Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

YouGov Favourability ratings: Johnson still beating Patel – politicalbetting.com

1235»

Comments

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,486
    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Yeah. This whole thing is mystifying to me, and I think many others. I can't recall a single job I've ever had where drinking wouldn't be an instant suspension.
    Is it really widespread?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 44,589
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    FFS....

    Extinction Rebellion: Jury clears protesters dragged off train roof

    Last month, the Anglican priest admitted she was "surprised" to avoid jail for blocking the M25. She was one of seven members of Insulate Britain who were handed suspended sentences for breaching an injunction and being in contempt of court.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-59996870

    So we can't even claim well it was just one of those things she got a bit carried away. She already guilty of blocking motorways and has a suspended sentence against her. Clear pattern of behaviour.

    Perhaps jury trial, like democracy, has had its day

    I’m semi-serious. That’s another implication from Cummings’ blog. Democracy may be dying. If it is proved that other systems are better at delivering prosperity, peace and happiness is democracy intrinsically worry pursuing? Hence his (and my) fascination with Singapore

    And yes I get the irony that I voted Leavd ‘because democracy’ but the world is full of complex ironies

    FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions which are so much smarter and more strategic and less emotional than any politician - or Eurocrat, or CCP apparatchik - we will hand over all our governance to the machines
    GPT doesn't make decisions: it pattern matches.

    See for yourself. Go to http://claro-gpt2.uksouth.cloudapp.azure.com/ (which I admit is GPT2 based, but the principle is the same.).

    Now take your sentence - "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions"

    And let's see how it does at producing something sensible:

    "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of the best interests of the people . I think it 's 's a a time good good good good good to to to to to for for have"

    Kinda good to the end of the sentence... And then utter gibberish.

    All these GPT "AIs" are just pattern matchers: they don't have any ability to reason.
    The difference between GPT2 and GPT3 is dumbfounding. The latter is so much “smarter”. After five or ten more iterations what will they be capable of achieving? The argument as to whether they are “intelligent” will be reduced to theology, they will certainly appear EXTREMELY intelligent, more so than us

    And it’s not “pattern matching” - it’s autocomplete, which is somewhat different
    Having a massive corpus of text, and using maths to predict the next word, sentence, etc. is not intelligence.

    It's just a parrot with a larger vocabulary.

    Now, there are amazing ways that AI/ML will change the world. But GPT3 isn't it. It's simply a party trick.
    We’ve already had this debate on PB multiple times, and, TBH, at a much more sophisticated level than the point you are making here
    The fundamental issue - which you really haven't got over - is that you don't understand how GPT3 works.

    The more people understand it - and there's a fair amount of understanding on this board - the less impressed they are that it in any way approximates intelligence.

    There are many, many AI/ML systems that might be able to produce generalised intelligence. GPT3x is not one of them.
    I understand it. It is autocomplete
    So, what you mean to have said is:

    GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of autocomplete
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 21,053
    ...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 21,053
    Great scoop from @JennaCorderoy - emails reveal how feted partygate investigator Sue Gray helped shield No.10 from scrutiny over the Grenfell fire in 2019 https://bit.ly/3fnrPzh
  • dixiedean said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Yeah. This whole thing is mystifying to me, and I think many others. I can't recall a single job I've ever had where drinking wouldn't be an instant suspension.
    Is it really widespread?
    Seems widespread across the civil service
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,486
    edited January 14

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    This is the civil service and change has to come to their culture
    Don't try to deflect on to the Civil Service. This is Whitehall. Overseen directly by Tory Ministers.
    The HMRC at Longbenton don't do this.
    Nor hundreds of other Civil Service sites.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 44,589

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Benevolent dictatorship works when you have a competent benevolent dictator.

    The problem is that one day you'll end up with an average leader, and then another day you'll end up with a dreadful one, and no way of removing them.

    And there's no way to get around that. China had competent dictators based around 10 year terms. (Maybe 'benevolent' is a little generous, but still...)

    And then along came Xi and ripped that up and made himself President (sorry General Secretary) for life. Oh yeah, and also started acting belligerently to the rest of the world. If the Chinese people don't like this, there is exactly nothing they can do about it.

    How many stable benevolent dictatorships have there been over time?

    The point of democracy is that we can have a palace coup, minus the civil war and death, every 4-5 years.

    Part of the reason for the nastiness of many dictatorships is the Tiger Problem. When you are riding a tiger, the problem is what happens when you get off.

    As the philosopher said, "Remember, you are only President... for Life".
    Yes, exactly. Mind you, we shouldn't delude ourselves that we have a smoothly functioning democracy in which we all have equal influence. I remember a few years ago giving a talk about the British system to a Chinese academic delegation (no, I wasn't paid £300,000 - £500 was the going rate), who listened politely to my explanation of the advantages of multi-party choice (I was slightly surprised they were even willing to pay to listen to it). One asked, "If we asked average British citizens whether they felt they had a meaningful impact on government at any level?" I admitted "Only to a very limited extent" and asked him how the average Chinese citizen would respond. He smiled wryly and shrugged without replying.

    We are clearly more democratic than China and have more choice and far less retaliation against organised dissent. But it's so moderated by biased media, lack of serious information and £££ that it only really works in the sense that you say - to correct obvious disasters.
    Many moons ago, Goldman Sachs did a conference, and Gavyn Davis stood up and said

    "I have spent the last two weeks in China, and it is very clear that the Chinese people do not want democracy."

    and then Peter Sutherland's turn came, and he said:

    "I am so glad that Gavyn's meetings with high up members of the Chinese Communist Party have given him such crucial insights into the minds of the Chinese people."
    I told a friend who failed to get into Goldmans that he'd obviously answered the "Would you sell your grandmother?" question wrong.

    In case anyone wonders - the correct answer is

    "No. Selling your grandmother would create an immediate tax liability. Instead, you setup an OTC market in Collateralised Grandparent Default Swaps and sell the instruments to Belgian widows and orphans"
    That's very good.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,282
    Scott_xP said:

    pigeon said:

    I may be jumping to conclusions here @Scott_xP but I'm beginning to get the impression that you're rather enjoying all of this...?

    How very dare you...
    Scott is my 'go to' poster at the moment. Almost as entertaining as Party time in Downing St
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 36,434

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    Alistair said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    FFS....

    Extinction Rebellion: Jury clears protesters dragged off train roof

    Last month, the Anglican priest admitted she was "surprised" to avoid jail for blocking the M25. She was one of seven members of Insulate Britain who were handed suspended sentences for breaching an injunction and being in contempt of court.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-59996870

    So we can't even claim well it was just one of those things she got a bit carried away. She already guilty of blocking motorways and has a suspended sentence against her. Clear pattern of behaviour.

    Perhaps jury trial, like democracy, has had its day

    I’m semi-serious. That’s another implication from Cummings’ blog. Democracy may be dying. If it is proved that other systems are better at delivering prosperity, peace and happiness is democracy intrinsically worry pursuing? Hence his (and my) fascination with Singapore

    And yes I get the irony that I voted Leavd ‘because democracy’ but the world is full of complex ironies

    FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions which are so much smarter and more strategic and less emotional than any politician - or Eurocrat, or CCP apparatchik - we will hand over all our governance to the machines
    GPT doesn't make decisions: it pattern matches.

    See for yourself. Go to http://claro-gpt2.uksouth.cloudapp.azure.com/ (which I admit is GPT2 based, but the principle is the same.).

    Now take your sentence - "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions"

    And let's see how it does at producing something sensible:

    "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of the best interests of the people . I think it 's 's a a time good good good good good to to to to to for for have"

    Kinda good to the end of the sentence... And then utter gibberish.

    All these GPT "AIs" are just pattern matchers: they don't have any ability to reason.
    The difference between GPT2 and GPT3 is dumbfounding. The latter is so much “smarter”. After five or ten more iterations what will they be capable of achieving? The argument as to whether they are “intelligent” will be reduced to theology, they will certainly appear EXTREMELY intelligent, more so than us

    And it’s not “pattern matching” - it’s autocomplete, which is somewhat different
    Autocomplete works by pattern matching.
    Ok as we’re talking about AI and war and UFOs - kinda - a young female friend of mine in Tooting has just seen THIS





    She wears it is ten times bigger than a plane and it is going STRAIGHT UP. Like a space rocket or a missile. There’s a short video as well, which proves this.

    Wtf is that? Do we have a secret space base in Tooting?

    I’m pleasantly flummoxed. Any ideas? Optical illusion? Plane seen at a weird angle?
    She is either gaga or suitcased
    Why not both? Have you checked the supply of cask strength turnip juice? Someone may have been siphoning from the barrel??

    Feeling better?
    Yes back to 100% , cold lingered a bit after testing negative but in end was just like man flu.
  • dixiedean said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    This is the civil service and change has to come to their culture
    Don't try to deflect on to the Civil Service. This is Whitehall. Overseen by Tory Ministers.
    The HMRC at Longbenton don't do this.
    I think you will find Sue Gray's report will find a widespread culture within the civil service
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 26,661
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Benevolent dictatorship works when you have a competent benevolent dictator.

    The problem is that one day you'll end up with an average leader, and then another day you'll end up with a dreadful one, and no way of removing them.

    And there's no way to get around that. China had competent dictators based around 10 year terms. (Maybe 'benevolent' is a little generous, but still...)

    And then along came Xi and ripped that up and made himself President (sorry General Secretary) for life. Oh yeah, and also started acting belligerently to the rest of the world. If the Chinese people don't like this, there is exactly nothing they can do about it.

    How many stable benevolent dictatorships have there been over time?

    The point of democracy is that we can have a palace coup, minus the civil war and death, every 4-5 years.

    Part of the reason for the nastiness of many dictatorships is the Tiger Problem. When you are riding a tiger, the problem is what happens when you get off.

    As the philosopher said, "Remember, you are only President... for Life".
    Yes, exactly. Mind you, we shouldn't delude ourselves that we have a smoothly functioning democracy in which we all have equal influence. I remember a few years ago giving a talk about the British system to a Chinese academic delegation (no, I wasn't paid £300,000 - £500 was the going rate), who listened politely to my explanation of the advantages of multi-party choice (I was slightly surprised they were even willing to pay to listen to it). One asked, "If we asked average British citizens whether they felt they had a meaningful impact on government at any level?" I admitted "Only to a very limited extent" and asked him how the average Chinese citizen would respond. He smiled wryly and shrugged without replying.

    We are clearly more democratic than China and have more choice and far less retaliation against organised dissent. But it's so moderated by biased media, lack of serious information and £££ that it only really works in the sense that you say - to correct obvious disasters.
    Many moons ago, Goldman Sachs did a conference, and Gavyn Davis stood up and said

    "I have spent the last two weeks in China, and it is very clear that the Chinese people do not want democracy."

    and then Peter Sutherland's turn came, and he said:

    "I am so glad that Gavyn's meetings with high up members of the Chinese Communist Party have given him such crucial insights into the minds of the Chinese people."
    I told a friend who failed to get into Goldmans that he'd obviously answered the "Would you sell your grandmother?" question wrong.

    In case anyone wonders - the correct answer is

    "No. Selling your grandmother would create an immediate tax liability. Instead, you setup an OTC market in Collateralised Grandparent Default Swaps and sell the instruments to Belgian widows and orphans"
    That's very good.
    Why, thank you, sir.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,189
    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Are we not addressing the wrong problem here? A culture of after-work jollity is not a problem AFAICS. It would be a shame to lose, in fact. And I'm not even averse to the odd blurred boundary between working and drinking - certainly I wouldn't want to live in the puritanical culture where the two cannot mix under any circumstances.
    The problem was having a party while telling everyone else not to.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,486
    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    The was acceptable is key here. Weasel cries of strict legality or truth telling don't cut it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,331
    Scott_xP said:
    Wasn't a main part of his dispute with the SNP that he felt there should already be an independence push that they were not doing? So I'm not sure what has changed.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 39,709
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    It really doesn’t look like a military jet in the video. It looks like exactly like a shiny silver missile or space rocket. Over Tooting

    It looks like a firework, if we can get past your friend's estimate that it was ten times bigger than a plane.
    It’s definitely not a firework. It’s a rocket (or a jet) of some kind. With a vapour trail.

    I would post the video but I’ve told her I’ll try and sell it to the daily mail for £50 first. If I fail I will post it here for the group opinion. A genuine mystery (tho I don’t think it is aliens)
    I think the chemtrails have softened your brain
    Update on Tooting-gate.

    She says the object was to the southwest of Tooting. In the video it looks big and stable (so not a firework) - definitely some kind of aircraft with a vapour trail?

    So then the best bet is a military jet making a very speedy and vertical ascent somewhere in far SW London or Surrey, and the unusual low sunlight makes the jet look like a missile

    Any RAF bods here? Do we have many active military airfields in Surrey?
    Odiham
  • Cookie said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Are we not addressing the wrong problem here? A culture of after-work jollity is not a problem AFAICS. It would be a shame to lose, in fact. And I'm not even averse to the odd blurred boundary between working and drinking - certainly I wouldn't want to live in the puritanical culture where the two cannot mix under any circumstances.
    The problem was having a party while telling everyone else not to.
    Fair comment
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 21,053
    NEW: We’ve seen the strict guidance issued to civil servants for Prince Philip mourning period

    - Dark suit/dress for public events
    - Business attire in work
    - Black edge for comms w/ Palace
    - Period of “sensitivity”

    Issued April 9. Lasted to April 18. No10 parties…on April 16
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1482052837454618627/photo/1
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,486

    dixiedean said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    This is the civil service and change has to come to their culture
    Don't try to deflect on to the Civil Service. This is Whitehall. Overseen by Tory Ministers.
    The HMRC at Longbenton don't do this.
    I think you will find Sue Gray's report will find a widespread culture within the civil service
    Within Whitehall.
    And who, pray tell, has been running the Civil Service for nearly 12 years? There is a common thread.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,189
    This thread has reached unfavourability ratings not seen since Jeremy Corbyn... New thread.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 26,661
    dixiedean said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Yeah. This whole thing is mystifying to me, and I think many others. I can't recall a single job I've ever had where drinking wouldn't be an instant suspension.
    Is it really widespread?
    It's more a case of what would have stopped it.

    In the City, in the Goode Olde Days, drinking like a fool was mandatory. Lunch was liquid. Hence all the pubs in the city.

    This was stopped by rules, based on liability and insurance. Being drunk at work was banished.

    No such purge took place in politics or large chunks of officialdom.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,160

    This thread has been deliberately sunk in the Channel by a smirking ghoul

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 54,837
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    It really doesn’t look like a military jet in the video. It looks like exactly like a shiny silver missile or space rocket. Over Tooting

    It looks like a firework, if we can get past your friend's estimate that it was ten times bigger than a plane.
    It’s definitely not a firework. It’s a rocket (or a jet) of some kind. With a vapour trail.

    I would post the video but I’ve told her I’ll try and sell it to the daily mail for £50 first. If I fail I will post it here for the group opinion. A genuine mystery (tho I don’t think it is aliens)
    I think the chemtrails have softened your brain
    Update on Tooting-gate.

    She says the object was to the southwest of Tooting. In the video it looks big and stable (so not a firework) - definitely some kind of aircraft with a vapour trail?

    So then the best bet is a military jet making a very speedy and vertical ascent somewhere in far SW London or Surrey, and the unusual low sunlight makes the jet look like a missile

    Any RAF bods here? Do we have many active military airfields in Surrey?
    Aircraft regularly overfly London at altitude - just check FlightRadar24 and set the altitude filter to over 25,000 feet. They’ll be at cruising speed so moving much faster than those coming in to land.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 18,867
    Cookie said:



    I'm not sure I agree with Nick.
    I mean, there is only so much influence one person out of 68 million can have - but democracies are far, far, far better than non-democracies at giving people what they want.
    Now you might argue that what people want isn't necessarily what people should have. Working in the public sector I come across that view quite a lot. Occasionally I agree. But I would argue that what the public thinks they should have is a much better match for what they actually should have than what the state thinks they should have.
    I believe in democracy pretty much above everything else.
    Though that might have been tested had the 2019 GE gone the other way.

    Edit - just noticed Nick's 'at any level' comment.
    If you don't think you have any influence over your local council and you want some, it is pretty easy. Local councils are crying out for people to care about local government. In my experience pretty much any expression of interest not expressed insanely is welcomed.

    Yes, I sort of agree with you - it's why I'm on my local council. I think if you're really interested you can shift things a bit, and it's unreasonable to expect more.

    But the question wasn't about what I thought, but what average citizens thought. And I think it's true that most people feel that government is something that happens to them (sometimes in a good way, sometimes not) rather than something that they influence by casting a vote every few years. The difference from the attitudes in Switzerland, where people can vote on all kinds of individual issues, is very striking - they will typically talk about "our bridge" or "our new hospital" rather than "the bridge/hospital that they're building".
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,486
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: We’ve seen the strict guidance issued to civil servants for Prince Philip mourning period

    - Dark suit/dress for public events
    - Business attire in work
    - Black edge for comms w/ Palace
    - Period of “sensitivity”

    Issued April 9. Lasted to April 18. No10 parties…on April 16
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1482052837454618627/photo/1

    I usually have a period of sensitivity after being totally smashed tbf.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,049
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    FFS....

    Extinction Rebellion: Jury clears protesters dragged off train roof

    Last month, the Anglican priest admitted she was "surprised" to avoid jail for blocking the M25. She was one of seven members of Insulate Britain who were handed suspended sentences for breaching an injunction and being in contempt of court.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-59996870

    So we can't even claim well it was just one of those things she got a bit carried away. She already guilty of blocking motorways and has a suspended sentence against her. Clear pattern of behaviour.

    Perhaps jury trial, like democracy, has had its day

    I’m semi-serious. That’s another implication from Cummings’ blog. Democracy may be dying. If it is proved that other systems are better at delivering prosperity, peace and happiness is democracy intrinsically worry pursuing? Hence his (and my) fascination with Singapore

    And yes I get the irony that I voted Leavd ‘because democracy’ but the world is full of complex ironies

    FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions which are so much smarter and more strategic and less emotional than any politician - or Eurocrat, or CCP apparatchik - we will hand over all our governance to the machines
    GPT doesn't make decisions: it pattern matches.

    See for yourself. Go to http://claro-gpt2.uksouth.cloudapp.azure.com/ (which I admit is GPT2 based, but the principle is the same.).

    Now take your sentence - "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions"

    And let's see how it does at producing something sensible:

    "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of the best interests of the people . I think it 's 's a a time good good good good good to to to to to for for have"

    Kinda good to the end of the sentence... And then utter gibberish.

    All these GPT "AIs" are just pattern matchers: they don't have any ability to reason.
    The difference between GPT2 and GPT3 is dumbfounding. The latter is so much “smarter”. After five or ten more iterations what will they be capable of achieving? The argument as to whether they are “intelligent” will be reduced to theology, they will certainly appear EXTREMELY intelligent, more so than us

    And it’s not “pattern matching” - it’s autocomplete, which is somewhat different
    Having a massive corpus of text, and using maths to predict the next word, sentence, etc. is not intelligence.

    It's just a parrot with a larger vocabulary.

    Now, there are amazing ways that AI/ML will change the world. But GPT3 isn't it. It's simply a party trick.
    We’ve already had this debate on PB multiple times, and, TBH, at a much more sophisticated level than the point you are making here
    The fundamental issue - which you really haven't got over - is that you don't understand how GPT3 works.

    The more people understand it - and there's a fair amount of understanding on this board - the less impressed they are that it in any way approximates intelligence.

    There are many, many AI/ML systems that might be able to produce generalised intelligence. GPT3x is not one of them.
    I understand it. It is autocomplete
    So, what you mean to have said is:

    GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of autocomplete
    1. What if all intelligence is esssntially just autocomplete? Reflexive responses to stimuli programmed by our genes and so forth? What if free will is just an illusion? Many philosophers believe it is. Atoms do not have intelligence. Nor do viruses. Yet viruses “act” intelligent. If intelligence is just autocomplete then GPT3 is already probably intelligent

    2. The Turing principle. At some point a computer will whizz pass the Turing test with flying colours, it will be completely indistinguishable from human intelligence (only much quicker and smarter, and funnier) and then it won’t matter if we define it as “intelligent” or not, we will probably worship this AI as a god thanks to our religious module

  • kjhkjh Posts: 6,145
    For @Leon or anyone actually and Off Topic. I had dinner the other night at Sorrel in Dorking. It was amazing. Steve Drake is the chef and I had a meal at Drake's in Ripley a few years ago which was equally good. He split from his wife. She got the Ripley restaurant and has surprisingly kept the Michelin star. He opened Sorrel and got a star pretty quickly. No menu in the evening. Set 9 course dinner. I asked for a wine flight so as to get a selection and because I know damn all about wine. 6 glasses, although not very full. Only added cost was coffee. Cost about £230 per head so not everyday stuff but will remember for a long time. Recommended for a one off experience. Lunch much much cheaper.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,189
    dixiedean said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Yeah. This whole thing is mystifying to me, and I think many others. I can't recall a single job I've ever had where drinking wouldn't be an instant suspension.
    Is it really widespread?
    I used to work in IT, and lunchtime drinking was par for the course in Friday, and not unusual on other days. Beer was often brought into the office to mark significant milestones.

    I've worked in a consultancy where there were spirits kept in the office (mind you, the partner in charge was a raging alcoholic) - again, drinking largely expected.

    More recently, at places I've worked it's been more frowned upon, and I think it's probably not allowed at my current place.

    But I wouldn't think that's universal.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 39,709
    dixiedean said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    This is the civil service and change has to come to their culture
    Don't try to deflect on to the Civil Service. This is Whitehall. Overseen directly by Tory Ministers.
    The HMRC at Longbenton don't do this.
    Nor hundreds of other Civil Service sites.
    When I worked in the public sector (not government), the widespread work drinking culture of the 1980s disappeared very rapidly, as I recall in or around 1988, and never returned. Prior to that, pretty much every manager had a bottle of spirits in their office to share out at all sorts of meetings, many staff spent lunch in the pub, and party-type events in the office, usually after but occasionally during working hours weren’t uncommon.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,122
    Roger said:

    Its an interesting question. What is it about Patel that makes the dislike of her so visceral. She's a hanger and flogger without an ounce of compassion but that just makes her a Tory. She's been sacked twice for dishonesty but that's on the low side.

    So what are you left with.............

    It may be a sort of Thatcheresque coldness but unaccompanied by leadership and untouched by genius.

    BTW it may be worth noting that of the 5 rated in the article two are of ethnic minorities and they come first and last.

  • Farooq said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    That actually makes the Tories look like the fun option. Not quite the intended effect.
    If a conga line is your idea of fun, I'm not coming to any of your parties! ;)
    Surely the "party" line dance for Boris Johnson's Tories is NOT the Conga but rather the Limbo?
  • Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    FFS....

    Extinction Rebellion: Jury clears protesters dragged off train roof

    Last month, the Anglican priest admitted she was "surprised" to avoid jail for blocking the M25. She was one of seven members of Insulate Britain who were handed suspended sentences for breaching an injunction and being in contempt of court.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-59996870

    So we can't even claim well it was just one of those things she got a bit carried away. She already guilty of blocking motorways and has a suspended sentence against her. Clear pattern of behaviour.

    Perhaps jury trial, like democracy, has had its day

    I’m semi-serious. That’s another implication from Cummings’ blog. Democracy may be dying. If it is proved that other systems are better at delivering prosperity, peace and happiness is democracy intrinsically worry pursuing? Hence his (and my) fascination with Singapore

    And yes I get the irony that I voted Leavd ‘because democracy’ but the world is full of complex ironies

    FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions which are so much smarter and more strategic and less emotional than any politician - or Eurocrat, or CCP apparatchik - we will hand over all our governance to the machines
    GPT doesn't make decisions: it pattern matches.

    See for yourself. Go to http://claro-gpt2.uksouth.cloudapp.azure.com/ (which I admit is GPT2 based, but the principle is the same.).

    Now take your sentence - "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions"

    And let's see how it does at producing something sensible:

    "FWIW I think democracy definitely IS finished, in the long term, thanks to AI. GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of the best interests of the people . I think it 's 's a a time good good good good good to to to to to for for have"

    Kinda good to the end of the sentence... And then utter gibberish.

    All these GPT "AIs" are just pattern matchers: they don't have any ability to reason.
    The difference between GPT2 and GPT3 is dumbfounding. The latter is so much “smarter”. After five or ten more iterations what will they be capable of achieving? The argument as to whether they are “intelligent” will be reduced to theology, they will certainly appear EXTREMELY intelligent, more so than us

    And it’s not “pattern matching” - it’s autocomplete, which is somewhat different
    Having a massive corpus of text, and using maths to predict the next word, sentence, etc. is not intelligence.

    It's just a parrot with a larger vocabulary.

    Now, there are amazing ways that AI/ML will change the world. But GPT3 isn't it. It's simply a party trick.
    We’ve already had this debate on PB multiple times, and, TBH, at a much more sophisticated level than the point you are making here
    The fundamental issue - which you really haven't got over - is that you don't understand how GPT3 works.

    The more people understand it - and there's a fair amount of understanding on this board - the less impressed they are that it in any way approximates intelligence.

    There are many, many AI/ML systems that might be able to produce generalised intelligence. GPT3x is not one of them.
    I understand it. It is autocomplete
    So, what you mean to have said is:

    GPT37 will make decisions on the basis of autocomplete
    1. What if all intelligence is esssntially just autocomplete? Reflexive responses to stimuli programmed by our genes and so forth? What if free will is just an illusion? Many philosophers believe it is. Atoms do not have intelligence. Nor do viruses. Yet viruses “act” intelligent. If intelligence is just autocomplete then GPT3 is already probably intelligent

    2. The Turing principle. At some point a computer will whizz pass the Turing test with flying colours, it will be completely indistinguishable from human intelligence (only much quicker and smarter, and funnier) and then it won’t matter if we define it as “intelligent” or not, we will probably worship this AI as a god thanks to our religious module

    Is not the Turing Test a bit like the Irish Question?

    In that as soon as the robots get close to resolving it, the humans go and change the test!
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 1,360
    Scott_xP said:
    Thanks for the link. Just read the article and agree with every word. Disappointed but not surprised that the SNP seem to have no interest in taking advantage of the current Tory embarrassment.
  • NEW THREAD
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 1,360
    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    It really doesn’t look like a military jet in the video. It looks like exactly like a shiny silver missile or space rocket. Over Tooting

    It looks like a firework, if we can get past your friend's estimate that it was ten times bigger than a plane.
    It’s definitely not a firework. It’s a rocket (or a jet) of some kind. With a vapour trail.

    I would post the video but I’ve told her I’ll try and sell it to the daily mail for £50 first. If I fail I will post it here for the group opinion. A genuine mystery (tho I don’t think it is aliens)
    I think the chemtrails have softened your brain
    Update on Tooting-gate.

    She says the object was to the southwest of Tooting. In the video it looks big and stable (so not a firework) - definitely some kind of aircraft with a vapour trail?

    So then the best bet is a military jet making a very speedy and vertical ascent somewhere in far SW London or Surrey, and the unusual low sunlight makes the jet look like a missile

    Any RAF bods here? Do we have many active military airfields in Surrey?
    Odiham
    Isn’t it in Hampshire?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 13,404

    rcs1000 said:

    Benevolent dictatorship works when you have a competent benevolent dictator.

    The problem is that one day you'll end up with an average leader, and then another day you'll end up with a dreadful one, and no way of removing them.

    And there's no way to get around that. China had competent dictators based around 10 year terms. (Maybe 'benevolent' is a little generous, but still...)

    And then along came Xi and ripped that up and made himself President (sorry General Secretary) for life. Oh yeah, and also started acting belligerently to the rest of the world. If the Chinese people don't like this, there is exactly nothing they can do about it.

    How many stable benevolent dictatorships have there been over time?

    The point of democracy is that we can have a palace coup, minus the civil war and death, every 4-5 years.

    Part of the reason for the nastiness of many dictatorships is the Tiger Problem. When you are riding a tiger, the problem is what happens when you get off.

    As the philosopher said, "Remember, you are only President... for Life".
    Yes, exactly. Mind you, we shouldn't delude ourselves that we have a smoothly functioning democracy in which we all have equal influence. I remember a few years ago giving a talk about the British system to a Chinese academic delegation (no, I wasn't paid £300,000 - £500 was the going rate), who listened politely to my explanation of the advantages of multi-party choice (I was slightly surprised they were even willing to pay to listen to it). One asked, "If we asked average British citizens whether they felt they had a meaningful impact on government at any level?" I admitted "Only to a very limited extent" and asked him how the average Chinese citizen would respond. He smiled wryly and shrugged without replying.
    It's a very CCP way of thinking - the Governing Party is the centre of everything.

    That's backwards.

    A more interesting question perhaps for comparison is the other areas of a democratic state - is the Government above or beneath the law? How far are individuals free to do what they desire?

    And so on.

    Actually, I don't agree on "no meaningful impact at any level" - at local level for a start it is perfectly doable.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 13,404
    Cookie said:

    DougSeal said:

    Cyclefree said:

    File under "You could not make it up"

    EXCLUSIVE :

    Kate Josephs, the former head of the Government unit responsible for drawing covid-19 restrictions, was given a leaving do in the Cabinet Office on December 17 2020 - the day before the Number 10 Xmas Party


    https://twitter.com/HarryYorke1/status/1482014927577624583?s=20

    In The Telegraph....

    At this rate the civil service is going to come out of this with an even worse reputation than Boris.
    It raises serious questions on their culture and just how long this has been going on

    A poster earlier said it was in 2017 and I have no doubt employment law will have to address this
    Why? It’s perfectly permissible for an employer to ban the consumption of alcohol on its premises at any time. Why do we have to legislate for terrible employers with awful cultures?
    Are we not addressing the wrong problem here? A culture of after-work jollity is not a problem AFAICS. It would be a shame to lose, in fact. And I'm not even averse to the odd blurred boundary between working and drinking - certainly I wouldn't want to live in the puritanical culture where the two cannot mix under any circumstances.
    The problem was having a party while telling everyone else not to.
    The Midget Gem haters will be coming for it.

    After work pub discriminates against teetotalitarians, for a start. The jollity discriminates against the miserable, and so on.
This discussion has been closed.