VILLAMARV

Mahoosive game.

An actual 6 pointer but need to remember win or lose it's still only 3 points.

To be fair to them I thought they were a good team when we played them and we were pretty fortunate to come away with the win.

I think a draw wouldn't be the worst result in the world for us.

4-0

I still have a Hick 405 although the glue behind the plastic coating is kind of discoloured.

4 hours ago, Jareth said:

Children, like your own

Can't see it being a good morning. MrsVM is not going to be happy I kept their existence from her all these years.

this reminds me of the time my (now sadly deceased) friend and me were doing a bar together at an event in a local venue that the pub we worked for at the time had the license for. It was an all female audience for sure. I can't remember the organisation though. Mind you it'd be about 25+ years ago now. We had to provide a free glass of wine on entry and so we set up our table, bowties on and everything and we pre poured a few glasses so that there wouldn't be a hold up for wine being poured unneccessarily. Anyhow we did a row, or about 5/6 glasses of red and then the rest of the table taken up with white (it being the 90's having both kinds of wine was the height of fashion in the Welsh countryside dontcha know) but it wasn't our first rodeo n that. Cue Millie Tant, full on accusing us of sexistly pouring more white than red, and us foolishly protesting it was a purely functional decision etc. Her and her friend took a glass of red after their dressing down of us and they were the only two that left that table once everyone had walked in.

the moon tickled me more than it probably should there. very good.

18 hours ago, bickster said:

Nah, you can knock those up in seconds from a template and data

while there may be some hyperbole there, it might be the case that statisticians in some data science depts maybe sometimes have referred to their geographer colleagues as 'The Colouring In Department"

More road related gripery, but the state of the road surfaces in Herefordshire. Genuinely never seen A roads so bad in the UK.

I liked Bailey telling Watkins he didn't pass to him because he was offside late on. Martinez got my potm vote despite, as others have said, really wayward distribution. Missed the first 20 minutes as I was heading home after a funeral. Considering the level of performance 0-0 is hardly a bad result away to Ajax. McGinn filling in at CB for the last 10 mins was an odd sight.

23 minutes ago, AndyM3000 said:

One of the worst games I've ever seen.

You're not wrong but I;m still laughing. That tickled me. cheers, I needed cheering up

2 minutes ago, Rds1983 said:

I could be wrong but I thought you were based in the States. Would that not make you a 'cellphone' user and not a 'mobile phone' user?

I'm a yam yam exiled in da Wales

4 hours ago, limpid said:

At least part of the problem is that many of these polls are still conducted by phoning people.

That will always lead to a bias favouring the opinions of older, more conservative responders.

And the online ones are blighted by self selection bias. And a lack of oversight.

Of course in the targetted algorythm world commissioning different polls built to get the response you desire from each individual is the name of the game.

3 hours ago, Jonesy7211 said:

does logical decision making trump emotive decision making?

Bingo, and if so, who says so and why?

It's ultimately the flaw in any economic model based on the perfect model. Humans don't conform to the perfect model or mathematical logic. Nor should they. However much pressure or threat of punishment is put upon them. Emotive reasoning is not a negative to be overcome. But it's really hard to quantify in mathematical models.

The more complex societal models will attempt to address this emotive reasoning and build some allowances into the model but moral philosophy is hard to ascribe a numerical value.

Quote

My interest is not data, it's the world. And part of world development you can see in numbers. Others, like human rights, empowerment of women, it's very difficult to measure in numbers. - Hans Rosling

Data sets are not objective.

4 hours ago, blandy said:

I am of course evil for even pondering such matters.

I dunno, it's classic utilitarianism, like the trolley problem.

On 04/03/2024 at 19:40, Xela said:

Love the Beatles... ahhh shit!

I'd say...all of us are mobile phone users?

On 04/03/2024 at 19:46, bickster said:

Marv would disagree, he has no mobile

21 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

will use/have used them. Don't own one.

to be fair to @Xela

10 minutes ago, blandy said:

Here’s a talking point. I was musing a few years ago, while sat in a huge stationary traffic jam on the motorway. The jam, it turned out was because someone was threatening to jump off a bridge. I was on my way to a Fall gig and had some leeway, but I wondered what’s the calculation? Motorway closed both directions. Thousands of people stuck. Is one of them gonna beat their wife/ plunge into depression/ insert terrible outcome here/ whatever? Because of the actions of a disturbed person?  At what point is the greater good/ least harm caused by just either grabbing the “jumper” or they jump?

It’s a philosophical question, not a point of view.

I get the question.

I suppose my immediate response would be to ask (perhaps rhetorically, I'm not pressing for a definitive answer) what the metric is for good/harm? How do we effectively measure, evaluate and compare harm?

And that's ultimately also your question right?

As Mr No Phone Weirdo it's all academic to me. But that was also why it interested me. We were all having a nice meal and the subject of the statistician sat at the table being the only one (with a phone obvs) who couldnt receive location pings via whatsapp to find the restaurant became the focus of the conversation. So much good natured merriment and banter between friends about the data scientist getting with the tech programme. And genuine interest from the rest about their reasoning as to why they favour one free to use service over another free to use service. But as you all anecdotally attest to there was this obvious backlash to the notion of changing. I'm not sure whether it was brand loyalty or some sort of defensive response to the idea that anything they were doing could be deemed worth of critique or laziness as mentioned above but it was visceral.

Personally the only time whatsapp came onto my radar at all was back in my phone owning days (not a smart one) when a sports team I was a part of would chat over it but I couldn't access it from my computer and they found it hilariously too much effort to send a text or email or use a different app/ find another platform that we could all access. So no biggie, I turned up for training when it was cancelled and that sort of thing. I've never used it and am unlikely to do so, but my friend (the signal using one) said much the same as you guys in that only their closest friends who genuinely wanted to contact them that had got tired over time of losing contact - had downloaded the signal app, and kind of under duress.

Could have gone in a few different threads and if this one is inappropriate then move it or whatever but a bit of a commotion over by here last night.

Noticed a couple of police cars in the street yesterday afternoon but as I live pretty much opposite a halfway house it's not an altogether uncommon sight. About tea-time though I noticed a fire engine blocking the road and police tape everywhere and an ambulance outside the halfwayhouse. There was a guy up on the roof threatening to jump. There were multiple times of the guy going in and out the building through his window. He was clearly very agitated. The vast majority of the service personnel there were keeping their distance quite clearly presumably so as not to agitate the situation with numbers. It took around 6 hours until they packed up and went home and I think they got the guy inside safely in the end.

As most of you know I live in a pretty rural place, so I'll probably know some of the lads sat in the fire engine. The same guys who had to deal with my mates body when he killed himself during lockdown. But much respect to anyone who has to deal with situations like that as part of their jobs. Amazingly high pressure environment. Harrowing. Whoever was on call to "talk them down" or however it's described outside of hollywood earned their corn last night. As I said, Respect.

16 hours ago, il_serpente said:

wouldn't be able to raise a glass to his lips anyway

10 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Fish puns

some people hake them

5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

She could probably have done with a better editor looking at the title.

out of likes soo....

5 minutes ago, Genie said:

Whatsapp is still working which is good. 

2 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

17 is the ideal age. I think we did it earlier than that at school. 

weirdly, my dad was one of the family members and I'm pretty sure he was about the same age when he read it.

30 minutes ago, sidcow said:

bUT ThEy tRAcK yOu WiTh vAcCiNaTiOnS

I appreciate (maybe I mean hope ) it's an attempt at humour, and the mocking around the table wasn't that stupid obviously, but it was interesting to me that the people that use that app around the table thought they would school an individual who literally deals with this stuff on a daily basis, and in an area actually covered by some existing ethics laws, on the insignificance of their own personal data. Because, you know, I want to chat with my mates and I don't want to download an app that does the same thing as whatsapp used to do when it was cool. 

It's hardly tin foil hat stuff when the owners of whatsapp literally sold data to cambrige analytica and were hauled in front of a US version of a government enquiry as a result.

Weird to me that people seem concerned with the Russians or the Chinese or the Trumps or the Farages of this world using targetted algorythms to literally attempt to sway elections in leagues with global corportions, or create social credit systems to dictate who 'earns' access to goods and services, but not so concerned if it means clicking on a different icon in their own lives. Baffles me.

In fairness, the Associate Professor of philosophy and ethics at the University of Oxford (Institute for Ethics in AI, Faculty of Philosophy), specialising in ethics of artificial intelligence (AI Ethics), applied philosophy, ethics, moral philosophy, political philosophy and practical ethics interviewed in the podcast doesn't mention vaccinations once. The Economist chose to put her book 'Priacy is Power' in their list of books of the year in 2020 fwiw.

But yeah, down with experts innit.

On 03/03/2024 at 17:51, Rds1983 said:

²

1 minute ago, mjmooney said:

Really? What did they think? Too sophisticated? Or too childish? 

yeah, they thought it would be a bit much. I was surprised when I read it. It's really accessible.