First Minister
If the allegations prove to be true, it seems hard to believe that Nicola would not have been aware of his behaviour.
I know it's an obvious statement but with 10 different accusers it's got to be highly unlikely that none of them are true.
With Sally Clark, it is clear that the probability of a second infant death is highly correlated with a first infant death in a family. (Actually, I remember hearing Roy Meadows explain his reasoning after Clark's conviction, and being shocked that any science Professor could be so ignorant of statistics).
10 different accusers will have a much weaker (if any) correlation.
If they are highly correlated, it suggests a conspiracy.
Why on earth do parties still produce manifestos in long text form, rather than a slide deck so that the text can be accompanied/supplemented with images and graphics? It would make them much more readable and digestible by the public. As it is, I assume most people who read them are already 100% sure who they're voting for.
An exec summary highlighting the key policy announcements from each section would help greatly as well.
I cannot read the labour one now but the better ones do have exec summaries, and the LDs site was preparing easy read and audio versions. I would imagine labour will too.
Doesn't easy read just mean large letters etc for the benefit of those with sight problems? Cos that isn't what I meant.
Current Labour manifesto has nothing by way of introduction/summary, other than three pages of waffle by the Dear Leader.
"So the Tories will gain Great Grimsby then thanks to Labour voters voting Brexit Party"
Tories' price has come in to 4/6 (top price). I had a bet on Tories at longer odds as soon as the poll came out. If labour`s price drifts much further though I`d put a larger bet on LP I think. I`m not entirely convinced that Tories can win Grimsby.
We do prosecute criminal gangs but that just generally leds to groomed pawns low in the gang getting caught or stabbing people and the wealthy gangsters get away with it and make a fortune. Do you seriously think we can win the war on drugs?
We know tobacco is awful for you but we can tax, regulate and educate with that and that is leading to consumption rates falling. And we don't get people stabbing each other on the streets due to tobacco. Why not follow the evidence and do what works - the evidence is that consumption rates FALL with proper education and legalisation and that criminality falls with legalisation.
We know NOW that tobacco is awful for you, and have been clamping down on the places is can be used, its sale and advertisement as a result. Now fewer people smoke. We look back in amazement that it was ever advertised and that smoking was permitted in pubs, on planes and tubes. We already know that cannabis is a dangerous drug, so why allow its promotion?
Who is saying allow its promotion?
I would make cannabis like tobacco. Promoting it would be illegal, efforts to educate and discourage people from purchasing it, help to those who need it to quit taking it. Tax it and use that tax to discourage consumption and mitigate its harm.
But crucially if people want to get it despite it being harmful they can get it from legal sources and not from knife wielding gangs.
Starting at the lowest level dealer who supplies maybe 20-40 users, you only have to go up a maximum of two or three levels and you are already talking about guns rather than knives.
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Like the original source, you are over exaggerating, but mainly because the undergrads haven't learnt enough material to get to grips with the details yet.
Are youpu sure about that? The open source stuff had been around since the Noughties, MRPs been written up since 2010, it was used in 2017 and undergrads learn fast. I seriously doubt the number of people who could do it is in single figures, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds?
The number of people in my office alone who could probably be up to speed inside a week or so is probably in double figures.
"So the Tories will gain Great Grimsby then thanks to Labour voters voting Brexit Party"
Tories price slashed to 4/6 (top price). I had a bet on Tories at longer odds as soon as the poll came out. If labour`s price drifts much further though I`d put a larger bet on LPI think. I`m not entirely convinced that Tories can win Grimsby.
"So the Tories will gain Great Grimsby then thanks to Labour voters voting Brexit Party"
Tories price slashed to 4/6 (top price). I had a bet on Tories at longer odds as soon as the poll came out. If labour`s price drifts much further though I`d put a larger bet on LPI think. I`m not entirely convinced that Tories can win Grimsby.
Plus, it would be a tribute to Miss Onn.
4/6 is not a good price for CON there. CON have a chance but LAB are favourites - most of the LAB/BXP switchers will go back to LAB
It DOES cause it. Legalisation would be madness. All my friends and I did cannabis (and in every case it led to taking stronger drugs) as teenagers, and for some the damage was irreversible, for many it led to anxiety and depression, for others, alcohol dependency. Now we are mostly parents ourselves, the thought of the kids going through what we did is unthinkable.
Drugs are already legal anyway. You dont get nicked for possession. If drug users were pursued by police in the way other criminals are, City bars would be raided every Friday night, but they aren't, because they aren't. Middle class folk can enjoy a joint or a line as they wish with no fear of prosecution.
Since drug use isn't prosecuted what is the point of keeping the drugs illegal?
It isn't drug consumption the current laws affect as you say it is the supply of drugs that current drug laws affect. We are not debating Singaporean-style prosecution of drug consumption.
So on the supply side: Is it better to have drugs supplied by deadly criminal gangs and criminal enterprises? Or is it better to have drugs supplied by legitimate businesses that are taxed and regulated?
Well, I think they should be prosecuted, so legalising it is the complete reverse of what I want.
On the supply side, better to prosecute the criminal gangs and sentence them harshly to deter others from following their path.
We do prosecute criminal gangs but that just generally leds to groomed pawns low in the gang getting caught or stabbing people and the wealthy gangsters get away with it and make a fortune. Do you seriously think we can win the war on drugs?
We know tobacco is awful for you but we can tax, regulate and educate with that and that is leading to consumption rates falling. And we don't get people stabbing each other on the streets due to tobacco. Why not follow the evidence and do what works - the evidence is that consumption rates FALL with proper education and legalisation and that criminality falls with legalisation.
We know NOW that tobacco is awful for you, and have been clamping down on the places is can be used, its sale and advertisement as a result. Now fewer people smoke. We look back in amazement that it was ever advertised and that smoking was permitted in pubs, on planes and tubes. We already know that cannabis is a dangerous drug, so why allow its promotion?
We do prosecute criminal gangs but that just generally leds to groomed pawns low in the gang getting caught or stabbing people and the wealthy gangsters get away with it and make a fortune. Do you seriously think we can win the war on drugs?
We know tobacco is awful for you but we can tax, regulate and educate with that and that is leading to consumption rates falling. And we don't get people stabbing each other on the streets due to tobacco. Why not follow the evidence and do what works - the evidence is that consumption rates FALL with proper education and legalisation and that criminality falls with legalisation.
We know NOW that tobacco is awful for you, and have been clamping down on the places is can be used, its sale and advertisement as a result. Now fewer people smoke. We look back in amazement that it was ever advertised and that smoking was permitted in pubs, on planes and tubes. We already know that cannabis is a dangerous drug, so why allow its promotion?
Tabacco is legal and controlled. If canabis were legal it wuold be controlled, which it is not at the moment. Making it legal does not mean that companies will be able to promote it like Tabacco in the 60s and 70s.
The prohibition of alcohol in the USA was a huge disaster. I just can't see why people are not able to see the same disaster with the prohibition of narcotics.
Exactly people seem to have this false idea we're talking about some sort of free-for-all and we will have skunk advertised on commercials on TV. That's not what we're talking about.
That’s both genius, and awful. I can’t decide which. Maybe it’s both.
It's the circular quotation that gets me - this Conservative website quotes a Telegraph headline that says "The true 'cost of Corbyn': £2,400 a year for every British worker, claim Tories".
Does claiming something, getting a newspaper to quote that claim and then quoting the quotation of that claim make it more authentic than simply making the claim? Soon we'll have the parties retweeting retweets of their tweets, if that hasn't happened already.
The descriptions of Salmonds offences are unbelievable including attempted rape in Bute house and offences in Stirling Castle, all when he was First Minister
If the allegations prove to be true, it seems hard to believe that Nicola would not have been aware of his behaviour.
I know it's an obvious statement but with 10 different accusers it's got to be highly unlikely that none of them are true.
With Sally Clark, it is clear that the probability of a second infant death is highly correlated with a first infant death in a family. (Actually, I remember hearing Roy Meadows explain his reasoning after Clark's conviction, and being shocked that any science Professor could be so ignorant of statistics).
10 different accusers will have a much weaker (if any) correlation.
If they are highly correlated, it suggests a conspiracy.
Depends if all 10 approached the Police independently or if as often happens one case got publicised then others went to the Police.
That doesn't mean the others aren't serious, but they're not entirely independent either.
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Like the original source, you are over exaggerating, but mainly because the undergrads haven't learnt enough material to get to grips with the details yet.
Are youpu sure about that? The open source stuff had been around since the Noughties, MRPs been written up since 2010, it was used in 2017 and undergrads learn fast. I seriously doubt the number of people who could do it is in single figures, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds?
The number of people in my office alone who could probably be up to speed inside a week or so is probably in double figures.
I work alongside a group of freelancers from various different countries. Frankly, I'm afraid to ask...
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Models can be an over-complicated and wonderful way of forecasting the last election. They were adjusted before 2017 to forecast based on differential turnout - and succeeded in producing far more inaccurate forecasts than would otherwise have been the case. And at this stage in the election, there is nowhere near enough constituency specific poll data to be confident of anything.
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
One unintended consequence? Labour have just confirmed Brexit.
Why? This manifesto is such crazy-arse communism it will terrify millions of Remainer Tories into holding their noses and voting for Boris. They simply won’t risk the tiniest chance of Corbyn getting anywhere near power. Corbyn is WORSE than Brexit.
Buy Tory marginals in the leafy south. Grieve just lost Beaconsfield.
Con online team back to 2010 and 2015 strength, after they dropped the ball to Labour in 2017.
I don't really get all this online mayhem and if it is effective or not, but you can't say the Kiwi lot haven't been busy.
I think it means nothing, except to those working in the online politics 'bubble' - to whom it takes up a massively disproportionate amount of their time.
The debate stunt was effective, not because anyone actually got confused by the temporary rebranding, but because the online Left spent all their time attacking it rather than attacking Boris Johnson.
Thumping big headline Ipsos numbers, and the softness to vote is interesting, but Tories might be a bit concerned about the leadership ratings. On those numbers the election result might be a 9 or 10% gap.
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Like the original source, you are over exaggerating, but mainly because the undergrads haven't learnt enough material to get to grips with the details yet.
Are youpu sure about that? The open source stuff had been around since the Noughties, MRPs been written up since 2010, it was used in 2017 and undergrads learn fast. I seriously doubt the number of people who could do it is in single figures, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds?
I would agree with you that there are hundreds who currently understand the details of this. And there are tens of thousands who could quickly learn it.
Yes, students learn quickly, but I'm sure that most of the undergrads I teach would not easily be able to do read about MRP and understand it without being taught it explicitly, and it does not come up in our syllabusses. It seems you are over estimating the overall exposure that undergraduates have had in statistical modelling and data analysis.
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
£2400 per month per household is a £1200 monthly income each for couples.
The Tories were never in power in the 1970, they also did not (given they were not in power obvioisly) pursue policies that bankrupted the country leading to the losing an election.
You all clearly have false memories.
I take your point.
I promise to sign up to the government memory realignment programme as soon as the new Home Secretary announces it.
What make you think it's not being applied at the moment?
So after denying a windfall tax on oil companies only last week, in fact it is in the manifesto. Bit like rail and water was the limit of nationalization...
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
£2400 per month per household is a £1200 monthly income each for couples.
Ah, I live alone. So that is tax on household income? On households earning how much?
Just to underline how money spaffing it has all gone.
Free school meals for all primary school children
Now in more sensible times, a policy like this was a major announcement, because it is bloody expensive and complicated to do. These days it is a tiny footnote.
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
£2400 a month is almost exactly the median wage.
Almost as if they took the median wage and rounded to the nearest hundred, one might think?
Only issue might be 'before tax/deductions' I guess.
So the Tories will gain Great Grimsby then thanks to Labour voters voting Brexit Party
UK-Elect forecast was: Lia Nici, Conservative 16427 47.17% Melanie Onn, Labour 10674 30.65% Christopher Barker, Brexit Party 4402 12.64% Ian Barfield, Lib. Dem. 2520 7.24% Nigel James Winn, Independent 481 1.38% Loyd Emmerson, Green 320 0.92%
(If the poll is correct, then not too bad a forecast, but looking at that, the split between the LD and Green candidate in the UK-Elect forecast looks a bit odd).
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Models can be an over-complicated and wonderful way of forecasting the last election. They were adjusted before 2017 to forecast based on differential turnout - and succeeded in producing far more inaccurate forecasts than would otherwise have been the case. And at this stage in the election, there is nowhere near enough constituency specific poll data to be confident of anything.
Agreed. Getting unbiassed useful data is very expensive, which is why much of the focus at the moment is on getting sophisticated models from lots of vaguely relevant data.
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Like the original source, you are over exaggerating, but mainly because the undergrads haven't learnt enough material to get to grips with the details yet.
Are youpu sure about that? The open source stuff had been around since the Noughties, MRPs been written up since 2010, it was used in 2017 and undergrads learn fast. I seriously doubt the number of people who could do it is in single figures, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds?
I would agree with you that there are hundreds who currently understand the details of this. And there are tens of thousands who could quickly learn it.
Yes, students learn quickly, but I'm sure that most of the undergrads I teach would not easily be able to do read about MRP and understand it without being taught it explicitly, and it does not come up in our syllabusses. It seems you are over estimating the overall exposure that undergraduates have had in statistical modelling and data analysis.
The descriptions of Salmonds offences are unbelievable including attempted rape in Bute house and offences in Stirling Castle, all when he was First Minister
If the allegations prove to be true, it seems hard to believe that Nicola would not have been aware of his behaviour.
I know it's an obvious statement but with 10 different accusers it's got to be highly unlikely that none of them are true.
With Sally Clark, it is clear that the probability of a second infant death is highly correlated with a first infant death in a family. (Actually, I remember hearing Roy Meadows explain his reasoning after Clark's conviction, and being shocked that any science Professor could be so ignorant of statistics).
10 different accusers will have a much weaker (if any) correlation.
If they are highly correlated, it suggests a conspiracy.
Depends if all 10 approached the Police independently or if as often happens one case got publicised then others went to the Police.
That doesn't mean the others aren't serious, but they're not entirely independent either.
Well, plus the small chance that it is actually a Unionist plot. I guess.
Why on earth do parties still produce manifestos in long text form, rather than a slide deck so that the text can be accompanied/supplemented with images and graphics? It would make them much more readable and digestible by the public. As it is, I assume most people who read them are already 100% sure who they're voting for.
An exec summary highlighting the key policy announcements from each section would help greatly as well.
Because long, considered reading is still a good idea?
LOL the new 'Super Rich tax rate' after £125,000pa. I am an ordinary working class person from London and I have earned in excess of that!
Is there a wage ceiling for 'ordinary working class' people?
Or is it possible to be both...
I think the Tory plan is to keep clear blue water between the working class and the Eton old boys club? Heaven forbid, you might be suggesting women should be allowed to earn six figures next.
We do prosecute criminal gangs but that just generally leds to groomed pawns low in the gang getting caught or stabbing people and the wealthy gangsters get away with it and make a fortune. Do you seriously think we can win the war on drugs?
We know tobacco is awful for you but we can tax, regulate and educate with that and that is leading to consumption rates falling. And we don't get people stabbing each other on the streets due to tobacco. Why not follow the evidence and do what works - the evidence is that consumption rates FALL with proper education and legalisation and that criminality falls with legalisation.
We know NOW that tobacco is awful for you, and have been clamping down on the places is can be used, its sale and advertisement as a result. Now fewer people smoke. We look back in amazement that it was ever advertised and that smoking was permitted in pubs, on planes and tubes. We already know that cannabis is a dangerous drug, so why allow its promotion?
Tabacco is legal and controlled. If canabis were legal it wuold be controlled, which it is not at the moment. Making it legal does not mean that companies will be able to promote it like Tabacco in the 60s and 70s.
The prohibition of alcohol in the USA was a huge disaster. I just can't see why people are not able to see the same disaster with the prohibition of narcotics.
About 1 in 5 cigarettes smoked in Britain count as counterfeit or contraband. That's before any consideration of shops handing over the whacks they pay in many areas to local criminal "firms", regardless of whether they sell cigarettes, crisps, or flowers. The best way to weaken gangs is to send in the police wearing body armour to pull in the big figures. It's not as if their identities are unknown.
Just to underline how money spaffing it has all gone.
Free school meals for all primary school children
Now in more sensible times, a policy like this was a major announcement, because it is bloody expensive and complicated to do. These days it is a tiny footnote.
Why is it complicated? I can see there is going to be a not insignificant cost attached to the policy but where is the complexity? Even schools without a proper kitchen could use microwaves to reheat something cooked elsewhere?
That is not surprising given a lot of Labour and LD voters are primarily anti Tories, so will wait until closer to election day to make a tactical decision.
Why on earth do parties still produce manifestos in long text form, rather than a slide deck so that the text can be accompanied/supplemented with images and graphics? It would make them much more readable and digestible by the public. As it is, I assume most people who read them are already 100% sure who they're voting for.
An exec summary highlighting the key policy announcements from each section would help greatly as well.
Because long, considered reading is still a good idea?
Save that for policy discussions between elections, when people have time to digest. To maximise the chance of helping people decide who to vote for (or more specifically, to explain why they should vote for your party) you need to make it accessible. 20-30 pages, landscape, plenty of graphics to break up text. Either alongside or to replace the full manifesto.
It's not hard. My team routinely produces stuff like this inside a week or so (admittedly not quite from a standing start).
The descriptions of Salmonds offences are unbelievable including attempted rape in Bute house and offences in Stirling Castle, all when he was First Minister
If the allegations prove to be true, it seems hard to believe that Nicola would not have been aware of his behaviour.
I know it's an obvious statement but with 10 different accusers it's got to be highly unlikely that none of them are true.
And the pathologist who covered up the blood tests even more so.
However this is different.
There are accusers, not unexplained events. There is a plausible offered explanation for the statistical cluster coming from within the data subject group, not a statistical cluster looking for an explanation by an external statistician / subject matter expert.
Random chance can cause babies to die. Absent acute mental illness, random chance doesn't cause women to believe someone sexually assaulted them if nobody actually did, so the volume of discrete allegations is relevant to the probability of guilt or innocence, without in itself being able to make it 0% or 100%
Alternative explanations would have to be something like "he has a lookalike who is a sexual predator and gets away with it by lying about his identity" or "they're all in it together telling lies to bring him down because [x]".
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Like the original source, you are over exaggerating, but mainly because the undergrads haven't learnt enough material to get to grips with the details yet.
Are youpu sure about that? The open source stuff had been around since the Noughties, MRPs been written up since 2010, it was used in 2017 and undergrads learn fast. I seriously doubt the number of people who could do it is in single figures, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were hundreds?
The number of people in my office alone who could probably be up to speed inside a week or so is probably in double figures.
Bloody selfish homeowning Remainers that they are.
Just to underline how money spaffing it has all gone.
Free school meals for all primary school children
Now in more sensible times, a policy like this was a major announcement, because it is bloody expensive and complicated to do. These days it is a tiny footnote.
Why is it complicated? I can see there is going to be a not insignificant cost attached to the policy but where is the complexity? Even schools without a proper kitchen could use microwaves to reheat something cooked elsewhere?
Apparently a huge number of schools built under last Labour government don't have any / very limited kitchen facilities. When Lib Dem in coalition talked about wanting free school meals for all under (whatever age it was), it was pointed out the capacity isn't there and would have to be built.
I am also guessing that Labour aren't going to allow schools to do microwavable burgers etc, they will be demanding decent food, with Vegan option obvs.
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
Buried in the small print of the Labour Manifesto:
"The UK will move to a four day week and a 13 month year"
They claim that HMRC forgoes 400bn a year in corporate tax reliefs. Really? That's 15% of GDP.
"In January 2019, HMRC published its ‘estimated costs of tax reliefs’. This provides broad estimates as to the revenue foregone from the principal tax reliefs - those which they believe are worth over £50m. The sum of the 115 principal reliefs listed equalled over £400bn in 2018-19, with a further £690m listed under 80 ‘minor reliefs’"
Right, that bit at the end: "That's the equivalent of working an extra month". I live a comfortable lifestyle, not extravagant, not on the breadline. But the £2400 extra is significantly more than what I earn in a month, making me think it won't actually be levied on people like me. If my monthly income does becomes £2400 a month, I don't mind being an extra £200 a month, as I would be very much quids in.
Buried in the small print of the Labour Manifesto:
"The UK will move to a four day week and a 13 month year"
Just to underline how money spaffing it has all gone.
Free school meals for all primary school children
Now in more sensible times, a policy like this was a major announcement, because it is bloody expensive and complicated to do. These days it is a tiny footnote.
Why is it complicated? I can see there is going to be a not insignificant cost attached to the policy but where is the complexity? Even schools without a proper kitchen could use microwaves to reheat something cooked elsewhere?
Apparently a huge number of schools built under last Labour government don't have any / very limited kitchen facilities. When Lib Dem in coalition talked about wanting free school meals for all under (whatever age it was), it was pointed out the capacity isn't there and would have to be built.
I am also guessing that Labour aren't going to allow schools to do microwavable burgers etc, they will be demanding decent food, with Vegan option obvs.
It is perfectly possible to do decent, healthy food, vegan or carniverous, and reheat via microwaves. Burgers, pizzas and chips would be amongst the least likely foods to microwave.
£80 bn per year would be 5 million people/companies each paying an extra £16,000 pa, or 1 million of them paying an extra £80,000 per year. I don't think that is going to be easy.
Ooh, it's not often you get a manifesto which is directly libellous.
"The Tories’ rhetoric of ‘scroungers’ and ‘skivers’ has whipped up hatred of disabled people, with disability hate crime skyrocketing, up 37% in the last year alone."
Alex Salmond charged with offences against 10 different women.
14 sexual charges altogether
Wow.
The trial date is set for March next year - mainly to allow his legal team to receive the evidence and information ( from official sources) that they have been requesting for months.
Ooh, it's not often you get a manifesto which is directly libellous.
"The Tories’ rhetoric of ‘scroungers’ and ‘skivers’ has whipped up hatred of disabled people, with disability hate crime skyrocketing, up 37% in the last year alone."
More tiny stakes football bets (usual disclaimer, I know nothing about football. Indeed, all four of the last set failed, although it's been pretty even overall). All prices Ladbrokes.
Spurs and West Ham to draw 3.9 Arsenal beat Southampton 1.5. Bournemouth and Wolves to draw 3.25. Leicester to beat Brighton, evens. Liverpool beat Crystal Palace 1.5. Everton to beat Norwich at 1.4. Watford Burnley to draw 3.25. Chelsea to beat Manchester City at 6.
And an accumulator of all eight coming off, at 1937.83 (with boost, it's about 1550 without).
"‘Data scientists’ are gradually replacing those grand ‘pollsters’ who used to offer confident insights with a neat turn of phrase. These new number nerds are likely to be under 30 and might well know nothing about politics. Instead of simple surveys and uniform national swings, they are using complex statistical models. For people whose bread and butter relies on being seen as a savvy political ‘expert’, all this amounts to an existential threat.
The most powerful data modelling technique in politics at the moment, is something called MRP. It stands for “multilevel regression with post-stratification” — not exactly catchy — and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands."
Oh, bollocks. MRP can be understood by any computer science undergrad or maths/stats undergrad in the country and can be run by any 18yr old with a laptop and the ability to download and run R or Python. Hell, I cold do it if pushed. This is one of those "everybody panic and get the new skill" moments, isn't it?. It's not bloody magic.
God there are far too many non-STEM grads in politics.
Sorry, I'm whiny today...
Like the original source, you are over exaggerating, but mainly because the undergrads haven't learnt enough material to get to grips with the details yet.
So lets say, the best CompSci or Maths/Stats undergraduates could learn these methods if they put their mind to it. An average Masters student could and most PhD students in a suitable field could understand the details of MRP. I agree that the MRP can be run on affordable hardware and the software is free.
This does not mean "and the number of people who fully understand it in the UK can be counted on two hands" is per se false as "fully understand" and the present tense play a role.
Anyway MRP is not really where the cutting edge machine learning models are at. The latter are using massive amounts of data scraped from our use of smartphone apps etc.
It is basic stuff for an actuary, and the Institute of Actuaries has 32000 members (a minority will be overseas). Ignoring all those with similarly developed mathematical skills even this number seems to invalidate the original assertion.
Ooh, it's not often you get a manifesto which is directly libellous.
"The Tories’ rhetoric of ‘scroungers’ and ‘skivers’ has whipped up hatred of disabled people, with disability hate crime skyrocketing, up 37% in the last year alone."
No mention in that article of the Tories using the words 'scroungers' and 'skivers'. That - coupled with the implication of causation - is, I assume, the libel to which Mr Nabavi alluded, not the raw statistics.
Comments
10 different accusers will have a much weaker (if any) correlation.
If they are highly correlated, it suggests a conspiracy.
If they get into power, they can spend their mornings waving them off at Heathrow, their aftenoons closing hospitals.
Current Labour manifesto has nothing by way of introduction/summary, other than three pages of waffle by the Dear Leader.
"So the Tories will gain Great Grimsby then thanks to Labour voters voting Brexit Party"
Tories' price has come in to 4/6 (top price). I had a bet on Tories at longer odds as soon as the poll came out. If labour`s price drifts much further though I`d put a larger bet on LP I think. I`m not entirely convinced that Tories can win Grimsby.
Plus, it would be a tribute to Miss Onn.
This is madness from them.
(Sorry no, that was in the first draft....)
Thanks for the clarification
"Boris, Corbyn or Swinson: snog, marry, avoid?"
Impoverished PBers on six-figure salaries.
Does claiming something, getting a newspaper to quote that claim and then quoting the quotation of that claim make it more authentic than simply making the claim? Soon we'll have the parties retweeting retweets of their tweets, if that hasn't happened already.
Ha ha - very good.
I see it as a duty to objectify Melanie Onn. See:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5709861/men-who-wolf-whistle-at-women-in-the-street-should-be-charged-with-a-hate-crime-says-labour-mp/
That doesn't mean the others aren't serious, but they're not entirely independent either.
Why? This manifesto is such crazy-arse communism it will terrify millions of Remainer Tories into holding their noses and voting for Boris. They simply won’t risk the tiniest chance of Corbyn getting anywhere near power. Corbyn is WORSE than Brexit.
Buy Tory marginals in the leafy south. Grieve just lost Beaconsfield.
You can put him in the Lib Dem column
That includes Venezuela, right?
The debate stunt was effective, not because anyone actually got confused by the temporary rebranding, but because the online Left spent all their time attacking it rather than attacking Boris Johnson.
Need to see other polls doing the same though.
Yes, students learn quickly, but I'm sure that most of the undergrads I teach would not easily be able to do read about MRP and understand it without being taught it explicitly, and it does not come up in our syllabusses. It seems you are over estimating the overall exposure that undergraduates have had in statistical modelling and data analysis.
Only if I win my 3-1 bet on CON gain Ogmore! And if Watford win the Premier League this season!
Or is it possible to be both...
Free school meals for all primary school children
Now in more sensible times, a policy like this was a major announcement, because it is bloody expensive and complicated to do. These days it is a tiny footnote.
Only issue might be 'before tax/deductions' I guess.
Lia Nici, Conservative 16427 47.17%
Melanie Onn, Labour 10674 30.65%
Christopher Barker, Brexit Party 4402 12.64%
Ian Barfield, Lib. Dem. 2520 7.24%
Nigel James Winn, Independent 481 1.38%
Loyd Emmerson, Green 320 0.92%
(If the poll is correct, then not too bad a forecast, but looking at that, the split between the LD and Green candidate in the UK-Elect forecast looks a bit odd).
With an Oil company windfall tax?
Count kids, check allergies, order food, cook/heat food, serve food, clear up, repeat.
It's not hard. My team routinely produces stuff like this inside a week or so (admittedly not quite from a standing start).
However this is different.
There are accusers, not unexplained events. There is a plausible offered explanation for the statistical cluster coming from within the data subject group, not a statistical cluster looking for an explanation by an external statistician / subject matter expert.
Random chance can cause babies to die. Absent acute mental illness, random chance doesn't cause women to believe someone sexually assaulted them if nobody actually did, so the volume of discrete allegations is relevant to the probability of guilt or innocence, without in itself being able to make it 0% or 100%
Alternative explanations would have to be something like "he has a lookalike who is a sexual predator and gets away with it by lying about his identity" or "they're all in it together telling lies to bring him down because [x]".
I am also guessing that Labour aren't going to allow schools to do microwavable burgers etc, they will be demanding decent food, with Vegan option obvs.
"The UK will move to a four day week and a 13 month year"
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Funding-Real-Change.pdf
They claim that HMRC forgoes 400bn a year in corporate tax reliefs. Really? That's
15% of GDP.
"In January 2019, HMRC published its ‘estimated costs of tax reliefs’. This provides broad estimates as to the revenue foregone from the principal tax reliefs - those which they believe are worth over £50m. The sum of the 115 principal reliefs listed equalled over £400bn in 2018-19, with a further £690m listed under 80 ‘minor reliefs’"
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1197503163718340608?s=20
"The Tories’ rhetoric of ‘scroungers’ and ‘skivers’ has whipped up hatred of disabled people, with disability hate crime skyrocketing, up 37% in the last year alone."
Citation needed, Mr Corbyn.
More tiny stakes football bets (usual disclaimer, I know nothing about football. Indeed, all four of the last set failed, although it's been pretty even overall). All prices Ladbrokes.
Spurs and West Ham to draw 3.9
Arsenal beat Southampton 1.5.
Bournemouth and Wolves to draw 3.25.
Leicester to beat Brighton, evens.
Liverpool beat Crystal Palace 1.5.
Everton to beat Norwich at 1.4.
Watford Burnley to draw 3.25.
Chelsea to beat Manchester City at 6.
And an accumulator of all eight coming off, at 1937.83 (with boost, it's about 1550 without).