Cummings in the soup?

[johnphilip]

25 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Just coming back to this. I started reading his blog and whilst there are some interesting points in it, I sometimes got the impression that he did not really understand some of the concepts he was discussing and advocating. In the case of an "architect" for some of things he advocates he may or may not know enough to stitch it all together in the big scheme of things.

I assume you read / have read his blog too?

I will dig back further if this is something that genuinely interests you.

At the moment I'm still trying to get my head around if / why he tried to position himself as some kind of sage on global pandemics which is suggested was done in retrospect. If such underhanded behaviour is proven then I believe it does go some way to support my "reservations" regarding what he really is all about. For the life of me I have no idea why the press aren't latched onto this, it's actually a pretty big deal in my book...

Actually I do know why, large portions of the press are junk.  

Once " the Press" or reporters  , interviewed and reported back . Now they are interview , and forming there own opinion.  , possibly  down to there own political  believes.  It's not there place to do anything put Report on an event  . But scandal they belive sell more papers . My father had a name for the " New Of The Word "  newspaper  that I cant type on here for it contains a swear word .

[Raja Clavata]

Not just soup, they've even named a beer after his exploits, pre-ordered 🙂 

https://www.brewdog.com/uk/barnard-castle-eye-test

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by Raja Clavata

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, johnphilip said:

Once " the Press" or reporters  , interviewed and reported back . Now they are interview , and forming there own opinion.  , possibly  down to there own political  believes.  It's not there place to do anything put Report on an event  . But scandal they belive sell more papers . My father had a name for the " New Of The Word "  newspaper  that I cant type on here for it contains a swear word .

https://theconversation.com/dominic-cummings-how-the-internet-knows-when-youve-updated-your-blog-139517

This source was checked against mediabiasfactcheck who rate the site as high factual reporting with least bias and covers the centre right and centre left.

Again, the fact that he did this without understanding the implications reinforces my belief that he might not actually be as smart as he would have many believe.

[Retsdon]

44 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

my belief that he might not actually be as smart as he would have many believe.

One man's prophet is another man's crackpot. And that's why Cummings is so divisive.

It can't be denied that the overall success rate in prophesy is abysmally low, and that's why I'm deeply suspicious of Cummings. While his supporters might hail him as a forward-thinking political genius who's going to lead Britain to some as yet to be specified sunny upland, it's far more likely in my opinion that he's going to lead the country into deep, uncharted, and dangerous economic and social waters from which it'll take years to escape from.

And there's another thing. Given its record thus far on the Covid outbreak whatever Brexit brings this government will not be up to the job. It's got nothing to do with being left or right wing. When a government can't organize the purchase of a few containers of PPE without ordering the wrong stuff; when it can't organize the processing of data from an already delayed testing scheme; when 'key parts' of a tracking programme are not in place when it's rolled out, when vacuum cleaner makers are charged with reinventing the ventilator wheel, etc, etc,..the list goes on and on - what hope is there that that self-same government is going to be able to introduce and oversee the hundred and one new systems and procedures that a hard Brexit will bring with it. Especially when, at the prophet's behest, the government is at war with its own Civil Service. 

So economically and socially I don't see this prophet taking Britain to the sunny uplands of Nirvana. More like the muddy jungle of Jonestown. 

[lancer425]

2 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

 

You lost me a bit there, are you advocating state run media like in North Korea, if not then what exactly?

North Korea? Certainly not.

More a new institutionalism approach to news grounded in sociological and historical approaches to new institutionalism and a general  approach to news production. This is a more modern integrated approach and encourages analysts to see the news as an outcome of interaction between responsible journalists and other political actors, adopting this approach should show contrasts  in news coverage around a general tendency toward homogeneity in the news, and, finally, that it encourages those looking for the real facts  to examine the full range of news outlets in the media universe rather than to concentrate their full attention on the narrow world of popular news  media.

The news media in its present accepted formats is at best woefully inaccurate and destructively biased and at its worst a terrifying weapon  of control and manipulation of an apparently gullible world wide populace .

 

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, Retsdon said:

One man's prophet is another man's crackpot. And that's why Cummings is so divisive.

It can't be denied that the overall success rate in prophesy is abysmally low, and that's why I'm deeply suspicious of Cummings. While his supporters might hail him as a forward-thinking political genius who's going to lead Britain to some as yet to be specified sunny upland, it's far more likely in my opinion that he's going to lead the country into deep, uncharted, and dangerous economic and social waters from which it'll take years to escape from.

And there's another thing. Given its record thus far on the Covid outbreak whatever Brexit brings this government will not be up to the job. It's got nothing to do with being left or right wing. When a government can't organize the purchase of a few containers of PPE without ordering the wrong stuff; when it can't organize the processing of data from an already delayed testing scheme; when 'key parts' of a tracking programme are not in place when it's rolled out, when vacuum cleaner makers are charged with reinventing the ventilator wheel, etc, etc,..the list goes on and on - what hope is there that that self-same government is going to be able to introduce and oversee the hundred and one new systems and procedures that a hard Brexit will bring with it. Especially when, at the prophet's behest, the government is at war with its own Civil Service. 

So economically and socially I don't see this prophet taking Britain to the sunny uplands of Nirvana. More like the muddy jungle of Jonestown. 

Well, we certainly don't agree on everything but I'm aligned with this.

The thing is though, with COVID, this government has the perfect cover for whatever happens with Brexit - I'm OK with no deal but lost nearly all hope they will act with integrity over it.

It should be pretty clear to everyone now that, just as elements of the UK banking needed us out the EU to avoid regulation, Cummings also needs us out in order to realise his real vision for ARPA.

[old man]

On 29/05/2020 at 08:08, twenty said:

Come on then.........who are the top five moaners ?

I would be proud to be in there as I'm heartily sick of the constant stream of greedy, ineffectual liars we seem to have been saddled with for years. 🤔

[JohnfromUK]

3 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Given its record thus far on the Covid outbreak whatever Brexit brings this government will not be up to the job. It's got nothing to do with being left or right wing. When a government can't organize the purchase of a few containers of PPE without ordering the wrong stuff; when it can't organize the processing of data from an already delayed testing scheme; when 'key parts' of a tracking programme are not in place when it's rolled out, when vacuum cleaner makers are charged with reinventing the ventilator wheel, etc, etc,..the list goes on and on

I see this as another of your arguments built on foundations of sand!

The 'government' of  whom you are being critical are presumably the political people - i.e. the ministers, junior ministers, secretaries of state, and other MPs - elected for their party to take up a policy forming and overseeing role.  They are 'this government' in that they are the people who are selected by the Prime Minister to have executive roles in his administration.

However - they do not personally order the PPE, the ventilators, place the contracts for the data processing software etc.  No - they task the machinery of government - the civil service - with implementing the policies of the government.

In this unprecedented situation, the civil service have had to try and obtain goods, materials, services in a timescale that is far far faster than their normal cautious and well trodden (if far from perfect) approach.  Inevitably when you rush things through ....... mistakes happen.

The TRUTH is that it has nothing to do with government ministers - the same need for lots of PPE, ventilators, data processing would have happened whichever party was in power - perhaps on different timescales - but almost exactly the same.  ALL governments worldwide have been in the same crisis of equipment and resources.

Other CIVIL SERVICES may have handled it better - and there is no doubt that our civil service has had to operate outside its normal comfort zone.

15 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

the government is at war with its own Civil Service

It isn't - but they have been pushed well outside their comfort zone, they have 'leaked' like a sieve, and there is little doubt that they need some 'improvement' in some areas.  This is an unprecedented and urgent situation - and it is entirely to be expected that they have been under a lot of pressure ....... but the war is against the virus - and the government and civil service are on the same side.

[johnphilip]

2 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

https://theconversation.com/dominic-cummings-how-the-internet-knows-when-youve-updated-your-blog-139517

This source was checked against mediabiasfactcheck who rate the site as high factual reporting with least bias and covers the centre right and centre left.

Again, the fact that he did this without understanding the implications reinforces my belief that he might not actually be as smart as he would have many believe.

Why do you post a link and the first thing I see is they want me to donate 20 quid 😀🤠

If you understood by post , I was saying in general  this is what the press reporters are now ..... in general .

[Mice!]

This may have already been posted, I'm not looking through, but he was in Australia watching the rugby yesterday!!! The bloke just doesn't care 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Marvellous 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[panoma1]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

I see this as another of your arguments built on foundations of sand!

The 'government' of  whom you are being critical are presumably the political people - i.e. the ministers, junior ministers, secretaries of state, and other MPs - elected for their party to take up a policy forming and overseeing role.  They are 'this government' in that they are the people who are selected by the Prime Minister to have executive roles in his administration.

However - they do not personally order the PPE, the ventilators, place the contracts for the data processing software etc.  No - they task the machinery of government - the civil service - with implementing the policies of the government.

In this unprecedented situation, the civil service have had to try and obtain goods, materials, services in a timescale that is far far faster than their normal cautious and well trodden (if far from perfect) approach.  Inevitably when you rush things through ....... mistakes happen.

The TRUTH is that it has nothing to do with government ministers - the same need for lots of PPE, ventilators, data processing would have happened whichever party was in power - perhaps on different timescales - but almost exactly the same.  ALL governments worldwide have been in the same crisis of equipment and resources.

 

Beat me to it John!...........I’m aligned with this! ^ 🤣

8 minutes ago, Mice! said:

This may have already been posted, I'm not looking through, but he was in Australia watching the rugby yesterday!!! The bloke just doesn't care 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Marvellous 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Where’s Wally?

[Mice!]

On 28/05/2020 at 23:09, Mr_Nobody said:

Yeah, here you go.

Don't worry, you don't need to watch it all, he's quite abrupt . . .  "Ben Kentish from LBC"  lol.

You should apply for one of Cumming's job offers with that second idea. A surefire support policy!

Just watched it, and the next video that came up, brilliant,  the way Peston talks slower almost ,, to ,,, make,,, you wait makes you want to choke him, and the fact he was 100% wrong is great.

I wonder if he listens to recordings of his own voice? He obviously likes how he sounds.

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, lancer425 said:

North Korea? Certainly not.

More a new institutionalism approach to news grounded in sociological and historical approaches to new institutionalism and a general  approach to news production. This is a more modern integrated approach and encourages analysts to see the news as an outcome of interaction between responsible journalists and other political actors, adopting this approach should show contrasts  in news coverage around a general tendency toward homogeneity in the news, and, finally, that it encourages those looking for the real facts  to examine the full range of news outlets in the media universe rather than to concentrate their full attention on the narrow world of popular news  media.

The news media in its present accepted formats is at best woefully inaccurate and destructively biased and at its worst a terrifying weapon  of control and manipulation of an apparently gullible world wide populace .

 

Okay, I'm fully aligned with the principle, in my mind this relates to the post truth era we find ourselves in - which applies to politics, media, current affairs etc. - but how do we go about making this change?

59 minutes ago, johnphilip said:

Why do you post a link and the first thing I see is they want me to donate 20 quid 😀🤠

If you understood by post , I was saying in general  this is what the press reporters are now ..... in general .

I didn't even spot that but it relates to Lancer425's post and my reply.

OK, I agree in general which is why I tend to avoid MSM or at least get a second or third angle on important topics 👍

[lancer425]

Just now, Raja Clavata said:

Okay, I'm fully aligned with the principle, in my mind this relates to the post truth era we find ourselves in - which applies to politics, media, current affairs etc. - but how do we go about making this change?

Not to put too fine a point on it there has to be a desire for the industry to change, this can only be brought about by a need. A need being they are dead in the water nobody buying/ contributing or supporting the news media.

Boycott. Force change. reap the rewards of a informative worthwhile genuine news media. Not the biased twisted gutter press we suffer today.

Force it Boycott them, lets have change.

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, lancer425 said:

Not to put too fine a point on it there has to be a desire for the industry to change, this can only be brought about by a need. A need being they are dead in the water nobody buying/ contributing or supporting the news media.

Boycott. Force change. reap the rewards of a informative worthwhile genuine news media. Not the biased twisted gutter press we suffer today.

Force it Boycott them, lets have change.

I was afraid you'd say this. You are preaching to the choir here but what percentage of the public even realise that they subscribe to media that feeds their biases and manipulates their thoughts even further? Again, I'm aligned with your thinking but don't see how the change can be affected in good time, if ever.

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

I see this as another of your arguments built on foundations of sand!

The 'government' of  whom you are being critical are presumably the political people - i.e. the ministers, junior ministers, secretaries of state, and other MPs - elected for their party to take up a policy forming and overseeing role.  They are 'this government' in that they are the people who are selected by the Prime Minister to have executive roles in his administration.

However - they do not personally order the PPE, the ventilators, place the contracts for the data processing software etc.  No - they task the machinery of government - the civil service - with implementing the policies of the government.

In this unprecedented situation, the civil service have had to try and obtain goods, materials, services in a timescale that is far far faster than their normal cautious and well trodden (if far from perfect) approach.  Inevitably when you rush things through ....... mistakes happen.

The TRUTH is that it has nothing to do with government ministers - the same need for lots of PPE, ventilators, data processing would have happened whichever party was in power - perhaps on different timescales - but almost exactly the same.  ALL governments worldwide have been in the same crisis of equipment and resources.

Other CIVIL SERVICES may have handled it better - and there is no doubt that our civil service has had to operate outside its normal comfort zone.

It isn't - but they have been pushed well outside their comfort zone, they have 'leaked' like a sieve, and there is little doubt that they need some 'improvement' in some areas.  This is an unprecedented and urgent situation - and it is entirely to be expected that they have been under a lot of pressure ....... but the war is against the virus - and the government and civil service are on the same side.

Accountability, the government and ultimately the PM are accountable for this, surely?

[JohnfromUK]

27 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Beat me to it John!

Most of my 40 years in industry was spent supplying various government contracts - and for minor quite low value items and spares, perhaps not as low as individual PPE items, but probably very similar to ventilator machines etc.

Whilst the very big high profile contracts and procurements (new aircraft, major ships, roads, airports etc.) may have some 'political influence' - mainly around jobs preservation, I never knew of a case where an elected MP or party functionary took part in any decision in relation to contracts or procurement of lower value items and services.

The civil servants in the procurement roles have a proven planned methodology involving International Standards (ISO etc.), British Standards, standard conditions of contract on payment, delivery, and termination etc, and civil service procedures for ensuring level playing fields, fair competition, obtaining a compromise between price, facilities, timely delivery, low technical or performance or delivery risk and of course no bribery/backhanders. 

When URGENT things are required - this carefully developed (and some may say tedious, slow and bureaucratic) process is streamlined - and inevitably the risk of mishaps increases.  However IT IS NOT 'government dependant' and IT IS NOT political.

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Accountability, the government and ultimately the PM are accountable for this, surely?

In much the same way as the Chairman of BT is accountable for your phone not working, or the Head of BMW accountable for the wiper falling off your BMW car - yes, but it doesn't mean that they can or do even know about the multitude of faults, decisions, purchases etc. taken every day in the organisations.

Government sets 'policy' level decisions - which will include budgets, priorities, policy, and a whole host of minor decisions, actions enad events are then actioned by those in the 'permanent' (i.e. those that remain whatever political colour is in power) civil service to the leg work (as I'm 100% sure you know!)

[Yellow Bear]

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

IT IS NOT political.

I would differ slightly here - it is not unknown for civil servants, at odds with HMG either politically or over pay(usually the same thing but not always), to prevaricate or screw-up deliberately to make the government look bad.  An old tactic by the CS unions.

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, Yellow Bear said:

I would differ slightly here - it is not unknown for civil servants, at odds with HMG either politically or over pay(usually the same thing but not always), to prevaricate or screw-up deliberately to make the government look bad.  An old tactic by the CS unions.

Whilst that may be true from time to time (I accept that it can happen), but I'm not suggesting that here the civil service/NHS buyers deliberately chose to buy from a dodgy supplier who they knew would deliver sub standard PPE to get back at HMG for something they didn't like, any more than I'm suggesting that Ministers told them to go to a T shirt maker in Turkey for PPE because it would make a good publicity stunt to have it flown in RAF to big fanfares etc.

BOTH side cocked up on that one.

[SpringDon]

3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Whilst that may be true from time to time (I accept that it can happen), but I'm not suggesting that here the civil service/NHS buyers deliberately chose to buy from a dodgy supplier who they knew would deliver sub standard PPE to get back at HMG for something they didn't like, any more than I'm suggesting that Ministers told them to go to a T shirt maker in Turkey for PPE because it would make a good publicity stunt to have it flown in RAF to big fanfares etc.

BOTH side cocked up on that one.

But it could easily be that the pressure of the shortage meant rules defining the nature of suppliers were relaxed by buyers which enabled the failure. No one is really to blame - pressure caused a gamble which didn’t pay off.

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, SpringDon said:

No one is really to blame - pressure caused a gamble which didn’t pay off.

Exactly - which is why it is not a fair or reasonable thing to post "a government can't organize the purchase of a few containers of PPE without ordering the wrong stuff".

 

[Raja Clavata]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

In much the same way as the Chairman of BT is accountable for your phone not working, or the Head of BMW accountable for the wiper falling off your BMW car - yes, but it doesn't mean that they can or do even know about the multitude of faults, decisions, purchases etc. taken every day in the organisations.

Government sets 'policy' level decisions - which will include budgets, priorities, policy, and a whole host of minor decisions, actions enad events are then actioned by those in the 'permanent' (i.e. those that remain whatever political colour is in power) civil service to the leg work (as I'm 100% sure you know!)

But the Government have been providing daily updates and discussing the details of these various issues, so I really don't get your line of reasoning here. Sounds like spin to me.

[panoma1]

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

But the Government have been providing daily updates and discussing the details of these various issues, so I really don't get your line of reasoning here. Sounds like spin to me.

No from my personal experience John is correct......again you attempt to muddy the waters, to try and demonstrate you weren’t wrong! 

[Rewulf]

4 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

Just coming back to this. I started reading his blog and whilst there are some interesting points in it, I sometimes got the impression that he did not really understand some of the concepts he was discussing and advocating. In the case of an "architect" for some of things he advocates he may or may not know enough to stitch it all together in the big scheme of things.

Blogs are to me at least , musings, a sound board, a forum.
Disagree with him, challenge him , but dismissing his ideas reveals a closed mind.

 

4 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

I assume you read / have read his blog too?

No , never , and no intention to.
I dont idolise the man, I just think , because of his stance and manner, he is treated very unfairly.
Using lies and half truths to defame someone you dont agree with , is the one of the lowest things you can do, a spreading of hypocrisy on top , and his enemies become my least favourite people.

 

4 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

At the moment I'm still trying to get my head around if / why he tried to position himself as some kind of sage on global pandemics which is suggested was done in retrospect.

Ill come to the underlined in a minute.
But if that accusation is where he 'positioned himself a sage...' or you are referring to when he sat on the SAGE committee (as an observer) Im not sure where he can be accused of this.
Theres plenty recently , who have accused him of being the architect of the lockdown , and hypocrite blah blah... As far as Im aware he has had nothing to do with covid planning ?
So again , defamatory comments based on fabrications.

 

4 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

For the life of me I have no idea why the press aren't latched onto this, it's actually a pretty big deal in my book...

Because the accusations are based again, on heresay.
 

When Dominic Cummings made a public statement to explain why he drove 260 miles to stay with his parents during the coronavirus lockdown, the prime Minister’s chief adviser made an assertion that initially went largely unnoticed:

For years, I have warned of the dangers of pandemics. Last year I wrote about the possible threat of coronaviruses and the urgent need for planning.

It was, ultimately, beside the point but Cummings seemed to be reminding the public of his value. We are to believe that he is too vital a cog in the machine to be forced out of his job.

However, unfortunately for Cummings, it didn’t take the internet nerds long to find out his claim is not exactly true.

In fact, a quick search and check on the Wayback Machine shows only one mention of coronavirus on Cummings’ blog or any other media attached to his name. 

The 'WAYBACK MACHINE is supposedly a privately run (by nerds) archive of every web page ever formed complete with edits, and swiftly deduced that DC changed his blog between April 11 and 15  THIS YEAR , to include the line about his (supposed )corona virus predictions. (Of which he never actually predicted)
Except , it doesnt ...

Hes just added some more information , which probably came to light after he wrote the first piece in early March, no where does it say he 'predicted' anything, and no where does he claim to be an expert. 
By the authors own admission , this is the only entry regarding coronavirus he can find written by Cummings, so , either , DC is lying (the implication) hes not a very good researcher, or he found it , but decided not to use it , because it didnt fit his defamatory story.
Which do you think is the most likely scenario ?

For the sake of argument, heres the original blog piece https://dominiccummings.com/category/technology/synthetic-biology/
Its about bio security , and not corona virus as a whole.
Its also a non story, just like the Durham furore , a pitiable attempt at more character assassination.

The piece written in a blog called The conversation , who you claim has been checked by the totally 'unbiased' Mediabiascheck   as not left or right wing biased, has this on the first page of the piece.

 

Author

1. Taha Yasseri

   Senior Research Fellow in Computational Social Science, Oxford Internet Institute, Alan Turing Fellow, University of Oxford

Disclosure statement

Taha Yasseri receives funding from the European Commission (Horizon 2020), Google Inc, eHarmony, Oxford University John Fell Fund, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He is affiliated with the Alan Turing Institute for Data Science and AI.

 

[SpringDon]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Exactly - which is why it is not a fair or reasonable thing to post "a government can't organize the purchase of a few containers of PPE without ordering the wrong stuff".

 

Ah ok, I do agree then. Also I don’t think it’s fair to blame the government for charging vacuum cleaner making to reinvent ventilators. I actually believe that was a triumph, leveraging underused expertise and capacity to fulfil emergency needs. The idea lacks recognition because it wasn’t ultimately  needed.