X : You seem negative with this Gov and press.
Me : Dominic Grieve (former chair of the intelligence and security committee) described Boris as a ‘vacuum of integrity'. I understand the need to maintain political balance but silence on these matters is complicity in them ->
X : You're very anti-Tory!
Me : No. I'm very anti "this form" of Conservatism. I have a great deal of respect for many of the ideals presented by one nation Tories but this current lot is not that. Integrity, transparency and challenge all matter.
X : You don't think there is integrity, transparency and challenge?
Me : I think it has shifted towards manipulation, secrecy and cronyism. I do not view this as healthy for our society. I do not trust Boris.
X : May?
Me : I disagreed with May. I had more trust though.
X : Blair?
Me : I trust Blair about as much as I trust Boris. Unfortunately Boris is our PM. This is not a party thing, it's about the importance of integrity, transparency and challenge in any Gov regardless of political leaning.
X : Unhealthy?
Me : Yes.
X : On challenge?
Me : Yes. From the special contract processes to the curtailing of the right to peaceful protest - politics.co.uk/comment/2021/0… ... there is much which is harmful.
X : Brits like a bit of a rogue.
Me : Eh? What?
X : Robin Hood?
Me : Are you kidding? There are two crooks n that tale - one thief steals from the poor to give to the rich (Sheriff of Nottingham) and the other being Robin Hood. We don't like the Sheriff.
X : Ah, taxes.
Me : Eh?
Me : Taxes are about raising capital from the entire population to benefit the population. They're not about extracting payments or cutting benefits to the poorest in order to fill the coffers of your chums. That's an abuse of the public purse, corruption (aka the "chumocracy")
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Social media is "killing people" ... alas it has made it cheaper for bad actors to target and manipulate people rather than encourage a society built on doing good and educating. However, mainstream has been complicit. Look at Fox News. How is that allowed to broadcast? ...
... the difficulty with "managing" social media is it also has enabled many positives i.e. Masks4All. It also challenges existing orthodoxy and power structures (European Soccer League, Meals for Kids). I don't see that happening so much with mainstream broadcasters ...
... so yes, there needs to be a Gov push towards integrity, transparency and challenge within the media. However, this has got to include mainstream. There is no way on earth that Fox News and its like should ever be allowed to exist.
Can't remember last time I cited Fox news ... however, "42% of 90,000 UK delta cases have been vaccinated" is worth repeating. While vaccines diminish symptoms the problem is transmission will still occur which is why reducing restrictions (distancing, facemasks) is bonkers ->
Vaccines tend to resist evolutionary pressue due to prophylactic use and multiple targets. If I was going to design an experiment to increase likelihood of escape variants with therapeutic use of vaccines with few targets then mass infection would be it ...
... now, I'm not a virologist. My background was in genetics. I do not understand the reasons for #FreedomDay
X : Is mapping right?
Me : It's a map (which by their nature are imperfect representations of a space) built upon a model of evolution (which by the nature of being a model is wrong). It is imperfect and wrong but it seems to be useful.
X : How do you know that?
Me : Well ...
Me : ... the hypothesis is that looking at your landscape is more useful than not looking at your landscape. That can be tested and I believe @RoserPujadas1 was looking into that. Whether the hypothesis holds or not is one we will find out over time.
X : But ...
X : ... lots of people seem to find it useful.
Me : I certainly have that impression but then I'm mindful of selection and confirmation bias. It's just annecdote at the moment, it will need a proper study to test whether mapping is useful and I can't do that being biased.
X : What did you think about Branson's space flight -
Me : Honestly, the dreamers bit got me. In my dreams we swap spaceflight for the few into a world where no child goes hungry. I couldn't help but think wealth tax. Leave space to the robots.
I do have bias here though, many many years ago I sat and listened to a bunch of very wealthy individuals talk about space as the solution to climate crisis i.e. them in space. So, I'm all for industrialisation of space (i.e. launchers, ground stations, control systems etc) ...
... and I do welcome the good stuff like Carbon Mapper - carbon.nasa.gov/carbon_mapper.…, the work of Planet Labs and communication satellites in space. But humans in space, space tourism? Hmmm ... I'd rather see universal basic income first.
Truly disgraceful. Marcus Rashford mural defaced -bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan… ... I hope to hear Priti Patel demand that all these individuals are chased down and imprisoned - from the booing to the defacement. For tolerance's sake these hate crimes cannot be tolerated.
X : Do you think the Gov needs to do more on social media?
Me : Be careful there. Social media is a legitimate tool of protest and communication. This Gov has shown some authoritarian tendencies especially against protest. I would look first at existing laws being applied.
However, that said, the Gov certainly needs to have shown leadership. Starmer fairly calls out Boris on this -
X : What problem?
Me : Lack of transparency. Ownership should be public.
X : The blockchain is open.
Me : Not the ownership of addresses. That's shrouded in the cloak of "privacy!" but it's far more political than that. It also perpetuates the "ethics of choice".
X : Ethics of choice?
Me : Hmmm, we are all a balance between "Me" and "We". The "Me" is all about our choice, the ethics of choice. The "We" is all about our duty to others, the ethics of care ...
... the ethics of choice like any system takes actions to perpetuate itself. Take philanthropy, it's all about financially powerful individuals making choices over who receives help but it requires there to be financially powerful individuals ...