I think we should also discourage people torturing and raping dolls. Not because of damage to the dolls but to the perpetrator.

I think he is against puns, and for appearing Serious (and I agree with him, given the money involved).

Was pleased today that I at least was able to mention 'neglected tropical diseases' in a speech, one of the existing but, well, neglected, black marks on humanity.

Me, I am Firmly anti-pun in scientific article titles.

Have read this thread without realising are you pro or anti pun?

It seems to me that AI should be able to radically improve education efficiency, but the tech bros are hopelessly naive and wrong-headed about how, and actual education experts who could lead this are sidelined, alienated, or resistant.

It's fit for purpose.

This particular plot is thanks to @bencochrane.bsky.social.

My (Claude's really) back of the envelope (I don't have scripts to monitor these ones automatically like I do NZ and USA) suggest diesel is about US$7 per gallon in Australia and US$10 per gallon in UK.

Even so it's still correct that 'you'd expect X to be ahead in some if Y is really ahead by 3' - unless you're saying beyond weighting, it's entirely deterministic.

It must be particularly complex trying to vaccinate birds that are shy.

Great keynote today by Neil Pearce for the Australasian Epidemiological Association using asthma and kidney disease as egs. Argues much that is called 'causal inference' is really causal estimation, and inference is more like multi-source, multi-method detective work eliminating suspects one by one.

What I am getting at is I believe that if there was a credible threat of getting in actual trouble when your AI does something bad that the labs would implement basic simple measures that would be highly effective at preventing those bad things.

This post concludes 'Spotify is actually the best music streaming service that currently exists', and even the one he switched to is inferior in lacking a large chunk of music his wife wants.

Nothing in measurement is certain, but the ILO statistical standards are among the oldest and best followed on the planet, and the US methods basically conform, so I think if you look at this on ILOStat the comparison will be pretty fair.

I think Wittgenstein wins if the field is philosophers, but Ashoka, Stravisnky, Picasso if we let other fields in.

This is genuinely interesting from a ministerial v cabinet responsibility question. You don't often see this sort of thing under quasi-presidential prime ministers.