Mollyycolllinss Categories Society
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
Hi @WDCouncil @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk
The Equal Opportunities Form in your job application has 'gender' in a list of what appears to be the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
cc @macca808 @SundayTimesScot
1/13
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
2/13
You then ask "How would you describe your gender?" with options:
Female
Male.
3/13
Again, 'gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
4/13
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
5/13
The Equal Opportunities Form in your job application has 'gender' in a list of what appears to be the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
cc @macca808 @SundayTimesScot
1/13
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
2/13
You then ask "How would you describe your gender?" with options:
Female
Male.
3/13
Again, 'gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
4/13
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
5/13
Thread on the recent report on the possible risk of increased death associated with the new UK variant (B117)- with a discussion of the evidence around this, and what this means.
First, there is strong evidence to support increased transmissibility of B117 - current estimates of increased transmissibility range between 30-70% - from epidemiological evidence examining the differential rate of growth of B117 with respect to other variants & increase in R
There is also evidence from PHE contact studies that the risk of transmission from those carrying the B117 variant is ~50% greater than with other non-B117 variants.
Increased transmissibility, even if a variant has the same fatality rate can increase deaths substantially, because the rate of growth of cases is higher- & more cases means more deaths.
Increased fatality rates also increase deaths- but do so
So how was risk of death with the variant studied?
We don't routinely sequence all samples for the virus. We've found that the variant has a particular deletion which means that some PCR tests on samples with the variant give a different read-out when the variant is present.
First, there is strong evidence to support increased transmissibility of B117 - current estimates of increased transmissibility range between 30-70% - from epidemiological evidence examining the differential rate of growth of B117 with respect to other variants & increase in R
There is also evidence from PHE contact studies that the risk of transmission from those carrying the B117 variant is ~50% greater than with other non-B117 variants.
Increased transmissibility, even if a variant has the same fatality rate can increase deaths substantially, because the rate of growth of cases is higher- & more cases means more deaths.
Increased fatality rates also increase deaths- but do so
How dangerous are the B.1.1.7 and 501Y.V2 hyper-transmissible strains?
— Eric Topol (@EricTopol) January 11, 2021
by @AdamJKucharski @CFR_orghttps://t.co/aycWMN3b5h
h/t @Karl_Lauterbach pic.twitter.com/JlaFzzP06t
So how was risk of death with the variant studied?
We don't routinely sequence all samples for the virus. We've found that the variant has a particular deletion which means that some PCR tests on samples with the variant give a different read-out when the variant is present.
A few things that I didn't cover yesterday when I talked about equity factor models (it's a huge area and it's impossible to more than scrape the surface)
1. How do you get the exposure matrix Xt?
There are different ways to estimate it, depending on the factor. Simplest is factors like industry or country exposure where the entries can be 0/1 depending on whether the stock is in that industry/country or not.
Some exposures can be estimated by linear regression on historical data, if you already have a time series which approximates the factor returns. E.g. exposure to the market factor (beta) is estimated this way, by regressing each stock against the S&P 500 (or some other index)
This also works for "macro" factors e.g. you can estimate exposures for each stock to commodity prices, exchange rates, interest rates, GDP or inflation surprises etc by regressing stock returns against the relevant historical time series.
Finally you can have exposures which are heuristically derived from other observable data about the stock, e.g. accounting data, analyst reports, past price movements etc. In this case you find some metric which measures the factor you care about (e.g. price to earnings) and
A few people in the DMs asking about equity factor models so here's a short explainer.
— macrocephalopod (@macrocephalopod) February 2, 2021
Let's make it a concrete problem -- you are the risk manager at a big multi-manager hedge fund with ~100 sub-PMs each of whom has a portfolio of 10-50 stocks, long and short.
1. How do you get the exposure matrix Xt?
There are different ways to estimate it, depending on the factor. Simplest is factors like industry or country exposure where the entries can be 0/1 depending on whether the stock is in that industry/country or not.
Some exposures can be estimated by linear regression on historical data, if you already have a time series which approximates the factor returns. E.g. exposure to the market factor (beta) is estimated this way, by regressing each stock against the S&P 500 (or some other index)
This also works for "macro" factors e.g. you can estimate exposures for each stock to commodity prices, exchange rates, interest rates, GDP or inflation surprises etc by regressing stock returns against the relevant historical time series.
Finally you can have exposures which are heuristically derived from other observable data about the stock, e.g. accounting data, analyst reports, past price movements etc. In this case you find some metric which measures the factor you care about (e.g. price to earnings) and
There is very little glamorous about the average western woman. No grace. No subtlety. No shyness, cuteness or warmth. Not sophisticated nor classy.
Coarse, obnoxious, aggressive, and openly, shamelessly promiscuous.
This is what "women's freedom" looks like.
Take a good look.
Perhaps if she had been a little less free to live life on her own terms, she may have retained some of the natural features of femininity that could endear a man to marry her for life.
The moral of the story here is too much freedom is even worse than too little for a woman.
Yes we may denounce the practices of more authoritarian cultures in how they limit their women, and how those women suffer at the hands of abuses of patriarchal power. But at least those women still resemble something that actually looks like a woman. They stay feminine & unugly.
Free women suffer an altogether different abuse, one only comparable to something akin to childhood neglect. Unattended, they lose their warmth and grace in their bid for self-reliance, stripping their femininity bare of all but its ugliest parts.
Free women are feral women.
And a feral woman is what you see in the video at the beginning of this thread.
An unmarriageable husk, an abomination that has all the negative qualities of the feminine, and all of the negative qualities of the masculine, with none of the positives of either
Neglect is abuse.
Coarse, obnoxious, aggressive, and openly, shamelessly promiscuous.
This is what "women's freedom" looks like.
Take a good look.
The ruse is up pic.twitter.com/Wq68n9QIwE
— CCide (@chimericide) January 19, 2021
Perhaps if she had been a little less free to live life on her own terms, she may have retained some of the natural features of femininity that could endear a man to marry her for life.
The moral of the story here is too much freedom is even worse than too little for a woman.
Yes we may denounce the practices of more authoritarian cultures in how they limit their women, and how those women suffer at the hands of abuses of patriarchal power. But at least those women still resemble something that actually looks like a woman. They stay feminine & unugly.
Free women suffer an altogether different abuse, one only comparable to something akin to childhood neglect. Unattended, they lose their warmth and grace in their bid for self-reliance, stripping their femininity bare of all but its ugliest parts.
Free women are feral women.
And a feral woman is what you see in the video at the beginning of this thread.
An unmarriageable husk, an abomination that has all the negative qualities of the feminine, and all of the negative qualities of the masculine, with none of the positives of either
Neglect is abuse.
The FBI arrests local cops surprisingly frequently, but this often looks more like a genteel gang applying pressure on a trashy gang than anything to cheer. Let me give an example from the 2008 RNC, and how the FBI pressured the local cops to raid/torture/etc us for them...
Ramsey County sheriff Bob Fletcher has been in the, ah, news recently, but back in 2008 he was the arch villain of the RNC protests, raiding all my "co-conspirators," doing interrogations where he acted like he was on 24, and screaming to the media about terrorism.
Because Fletcher is a quintessential dipshit chud you may be tempted to believe this was all him going off half-cocked. Indeed this became kinda the media narrative, insofar as they pushed back on him at all.
The reality however is more that Fletcher was a useful tool to the FBI
First, it's important to note that the RNC (and the DNC) as a rule donate massive piles of money to local police forces at their conventions to *insure* them against lawsuits. This was the case in 2008, I don't remember the exact figure but on the order of 10 million USD.
Now the Welcoming Committee was an anarchist project to organize protest infrastructure and was aboveground and open to the public. This meant we had to deal with multiple undercovers / informants from jurisdictions often competing with each other. You just make them wash dishes!
Let\u2019s not forget that the former #1 and #2 at LA County Sheriff are doing time in Federal prison for interfering with an FBI investigation.
— Chad Loder (@chadloder) January 14, 2021
Ramsey County sheriff Bob Fletcher has been in the, ah, news recently, but back in 2008 he was the arch villain of the RNC protests, raiding all my "co-conspirators," doing interrogations where he acted like he was on 24, and screaming to the media about terrorism.
Because Fletcher is a quintessential dipshit chud you may be tempted to believe this was all him going off half-cocked. Indeed this became kinda the media narrative, insofar as they pushed back on him at all.
The reality however is more that Fletcher was a useful tool to the FBI
First, it's important to note that the RNC (and the DNC) as a rule donate massive piles of money to local police forces at their conventions to *insure* them against lawsuits. This was the case in 2008, I don't remember the exact figure but on the order of 10 million USD.
Now the Welcoming Committee was an anarchist project to organize protest infrastructure and was aboveground and open to the public. This meant we had to deal with multiple undercovers / informants from jurisdictions often competing with each other. You just make them wash dishes!
