Female pianists are to be favoured over men, according to the rules of a leading piano competition under which judges are instructed to “consider” picking a woman “in the case of a tie”. The Telegraph has more.
The jury of the Leeds International Piano Competition has been instructed, in the case of a tie between a male and female contestant, to “consider advancing her first”.
The preferential treatment aims to help to “tackle male dominance”, according to the rulebook.
New rules – introduced this year – also stipulate that jurors must cancel their votes and start again if any round of the competition “significantly reduces the ratio of women to men”.
Members of the jury have been required to undergo training which is aimed at “eliminating both conscious and unconscious bias in order to promote a more equal environment for all competitors”.
The new set of rules governing the 2024 competition has produced a set of five finalists, two of which are women, including the London-based rising star Junyan Chen and Vietnamese pianist Khanh Nhi Luong.
The stipulation means Ms. Chen and Ms. Nhi Luong could have received preferential treatment in the qualifying rounds because of their gender, pushing them ahead in the competition ahead of male counterparts. There is no suggestion that this is the case. …
The voting process now ensures that in the event that a round of the competition produces an all-male selection, there will be a revote.
There will also be a re-vote if the proportion of women remaining in the competition is significantly reduced in a round of voting, and this will apply all the way through to the semi-finals.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Even if you ask a deep question the answers tend to be rather cagey. The limits are the limits of analysis compared to inspiration. If you are impressed by AI then you probably have very limited knowledge of literature and culture. The whole spirit of literature is the rejection of AI. There is always a sense that the writing down involves a sacrifice and loss.
Unfortunately, being an extremely stupid dog with paws unsuited to touch screens I haven’t yet worked out what the real utility is of (misnamed) AI or indeed tiktok unless it is reduce the youth of western countries to utter imbecility, an objective it seems to be achieving satisfactorily well.
LLMs seem to be reasonably ok at digesting large volumes of information and summarising it accurately and coherently in response to questions. They are also ok at generating images though that’s not really my field.
It depends how you define “intelligence” but AI is perhaps an unfortunate term.
I am similarly uninterested in the (misnamed) AI.
I honestly don’t think we’re missing much, Jack the dog.
I speak as a professional in the IT field.
But please do not take my word for it. It could be amazing. In the meantime, I need to put another log on the fire.
Your enemies lie within. It is just stupid to pretend otherwise and that the Chinese are looking to attack you. For God’s sake you only have to have lived in a western country in the last thirty years. You destroyed yourself.
Never use touch screen technology. It is good to have a touch screen because it tends to be durable but please never actually touch anything on the screen.
Why?
It is stupd for many reasons. They wil easily beat you in maths and physics exams and will generally have more vitality. But they aren’t trying to destroy the West. Their very existence is predicated on trying to be a good emulation of the west in certain ways. If you go all over Asia they love American culture and the American people. It is assumed that the Iranians hate America. This is the opposite of the truth they are the most pro-American culture in the world. They assume that Iranians hate Jews when Iran gave refuge to the Jews for 2500 years and still the real capital of Jewish power is Tehran and Jewish culture is in large part Persian culture, You shouldn’t listen to the crap they pedal.
If deep seek is truly open source the sureky it should be possible to identify any malign intentions from analysis of the source code.
From a brief search there seems to be some dispute as to whether it’s truly open source. I don’t know enough about how LLMs work to have a view myself.
Ta!
They don’t want you. They don’t care. They have better things to do.
I am a lot less worried about DeepSeek (i.e. not at all, I don’t use it, I don’t know what it’s for) than I am worried about what Google, the NSA, CIA, MI6, GCHQ et al already think they know about me.
Who paid the developers is the unanswered question? It has to be the CCP!