Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | choult's commentslogin

Cherry-picked example from a right-wing propaganda rag that has no business on Hacker News.



They don't decide on a recall. They can sanction an MP, such as suspension from the House of Commons.

Instead, a recall petition - requiring 10% of an MP's constituents to sign to then recall - is automatically triggered when an MP is suspended for 10 or more days.


This has happened e.g. in 2023 to Margaret Farrier - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-663...

Her recall got nearly 15% of eligible voters which is about half as many votes as she got to win the seat in 2019. Thousands of locals came out solely to sack this MP.

Quick timeline: elected December 2019; spreading covid September 2020; guilty plea August 2022; loses seat July 2023 (10 months before the next general election)


Notably, Binface got about 1500 more actual votes than that petition would need signatures, on a hot August day.

The petition is published for six weeks!

Farage must be very uncomfortable now.


Farage engineered this situation to try to take control of the narrative about the investigation into £5m of undeclared income/gifts.

They neutered that move by not entering the contest in the first place. And Binface (with support of 32 other candidates) turned it into a humiliating exercise.


He was, that is solid Reform territory.

But Farage did not get to control the narrative of the situation ghat _he_ created - instead managed to beat a man with a bin on his head.

Well done, Nige.


BBC’s the State media, run by British Intel. THEY create the narrative, and we know what they think of Farage and Reform.


The BBC has had Nigel Farage on constantly. He is one of the most frequent guests on BBC Questiontime, their flagship political programme for at least fifteen years. He is partly of their creation.


Wait, so you are saying that Farage did not receive an undisclosed £5 million personal gift from a cryptocurrency billionaire? Or he did, but any reporting on it is obviously the deep state ganging up on him?


Uh, so you Brits have this kind of chaps too?


Amd the winner of the by-election didn't even attended the announcement of the results.


I am so glad to see these guys get some well-deserved attention!

I worked with the founders Marcus and Rob, and met their infographics whizz Christian waay back when they were kicking this off. I was blown away by it then, and I continue to be blown away now.

Here's to the next 15 years!


No, not enough money in it.

Tax the rich.


Just remember Piketty too, Capital in the 21st Century: the purpose is not generate revenue. Taxation's primary purpose is to prevent extreme concentrations of wealth & power, to diffuse the un-democratic dangers hazards and threats.


That's confusing. The rich make their money and hold their assets in economically productive (or extractive) enterprises. Land, factories, services, arms, etc are the real storehouses of wealth. If you take that from the rich, they have nothing.


The rich already pay most of the income tax in our country. We probably have the most progressive tax system in the world.


Evaluations of different implementations of a tech. Kind of like a meta service layer on top of an industry, such as "Which frontier model is best?"

I do agree that the author does not do a good job of introducing the term.


"Which frontier model is best?"

What kind of stupid business is this. Though nothing can beat SEO in that spirit.


It's an important question! If you are paying a lot of money to use AI models, you care that you are using the best for your task. And it turns out that figuring out which AI models is best for your task is not trivial and requires some expertise.


That was too nice of a reply, I apologize. I just can't understand the thought process and that what exactly are we optimizing for? If you are paying a lot of money to use AI models, you already have so much overhead that precise ranking in an eval is not gonna make much difference between equally "frontier" models. Especially since models are sensitive to the input. So the eval is just gonna evaluate the eval with very high accuracy. It might be equivalent to the illusion of safety thing applied to financial risk.


>equally "frontier" models

A key point I want to make is that the notion of "frontier" is somewhat fictive in the sense that a model which dominates all others on a given eval is not guaranteed to be number one on another eval, even if both evals are ostensibly for the same task.

For example, the best publicly-available model (i.e. excluding Claude Mythos and Fable) on DeepSWE[0] is gpt-5.5-xhigh at 67%, which is soundly better than claude-opus-4.8-max at 59%. I would say an 8pp gap on a benchmark is quite large. But on FrontierCode[1], claude-opus-4.8-xhigh is the best, at a score of 13.4% compared to gpt-5.5-medium at 6.3%.

That's quite a significant reversal!

Now, one might wish to claim that either DeepSWE or FrontierCode is poorly constructed and that the other is more accurate. But I think you'll find that the degree to which eval-design considerations in this case affect measurement is probably of no less magnitude than user-specific considerations affect measurement in general.

[0] https://deepswe.datacurve.ai/ [1] https://cognition.com/blog/frontier-code


It's not just figuring out if a model is good at things, but is it good at the things I care about.

Using a targeted eval suite (like a test suite) tells us that.


It's not just for choice of model, you can use it for your prompting as well (basically anything to do with your setup). And yes, running evals is expensive and mostly of use to people with serious spend.


There is a larger question of "do I need a frontier model for this" - knowing the cost/benefit tradeoff using frontier vs. e.g. local models is extremely valuable and takes skill to do!


But frontier models are constantly changing.


They all change day to day and are non-deterministic by design. Your settled answer is only good for a moment.


... so an event that had a (simulated) 47% percent chance of happening happens, and an event that had a 53% chance of happening didn't.

You must _hate_ it when you need <= 4 and you roll a 5...


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: