Latest news with #Jeff
Scotsman
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Scotsman
Readers' letters: Asking AI about state of Scotland isn't the best idea
Green MSP Lorna Slater raised eyebrows with her Parliamentary AI experiment Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Opposing a motion to the Scottish Parliament 'Demanding a Better Deal for Taxpayers in Scotland', Green MSP Lorna Slater presented the case that, once the benefits of various policies such as 'free' prescriptions, bus travel, tuition fees and social care was taken into account and despite higher income tax rates, people in Scotland are generally better off than people in England. To prove her point, she had put her thesis into an AI chatbot which confirmed her view. If the output from AI was capable of unequivocally defining what is true, it would strengthen her argument; however, it does not have that capability. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Troubled by two recent incidences where ChatGPT had not just given me wrong information but made up 'facts' (a phenomenon known as 'hallucination'), I challenged ChatGPT as to why it does that. Its response was enlightening and included the following: 'It was trained to sound helpful – not to know the truth. So, when you ask a question, it tries to give you the kind of answer it thinks you want – even if it has to guess.' Scottish Greens co-leader Lorna Slater has been experimenting with artificial intelligence (Picture: Jeff) I find it amusing that Lorna Slater, a politician, relied upon AI to justify her position. After all, the text quoted above would also be a reasonable description of most politicians. George Rennie, Inverness No rights This week legislation was changed in the House of Commons to stop women being prosecuted for having a late-term abortion. It was passed by a majority of 242 MPs, who were heard cheering as the result was announced. At the moment abortion is legal up to 24 weeks, which in itself is utterly ludicrous. I have personally known babies that have been born at 24 weeks and have grown to lead healthy adult lives. The NHS is wonderful when it comes to looking after premature babies, moving heaven and earth to save their precious lives. Now, the law is to decriminalise abortion up to the day before birth at nine months! This is barbaric, it is inhuman and violates the human rights of the unborn healthy child. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The majority of supporting MPs were Labour and have said the point of the law change is to remove the threat of investigation on the mother of the child. What about the rights of the viable child that has in effect being killed against its will? What about the many parents who have suffered multiple miscarriages and those who can't have biological children, how does this barbaric decision affect their mental health? I agree with abortion in the very early stages – under 20 weeks – of pregnancy, if the health of the mother is at critical risk or the child was to be born with profound, life-limiting disabilities or in the case of a pregnancy resulting from rape. That choice must always be permitted and is the decision of the mother. However, this legislation change is wrong on every level, it is depraved and disgusting, these supporting MPs should really be questioning their moral judgment and ultimately be removed from Parliament as they are not supporting their constituents in the manner they should be. Conrad Ritchie, Fraserburgh, Aberdeenshire Grab talent Edinburgh University Principal Professor Sir Peter Mathieson noted that unfortunately the University was to go into the red next year after years of profit. His answer was to stop recruitment. Then President Donald Trump declared war on US universities. A number of leading staff are seriously disaffected. In other countries a race to recruit some of these people has begun. What should particularly interest us is those in the Sciences. They present a unique opportunity to recruit. But I am told Edinburgh's ban still applies. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad As a graduate I have always been proud to be an alumnus of one of the great institutions in the world. This is as a result of high-class recruitment. How can we abandon this opportunity? In capital terms Edinburgh is the third most wealthy university in the UK. In revenue terms, scientific research is supported by special Government grants. In a similar way I have been a benefactor and others like me must wonder if, after the David Hume fiasco, there is any point in responding to appeals? How is Mathieson enhancing the reputation of his charge? Does the University Court have a voice in this matter? Hugh Mackay, Edinburgh Cap the greed Alex Williamson of Scottish Rugby insists that Murrayfield stadium needs to put on ever more concerts and matches. He's unhappy with the cap of 12 concerts a year, but for the local residents, this is more than enough. An influx of over 50,000 people is horrendous each time, with parking and traffic flow restrictions causing mayhem. Mr Williamson suggests he has the local residents on board but that's not the case. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad We need a smaller cap, not a bigger one. SRU greed needs to be capped! Brian Bannatyne-Scott, Edinburgh Wheels off the bus Allan Sutherland attacks both Labour and the SNP for their perceived joint failure to stop the Alexander Dennis bus group from relocating outwith Scotland (Letters, 19 June). In doing so he assumes it is within the Scottish Government's remit to place orders for buses using public funds. Under Scottish Public Finance Manual rules the SG can only provide finance. It cannot become involved in the actual procurement process. This is to avoid any hint of favouring one company over another for political reasons. In this instance it merely put money towards a Net Zero Emissions fund with further contributions from the bus companies which were doing the ordering for their fleets. Conversely Manchester City Council, as a procuring authority, was free to choose where to place their orders. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad You could argue that the Scottish Government could have made a stipulation to buy Scottish a condition of their involvement. But that would have put them in breach of both the UK Internal Market and the World Trade Organisation rules which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of nationality when awarding a publicly funded contract. In any case, most bus companies in Scotland are privately owned. As such they have a legal duty to their shareholders to procure in a way that benefits them rather than politicians. Lothian Buses is one exception as they are publicly owned. However, when they buy buses they are governed by local authority 'best value' rules which means they are obliged to buy from the company which represents best value for the local taxpayer. These rules were introduced in 2003 when there was a Scottish Labour First Minister. Robert Menzies, Falkirk Ask the people Margaret Neighbour's article 'Dozens killed waiting for food trucks in Gaza' (18 June), accompanied by the appalling photograph of crowds of people waiting for food, graphically illustrates the horrific choice Palestinians face – to risk being shot or die of starvation. According to David J Crawford in his letter "What democracy?' (same day), Keir Starmer is refusing to rule out additional jet fighters being sent out to the Middle East 'to protect Israel from Iranian attacks'. Mr Crawford makes an important point. Why is the Prime Minister not using the existing democratic processes to consult Members of Parliament – our elected representatives – about where we should stand in relation to Israel's actions, both morally and ethically? The violence perpetrated against the people of Israel on 7 October 2023 was unforgiveable. The violence experienced by Jewish people everywhere during the Holocaust was unforgiveable. But subjecting innocent men, women and children in neighbouring countries to the suffering that Israel is currently perpetrating is also unforgiveable. Should the people of Britain not at least have a right, through their elected representatives, to have the subject fully debated in Parliament? Melanie Lewin, Edinburgh Blame SNP Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad If a person finds that his favoured political party, in government, is being rightly criticised for failures in delivery, what is he to do? If he is Stan Grodynski (Letters, 19 June), he complains that the criticism should be levelled at someone else, always the UK Government, even for failures for which his party the SNP, is wholly responsible. As for UK debt, most of us will remember the banking crisis and the Covid crisis, which caused massive shocks to our finances and caused us to borrow significantly. If Mr Grodynski peeped outside his anti-UK bubble, he would see that several other developed countries have debt that is greater than the UK's: the US, Japan, Singapore, France, Italy, for example. As for perpetuating the hoary old myth that Scotland performs better than the rest of the UK in its NHS and education – he trots out the usual 'school leavers in positive destinations' mantra, not school leavers with a firm grasp of literacy and numeracy – that is nonsense. And these are areas for which the Scottish administration is entirely responsible. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh Legally blind Considering how much income the Scottish Government has generated for the legal profession in Scotland over the years it is high time it reciprocated by ditching its bloody-minded attitude to the profession. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad If any MSPs needed Legal Aid I bet things would happen a bit more speedily! Just because some lawyers make a very successful living doesn't mean they all do! David Elder, Haddington, East Lothian Write to The Scotsman
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Who is Jeff and why does he have 10 nuclear weapons?
While President Donald J. Trump was issuing fresh warnings from the White House — 'Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It's very simple.' — a more peculiar nuclear mystery was unfolding online. This one wasn't about centrifuges spinning in Fordo or uranium stockpiles in Natanz. It was about Jeff. Specifically, a bar chart from CNN titled 'World's Nuclear Arsenals' listed the usual powers: Russia, the United States, France, China, the UK, and so on. But tucked away near the bottom, with fewer than 10 warheads, was an unexpected entrant: Jeff. No flag. No footnote. Just the name — as if he were a rogue microstate with a doomsday arsenal. So who is Jeff? So who is Jeff? To the casual viewer, Jeff might sound like a rogue nuclear actor. A breakaway republic? A tech billionaire with a uranium hobby? A bulky think tank guy? — Cold_Peace_ (@Cold_Peace_) The answer is disappointingly rational. JEFF stands for the Joint Evaluated Fission and Fusion File, a nuclear data library maintained by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). It is not a country and does not possess weapons. It compiles nuclear reaction data for civilian applications — including power generation, reactor safety, and medical isotopes. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Switch to UnionBank Rewards Card UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo The latest dataset, JEFF-3.3, released in 2017, is widely used across Europe. What likely happened is a labelling error: a dataset meant to be cited as the source of nuclear information was mistakenly interpreted as an entity with nuclear weapons. This misrepresentation, noted in a 2024 IFLScience article, shows how easily public understanding of complex topics can be distorted — especially when visualised without context. Iran's Nuclear Ambitions While social media turned Jeff into a fictional arms dealer, the real nuclear issue — Iran — continues to escalate. Trump's administration, now back in office, has repeatedly stated that preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is non-negotiable. Iran's nuclear programme began under the Shah in the 1950s, with US support through President Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace initiative. The Tehran Research Reactor was built with American assistance. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the programme was briefly suspended but revived in the 1980s with help from Pakistan, Russia, and China — this time without Western oversight. By the early 2000s, Iran's nuclear activities drew intense scrutiny. In 2002, dissident groups revealed secret enrichment facilities at Natanz and Arak, prompting IAEA investigations. Iran maintained that its goals were peaceful — energy independence and medical research — but limited inspector access and evidence of weaponisation work raised alarms. This led to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), under which Iran agreed to restrict uranium enrichment and submit to international inspections in exchange for sanctions relief. In 2018, Trump withdrew from the deal, citing weak enforcement and sunset clauses. Since then, Iran has significantly expanded its enrichment activities. As of 2025, it is enriching uranium to 60% purity — just shy of weapons-grade — and is believed to have enough material for a bomb within weeks, if it chooses to proceed, according to IAEA assessments. Trump has responded with blunt consistency: 'Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.' Not as a slogan, but as a foreign policy red line.
Bloomberg
2 days ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Fed in ‘Nothing to See Here' Mode: BlackRock's Rosenberg
00:00 The one thing that did stand out was this idea that this is not a Fed that feels urgency to cut rates, even though you have the president basically jawboning them and you have people in the market saying we are seeing cracks. What was your take, Jeff, from this meeting? Yeah, you know, there's something we're not talking about which could have been, you know, the headline, which is this is the first statement of economic projections post the tariffs uncertainty. And mostly he got away with not really talking about that. Torsten just highlighted it a second ago. It's stagflation, eerie. I don't think anybody raised that in once that word ever came up. So we really kind of pivoted away from what might have been kind of an interesting storyline to the storyline that we're hearing, which is watching paint dry. And I think that's an excellent outcome for the Fed. That's what they want us to talk about paint drying and not the Fed opining on the impact of policy. They really ended up pivoting the conversation towards a repeat of nothing to see here. And, you know, we don't know. And it's much more about the uncertainty than it is about the forecasts that we just wrote down. I think that's kind of an interesting takeaway. I think as your previous guest just highlighted, that is the takeaway that the markets are, you know, having from today. And when you listen to the opening press conferences, I do I pull up last month's press conference and you can follow along. It's almost verbatim, with the exception of the insertion of the CPI changes, which he downplayed and maybe the the introduction of, you know, waiting for more information as opposed to waiting for the uncertainty to clear. This is very much a repeat of what we got last month.
Daily Mirror
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mirror
Jeff Brazier recalls son Freddie's 'challenging' diagnosis at age 10
Jeff Brazier has opened up about his son Freddie's ADHD diagnosis, as he spoke to families and those diagnosed with the disorder on The One Show Jeff Brazier made a heartfelt appearance on The One Show this Wednesday, opening up about his personal experiences with ADHD as he met individuals living with the condition. The familiar face from This Morning engaged with families to understand the impact of ADHD on their lives. Nicky Campbell, who found out he had ADHD at the age of around 60, was also featured in the enlightening segment. Before meeting a mother and her ADHD-diagnosed daughter, Jeff shared insights into his own son Freddie's early diagnosis. "My son was diagnosed with ADHD at 10 years old. School was really challenging," Jeff admitted. "But, his diagnosis helped me understand better that he needed support." In a candid conversation with a guest, Jeff reminisced about how someone once described Freddie, now 20, with a memorable analogy. "My son was described, compassionately, as a Ferrari engine in the chassis of a Mini," he chuckled, finding common ground with the guest's experience. Jeff, also dad to 22 year old Bobby, previously discussed Freddie's ADHD when they both took part in Celebrity Race Across the World, reports Wales Online. On the BBC programme, Jeff expressed his unwavering belief in his son's potential: "I couldn't hazard a guess on how Fred's mind works but I know he's going to do something amazing in his lifetime. "We need the pioneers, we need the people that give a completely different opinion. That's what Fred's role is gonna be. And I see it. I've always seen it and I look forward to him realising it, one day it's all gonna click and fall into place." Freddie recently disclosed his Bipolar Disorder diagnosis. In a TikTok video discussing his mental health, the 20 year old shared his epilepsy experiences and offered advice. "Just coming on to say that seizures - or any illness - shouldn't be made a joke or something to laugh about," he advised viewers. Freddie then confessed: "Me myself, I suffer from serious mental health, and I've got ADHD and bipolar. And it's not nice when people want to belittle you or talk down on you because of it."
Wales Online
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Wales Online
Jeff Brazier opens up on son's 'challenging' diagnosis at just 10 years old
Jeff Brazier opens up on son's 'challenging' diagnosis at just 10 years old Jeff Brazier has candidly opened up about his son Freddie's ADHD diagnosis, recalling how he had found things 'challenging' beforehand Jeff Brazier returned to TV screens in a segment on The One Show on Wednesday (18th June), where he discussed ADHD and met with those who have been diagnosed with the disorder. The TV star, who is a regular on shows such as This Morning, met with families whose children had been diagnosed with ADHD. Broadcaster Nicky Campbell, who was diagnosed with ADHD herself at around 60, also featured in the segment. As Jeff geared up to meet a mum whose daughter had been diagnosed with ADHD, he spoke about his son Freddie's diagnosis, which came at a young age. "My son was diagnosed with ADHD at 10 years old. School was really challenging," the dad-of-two said. "But, his diagnosis helped me understand better that he needed support." Jeff Brazier opened up about his son's ADHD diagnosis (Image: BBC ) Article continues below Later on, while speaking to a guest, Jeff recalled what he'd been told about his son Freddie, now 20 years old, when he was diagnosed. "My son was described, compassionately, as a Ferrari engine in the chassis of a Mini," Jeff laughed, as the guest shared a similar story. Jeff, who is also father to Bobby, 22, spoke about Freddie's diagnosis when the father and son duo appeared on Celebrity Race Across the World last year. Speaking about his son on the BBC show, Jeff said: "I couldn't hazard a guess on how Fred's mind works but I know he's going to do something amazing in his lifetime. "We need the pioneers, we need the people that give a completely different opinion. That's what Fred's role is gonna be. And I see it. I've always seen it and I look forward to him realising it, one day it's all gonna click and fall into place." Jeff with his youngest son Freddie (Image: BBC ) Freddie recently revealed he's also been diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder. The 20-year-old appeared in a TikTok video where he spoke about his mental health struggles and shared advice for those struggling with epilepsy as he does. "Just coming on to say that seizures - or any illness - shouldn't be made a joke or something to laugh about," he said in the clip. He then revealed: "Me myself, I suffer from serious mental health, and I've got ADHD and bipolar. And it's not nice when people want to belittle you or talk down on you because of it." Article continues below The One Show airs on weekdays on BBC One at 7.30pm
