"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
More from Simon DeDeo
This is the first deletion, back in 2014. A bit hard to read between the lines, but the basic story that an admin had Stickland's page "speedy deleted"—i.e., deleted without debate. The method was something called Copyright Jujitsu.
In particular, the admin had the page deleted not because of notability, but because it included a photograph of Strickland that had ambiguous copyright status. This is a method that people developed to get rid of content they didn't want, but also didn't want to debate.
"Copyright Jujitsu" because it is usually used against spam from companies; a PR officer uploads promotional material to Wikipedia. Instead of debating whether it's neutral, the admin can say "we'd love to have it, but the material appears to violate your company's copyright".
Usually the PR office and the IP office are separate in a company, and the idea of releasing promotional material under public domain is such a legal nightmare that the PR person goes away.
One thing that’s always struck me is how *late* probability theory came in intellectual history. We had integral calculus before we had probability. And probability is insanely simple, mathematically!
I’m tempted to say that probability theory is not, in fact, Lindy. Frequentist probability is (for all the usual reasons) best understood as a heuristic. Bayesian interpretations, by contrast, take the remarkable step of tying it to mental states.
You have to work very hard to convince yourself that beliefs really are “degrees of belief in sets of events” (or whatever). It’s not natural—and I won’t rehearse the whole story about rational choice and decision theory...
So with those critiques in the back of my mind, when I read David Wallace’s decision-theoretic account of the Born Rule I was rather primed to say, hey, so what? Meaning...
Some thoughts worked out in a letter to a friend, which is the kind of thing you do when off Twitter for a glorious week. (🧵)
“Chance is ignorance”—the Bayesian story; all probabilities represent states of mind, not states of the world. One *could* put (some) chances “in the world”, but let’s take Occam’s Razor seriously...
That the probability of a fair coin coming up heads is 50% simply means that marginalizing (tracing, as the physicists say) over the hidden facts leaves you, nearly, maximally ignorant of the outcome.
Quantum uncertainty (access below!) poses an apparent challenge to this story. There seems to be nothing to be ignorant about when it comes to (say) electron spin—there is nothing “inside” the
The electron is a simple object, in other words. So where does the uncertainty come from? One could follow David Wallace’s wonderful interpretation in terms of chaotic dynamics and decoherence, but let’s see if we can take another route...
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Put another way, the editors who built the dominant nodes in this network...
...have little overlap with the ones who made this much more recent managerial flowchart.
Internet time runs at hundred-fold speed—the difference between the people who painted what's in the Uffizi, and the people in charge of keeping those paintings from deteriorating. Very different tasks, and (one presumes) very personalities as well. @PaulSkallas?
More from Life
Illustrations by @visualizevalue.
1/ Get more done by doing less.
2/ You can't get better unless you get started.
3/ Zoom out. It's getting better. (IP via @behaviorgap)
4/ 'Normal is an illusion. What is normal for the spider is chaos for the fly.' — Charles Addams
1. The 401k - the backbone savings vehicle of American retirement - did not exist until 1978. The Roth Ira was not born until 1998. If it were a person it would be barely old enough to drink
2. NYU professor Scott Galloway has a related idea that is so important to remember when judging success - both your own and others': "Nothing is as good or as bad as it seems."
3. Margin of safety - you can call it room for error or redundancy
4. "Every job looks easy when you're not the one doing it because the challenges faced by someone in the arena are often invisible to those in the crowd."
5. "The average equity fund investor underperformed the funds they invested in by half a percent per year, according to Morningstar - the result of buying and selling when they should have just bought and held."
You remember your heroes: Eisenhower and Reagan, the Bush's? Right? You knew that they would "take care of us" while all the crazy tree huggers and hippies wanted to buy the world a Coke and and give all your money to poor people and immigrants!
...and how was THAT gonna teach them to pull themselves up by the boot straps and make something of themselves like YOU DID??
After all, this is the land of opportunity, RIGHT? Everyone has the same chance to be successful and PROSPEROUS, right???
You did it all with NO HELP--ALL BY YOURSELF, DIDN'T YOU. I mean, the G.I. Bill didn't do all that MUCH!
Rich people were taxed at 70%, and that was OK with you because you weren't one. *YET*
Just because the cost of living was MINISCULE compared to now, and you got a spiffy new job with a company car and paid health insurance, and a freaking house you BOUGHT ALL BY YOURSELF for 25 thousand freaking dollars,
I won't name the person but it's related to someone I know digitally
I've been following him for a year or more
He owns a digital marketing agency and a sells some courses
He had tremendous growth rate on his social media
Everything was going good but today he's shutting down his agency
Started providing digital marketing services but
Instantly started running massive number of ad campaigns on his social media accounts
Used to pay around Rs 5-10 lakhs per month = rent in a posh area + employees
Shutting down today
He has a strong personal brand but at the cost of massive investments!
Be it on Ads or PR or some branding
You May Also Like
All other claims are about social governance on private sites, where applying free speech doctrine is a stretch at best
Baseline free speech has expanded modestly since 1776 or whatever your reference point is.
About 20% beyond core case of government-critical speech in formally public spaces and media I'd say.
You can (for example) have more kinds of conversations in a bar without getting punched or kicked out by other patrons or management. You can teach more things in colleges than 100 years ago.
That's a genuine de facto increase in practical, informal free speech/expression.
But online free "speech" is, as @reneed has pointed out, not an expansion of free speech at all, but an expansion of reach. It is like the secondary freedom of the press to print as many copies as they can afford, not primary freedom to say what they want
If a newspaper wants to print more copies it has buy more printing equipment and front more upfront costs. Reach for a paper publication is not "free", but a function of desired circulation, which in turn is a function of demand prediction etc. But that logic is obscured online.
BREAKING: President Donald Trump has submitted his answers to questions from special counsel Robert Mueller— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) November 20, 2018
Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.
Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.
Mueller's team was 100% partisan.
That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election
They looked high.
They looked low.
They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.
And they found...NOTHING.
Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.
What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?
THERE WEREN'T ANY.
Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.
These setups I found from the following 4 accounts:
Share for the benefit of everyone.
Here are the setups from @Pathik_Trader Sir first.
1. Open Drive (Intraday Setup explained)
Bactesting results of Open Drive
Already explained strategy of #opendrive— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) May 27, 2020
Backtested results in 30 stocks and nifty, banknifty.
Success ratio : approx 40-45%
RR average 1:2
Entry as per strategy
Stoploss = Open level
Exit 3:15 PM Or SL
39 months 14 months -ve, 25 +ve
Yearly all 4 years +ve performance. pic.twitter.com/nGqhzMKGVy
2. Two Price Action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as
So today we will discuss two more price action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) June 20, 2020
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as Support
Example of PDC/PDH Setup given
I've been a @23andMe customer for a while, and have followed their ancestry updates closely.
All is more or less as expected....except for this bit about Native American.
The family is almost completely composed of Spanish peasants (from various regions) who emigrated, along with a massive wave in the late 19th-cent./early 20th-cent., to Cuba back when it was a booming economy (richer than Spain's) and worth emigrating to (Communism killed that).
Also, the native population of Cuba was annihilated early on---was the first place the Spanish colonized after all. Having a native background in Cuba would be like having the same in, say, Massachusetts, particularly if you're (say) mostly Irish. Just really, really unlikely.
(Note: the North African/Arab background is less mysterious. The Iberian peninsula was part of the Muslim world for centuries. It would be odd *not* to have some Arab/Middle Eastern background coming from Spain. Given the family is mostly from Northern Spain, it's small though.)
I have a Spanish passport, have been back to the ancestral villages in Spain, seen the church where my grandmother was baptized, my grandfather told me stories about growing up as the child of Spanish colonists in rural Cuba. The native bit just clashes with all the family lore.
Andrew McCabe was reported to the FBI’s Office of Public Affairs for making an unauthorized leak of classified info to the media about @GenFlynn in early February 2017.
If you’ve wondered exactly who it was who leaked the classified info from that intelligence report on @GenFlynn’s phone calls with then-Russian ambassador Kislyak to the media, you are right now seeing a huge honking clue who it was.
To those responding to this info by sneering "Nothing's gonna happen":
You just might be too stupid to be following me.
The then-Deputy Director of the FBI get's caught targeting @GenFlynn with an illegal leak so he can 'investigated' by Peter Strzok?
Now that we know it was McCabe who set up Flynn for a fake 'perjury' investigation by his pet attack dog, Peter Strzok, the next name that's going to surface is...Joseph Pientka.