Take the quiz. I got 3/7.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34312879
Sister blog of Physicists of the Caribbean in which I babble about non-astronomy stuff, because everyone needs a hobby
Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Be more Machiavellian
My advice to Labour right now would to be Machiavellian. You may not like Corbyn, but a lot of voters certainly did. Nigh-on all of Scotland voted for the even more left-wing SNP. True, Ed Miliband didn't go down well in England either, but then Ed had even less charisma than David "I definitely did not have sexual relations with that pig" Cameron, as he shall henceforth be known.
Miliband had no prospect of building the wider social movement needed to support his (supposedly) hard-left policies, but worse, he was willing to compromise pretty drastically to try and appease Tory voters on other issues, especially immigration. This ended up with a mix of policies perceived as very left and others which basically said that some fundamental Labour ideologies were wrong, led by a man without any talent for leadership. It was the worst of all worlds, and never going to end well.
Now, it could well be the case that the policies of Corbyn won't appeal to a wider audience. That is perfectly possible, but it remains to be seen. Surely the correct course of action is to give it a little time (let's say a year) and see how Labour do in the polls and by-elections. Corbyn has charisma, appeals to younger voters, and stands a real chance of building the movement that Miliband couldn't. Maybe it won't work, but it would be foolish to stab him in the back without giving him a chance. This is the exact opposite of the mistake with Miliband, which was to not stab him in the back a lot sooner (albeit that for a long time the polls were highly misleading).
You were willing to veer to the right under Blair to get into power, why not veer to the left under Corbyn if he can do the same ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34331389
Miliband had no prospect of building the wider social movement needed to support his (supposedly) hard-left policies, but worse, he was willing to compromise pretty drastically to try and appease Tory voters on other issues, especially immigration. This ended up with a mix of policies perceived as very left and others which basically said that some fundamental Labour ideologies were wrong, led by a man without any talent for leadership. It was the worst of all worlds, and never going to end well.
Now, it could well be the case that the policies of Corbyn won't appeal to a wider audience. That is perfectly possible, but it remains to be seen. Surely the correct course of action is to give it a little time (let's say a year) and see how Labour do in the polls and by-elections. Corbyn has charisma, appeals to younger voters, and stands a real chance of building the movement that Miliband couldn't. Maybe it won't work, but it would be foolish to stab him in the back without giving him a chance. This is the exact opposite of the mistake with Miliband, which was to not stab him in the back a lot sooner (albeit that for a long time the polls were highly misleading).
You were willing to veer to the right under Blair to get into power, why not veer to the left under Corbyn if he can do the same ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34331389
How the other half live
"People with weakened immune systems, such as Aids patients, have come to rely on the drug, which until recently cost about $13.50 (£8.80) a dose. But Mr Shkreli announced he was raising the price to $750 a pill."
How is that even legal ?
"The additional profits he said will be used to make improvements to the 62-year-old drug recipe."
Yes, while the people who actually need it probably can't afford it any more.
""We've agreed to lower the price on Daraprim to a point that is more affordable and is able to allow the company to make a profit, but a very small profit," he told ABC News. "We think these changes will be welcomed.""
Why do I suspect that this man's idea of "very small profit" and my idea of "very small profit" might be quite different things ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34331761
How is that even legal ?
"The additional profits he said will be used to make improvements to the 62-year-old drug recipe."
Yes, while the people who actually need it probably can't afford it any more.
""We've agreed to lower the price on Daraprim to a point that is more affordable and is able to allow the company to make a profit, but a very small profit," he told ABC News. "We think these changes will be welcomed.""
Why do I suspect that this man's idea of "very small profit" and my idea of "very small profit" might be quite different things ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34331761
Tuesday, 22 September 2015
How not to manage a damaging allegation
An interesting insight into how to manage a damaging news story.
Also quite revealing as to the problem Cameron faces over the (dubious) pig story: if he denies it then people will ask why not deny everything else, which is lethal if something, such a when he knew about Ashcroft's nom-dom status is proven true.
Basically, he's been caught good and proper.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/22/david-cameron-advisers-piggate-spin-doctor
Also quite revealing as to the problem Cameron faces over the (dubious) pig story: if he denies it then people will ask why not deny everything else, which is lethal if something, such a when he knew about Ashcroft's nom-dom status is proven true.
Basically, he's been caught good and proper.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/22/david-cameron-advisers-piggate-spin-doctor
Radiation at Fukushima is not that big a deal
Via David Strumfels
Originally shared by Jennifer Ouellette
Four years after Fukushima, no one has been killed or sickened by radioactivity. But 1,600 died fleeing the disaster. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/science/when-radiation-isnt-the-real-risk.html …
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/science/when-radiation-isnt-the-real-risk.html
Originally shared by Jennifer Ouellette
Four years after Fukushima, no one has been killed or sickened by radioactivity. But 1,600 died fleeing the disaster. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/science/when-radiation-isnt-the-real-risk.html …
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/science/when-radiation-isnt-the-real-risk.html
Monday, 21 September 2015
This man needs a twitter minder

Not sure what he's done lately, but I agree on general principles.
EDIT : Oh, he thinks Clock Boy is a fraud. Good grief.
Originally shared by Yonatan Zunger
There are some people whose reputation seems to vary in inverse proportion with the frequency with which they open their mouths.
Seriously, how did he turn into this much of a dick?
Moderation squared
Freedom of speech, people being offended, Kim Davis, Jeremy Corbyn, Bilbo Baggin's genitals, Tim Hunt and sex robots... but not necessarily in that order.
Or if you want an actual blurb : I look at people being offended and free speech. It's perfectly possible to be offended by something not because it's genuinely harmful, but because you're an idiot. This appears to be the case with Jeremy Corbyn not singing the national anthem, and, to a lesser extent, the Tim Hunt fiasco (though in that case people were not in possession of the full facts, they tended to instantly assume the worst without justification). I look at when I think censorship is appropriate, but discuss why this is an extreme measure. It should be a weapon of last resort, not a first response as many twitter mobs seem to be advocating.
PLACEHOLDER
Or if you want an actual blurb : I look at people being offended and free speech. It's perfectly possible to be offended by something not because it's genuinely harmful, but because you're an idiot. This appears to be the case with Jeremy Corbyn not singing the national anthem, and, to a lesser extent, the Tim Hunt fiasco (though in that case people were not in possession of the full facts, they tended to instantly assume the worst without justification). I look at when I think censorship is appropriate, but discuss why this is an extreme measure. It should be a weapon of last resort, not a first response as many twitter mobs seem to be advocating.
PLACEHOLDER
Saturday, 19 September 2015
"It's not about winning", they said
"Scientists believe this will now give them the sensitivity needed to pick up what should be a very subtle signal. The theoretical physicist Kip Thorne, one of the pioneers behind the experiment, went so far as to say that it would be "quite surprising" if the labs made no detection."
I'll believe it when I see it.
""Recording a gravitational wave for the first time has never been a big motivation for Ligo," said Kip Thorne."
HAH HAH AHHAH HAHH ! Good one, Kip.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34298363
I'll believe it when I see it.
""Recording a gravitational wave for the first time has never been a big motivation for Ligo," said Kip Thorne."
HAH HAH AHHAH HAHH ! Good one, Kip.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34298363
Friday, 18 September 2015
The chicken that walks like a dinosaur
"Dr Rodrigo Vasquez, from the University of Chile, received the biology Ig Nobel for the crucial observation that if you raise a chicken with a weighted, artificial tail stuck to its backside, it will walk like a dinosaur."
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34278595
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34278595
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Review : Epic Slavic Myths
Following a now well-established procedure, after that delightful but short offering from Thames & Hudson , I turn to a longer collecti...
-
Hmmm. [The comments below include a prime example of someone claiming they're interested in truth but just want higher standard, where...
-
"The price quoted by Tesla does not include installation of the unit. To this needs to be added the cost of installing solar panels to ...
-
Of course you can prove a negative. In one sense this can be the easiest thing in the world : your theory predicts something which doesn...