Can you clarify that? is it an inference that it isn't an intelligent man who is looking?
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Dont think Tolstoy had benefit of cut and paste you, ve used for any intelligent aspects.He had to rely on cognitive ability, accepted you cant.
Serously OG why dont you comment on DM online I, m sure you, d find some more like minded nutters to agree with you.
Was that the helicopter from episode two of the Chernobyl series?
This is true, and I have to agree you do indeed hardly try, and yet in a rather winning and amusing way, manage to be "trying"
The old saying "Do as you would be done by" springs to mind
And what is most curious of all, despite disappearing from time to time, you keep coming back to find something else to express outrage about.
I am registered to do so, but I find myself laughing too much to make the effort any more
Incidentally where does this line referring to me
"He had to rely on cognitive ability, accepted you cant."
"Seriously OG why dont you comment on DM online I, m sure you, d find some more like minded nutters to agree with you.
Equate with
"Surprising how many apparently decent posters justify deplorable posts.
Perhaps they arent decent folk at all? Underneath their veneer of respectability is pure nastiness. "
You really do personify the line
"Normally I can't stand hypocricy
But I'm prepared to make an exception in my own case."
And you really don't recognise when you are doing it do you?
That why I laugh, the irony passes right over the top of your head
No, but moral outrage about the word "feckless" really is confected anger (to use one of their cliches)
Labour seem to have renewed their credentials as aJew hating racist organisation.
Is there some particular recent reference,to which you might like to direct us,or is this of the " lets throw muck and see if it sticks" category?.
Slippery perch sydrome in the Belfry again..gives ride to sudden shock headaches
Cummings latest Blog full of good stuff:
"It is relevant to Brexit and anybody thinking ‘how on earth do we escape this nightmare’ but 1) these ideas are not at all dependent on whether you support or oppose Brexit, about which reasonable people disagree, and 2) they are generally applicable to how to improve decision-making — for example, they are relevant to problems like ‘how to make decisions during a fast moving nuclear crisis’ which I blogged about recently, or if you are a journalist ‘what future media could look like to help improve debate of politics’. One of the tools Nielsen discusses is a tool to make memory a choice by embedding learning in long-term memory rather than, as it is for almost all of us, an accident. I know from my days working on education reform in government that it’s almost impossible to exaggerate how little those who work on education policy think about ‘how to improve learning’.
Fields make huge progress when they move from stories (e.g Icarus) and authority (e.g ‘witch doctor’) to evidence/experiment (e.g physics, wind tunnels) and quantitative models (e.g design of modern aircraft). Political ‘debate’ and the processes of government are largely what they have always been — largely conflict over stories and authorities where almost nobody even tries to keep track of the facts/arguments/models they’re supposedly arguing about, or tries to learn from evidence, or tries to infer useful principles from examples of extreme success/failure. We can see much better than people could in the past how to shift towards processes of government being ‘partially rational discussion over facts and models and learning from the best examples of organisational success‘. But one of the most fundamental and striking aspects of government is that practically nobody involved in it has the faintest interest in or knowledge of how to create high performance teams to make decisions amid uncertainty and complexity. This blindness is connected to another fundamental fact: critical institutions (including the senior civil service and the parties) are programmed to fight to stay dysfunctional, they fight to stay closed and avoid learning about high performance, they fight to exclude the most able people.
I wrote about some reasons for this before the referendum (cf. The Hollow Men). The Westminster and Whitehall response was along the lines of ‘natural party of government’, ‘Rolls Royce civil service’ blah blah. But the fact that Cameron, Heywood et al did not understand many basic features of how the world works is why I and a few others gambled on the referendum — we knew that the systemic dysfunction of our institutions and the influence of grotesque incompetents provided an opportunity for extreme leverage.
Since then, after three years in which the parties, No10 and the senior civil service have imploded (after doing the opposite of what Vote Leave said should happen on every aspect of the negotiations) one thing has held steady — Insiders refuse to ask basic questions about the reasons for this implosion..."
Full text here: https://dominiccummings.com/2019/06/26/on-the-referendum-33-high-performance-government-cognitive-technologies-michael-nielsen-bret-victor-seeing-rooms/
"It is relevant to Brexit and anybody thinking ‘how on earth do we escape this nightmare’ but 1) these ideas are not at all dependent on whether you support or oppose Brexit, about which reasonable people disagree, and 2) they are generally applicable to how to improve decision-making — for example, they are relevant to problems like ‘how to make decisions during a fast moving nuclear crisis’ which I blogged about recently, or if you are a journalist ‘what future media could look like to help improve debate of politics’. One of the tools Nielsen discusses is a tool to make memory a choice by embedding learning in long-term memory rather than, as it is for almost all of us, an accident. I know from my days working on education reform in government that it’s almost impossible to exaggerate how little those who work on education policy think about ‘how to improve learning’.
Fields make huge progress when they move from stories (e.g Icarus) and authority (e.g ‘witch doctor’) to evidence/experiment (e.g physics, wind tunnels) and quantitative models (e.g design of modern aircraft). Political ‘debate’ and the processes of government are largely what they have always been — largely conflict over stories and authorities where almost nobody even tries to keep track of the facts/arguments/models they’re supposedly arguing about, or tries to learn from evidence, or tries to infer useful principles from examples of extreme success/failure. We can see much better than people could in the past how to shift towards processes of government being ‘partially rational discussion over facts and models and learning from the best examples of organisational success‘. But one of the most fundamental and striking aspects of government is that practically nobody involved in it has the faintest interest in or knowledge of how to create high performance teams to make decisions amid uncertainty and complexity. This blindness is connected to another fundamental fact: critical institutions (including the senior civil service and the parties) are programmed to fight to stay dysfunctional, they fight to stay closed and avoid learning about high performance, they fight to exclude the most able people.
I wrote about some reasons for this before the referendum (cf. The Hollow Men). The Westminster and Whitehall response was along the lines of ‘natural party of government’, ‘Rolls Royce civil service’ blah blah. But the fact that Cameron, Heywood et al did not understand many basic features of how the world works is why I and a few others gambled on the referendum — we knew that the systemic dysfunction of our institutions and the influence of grotesque incompetents provided an opportunity for extreme leverage.
Since then, after three years in which the parties, No10 and the senior civil service have imploded (after doing the opposite of what Vote Leave said should happen on every aspect of the negotiations) one thing has held steady — Insiders refuse to ask basic questions about the reasons for this implosion..."
Full text here: https://dominiccummings.com/2019/06/26/on-the-referendum-33-high-performance-government-cognitive-technologies-michael-nielsen-bret-victor-seeing-rooms/
Last edited:
Labour have re-admitted Chris Williamson to their party, a man with a Jew hating agenda, having once been suspended for such behaviour.
Maybe you consider Williamson’s behaviour to be nothing more than mud throwing. We have seen glimpses of your attitude with regards to the trivialisation of Concentration Camps, so perhaps your stance is unsurprising. Based on your attitude, it would not surprise me to learn that you are also a holocaust denier.
Last edited:
People who have been manipulated sometimes find it hard to admit and come to terms with. A long period of denial is likely.
BBC news quotes:
Mr Hunt said it was essential the Conservatives had delivered Brexit before a general election, otherwise the party "will be thrashed".
Anyone of the opinion that the tories won't be thrashed if they actually deliver brexit?
Mr Hunt said it was essential the Conservatives had delivered Brexit before a general election, otherwise the party "will be thrashed".
Anyone of the opinion that the tories won't be thrashed if they actually deliver brexit?
340000 people moved out of Knife Town last year over fear of violence! Another slaying last night.
Thanks for the link and interesting too, he has a point that institutions based on precedent and formal response structures can easily be outmaneuvered by unscrupulous organisations not restricted in such ways.
Decision makers when not burdened down by (to his mind) petty considerations are easy to outwit and out outmaneuver.
Having to take rational pragmtic decisions makes you easy prey to con men and shysters with a high level of inherent cunning and an amoral outlook.
That's him! and yet for all that he allowed himself while armoured by his arrogance and vanity to be used by others as a useful fool.
And my! hasn't he been bitter over that, blaming others , not himself!
Couldn't happen to a more worthy chap.
Karma....Om...Om...Om.
I think he forgot to add "otherwise we won't get the chance"
Well done! You used far less words than I did to say much the same thing! I should have just described him as having been mugged