Psycho-Babble Social Thread 1115219

Shown: posts 1 to 7 of 7. This is the beginning of the thread.



Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 4:44:18

so new zealand was in the process of building some convention centre in auckland. for trade stuff. for some big conference that was supposed to happen. to do with trade.

but there was a fire and it burned to the ground before it was finished.

and there was something briefly in the news about them doing it for the insurance money.

they tried to blame an apprentice (of course) for accidentially leaving on a blow torch that was unattended. only the engineers of the blow torch were quick to point out that they weren't stupid enough to have designed a blow torch that was capable of being left on unattended.

so it's hard to see how it could have been an accident.


but the insurance company will pay for it -- right?


i don't know if nz has insurance companies... likely not... so people will come from overseas.

i think more recently i've seen something to the effect that...

we aren't allowed to make milk powder by ourselves anymore. we are required to work under supervision from chinese... auditors? testers? i think they regularly test the contents etc. otherwise we are no longer allowed to supply to their market. because we are not to be trusted.

i think that more recently i've seen something to the effect that...

we are having external engineers to sign off on our building projects, now, too. i don't mean individual houses (though it may come to that) i mean high rises.

to check the steel. to check the foundations. to check the concrete. to check... every step of the way.

otherwise i don't think we can get insurance for the buildings, anymore.

i think there is something like that.


apparently lawyers are required to have insurance.

because there is an awful lot of bad law advice out there.

i mean... all they can really say is 'well, there isn't any precedent in the new zealand courts so, hey, they can't judge you did anything wrong insofar as precedent'. or... 'hey this is new zealand just do whatever you want'.

up to 1.3 millino dollars indemnity insurance, recently. required. for parners. in order to practice.

and i guess every time they are found wrong then the cost of that insurance goes up until it's too expensive for them to practice.


i wonder if we will get clock in and clock out of the hospital systems.

we need them.

to enforce the schedule. work starts. work stops.

if you aren't scheduled on -- then you are required to get the f*ck out. we can't afford the libility insurance to have you committing accidential death when you are in the hospital off schedule. when you are in the process of committing a crime and somebody dies that's called murder.

did not take due care.

it's not reasonable care or skill when your shift is up


apparently they are only considering that in the US. that's about where things are at, there.

some question about whether there is evidence that surgeons working long hours commit more accients. so whether there is grounds to think that they are operating without due care and skill if they are operating outside the hours. after a 10 hour shift or whatever. without having the breaks they are supposed to...

there are genuine difficulties there...

but new zealand mostly has difficulty...
most creates difficulties. artificially.
an attempt to.... be obstructive. create confusion.
if we spend all our time denying the obvious we never get to make progress on the things that are genuinely difficult.


the ethics lady seemed nice. i was being slightly facecious.
shame i couldn't have worked *with* her.

i think they were trying to display...
how the medical kids get the best of everything.
the best of the teachers etc.

she seemed to have good and sensible intuitions was my point there.

it was refreshing to be on the same page.

that i started where she was hoping things would end up. we were on the same page.

sense of morality. there was.

the point of the ethics discussion at Tamaki seemed to be to... show. demonstrate...

that there were smart kids there enrolled in that programme.

good kids. kids with good intuitions.

they were young kids. they had never studied ethics before. it was their first or second day of classes at university. they were asking good questions and raising good points.

kids who were enrolled in (by the view of the university) the idiot degree for imbecels.

and of course she didn't teach anyting out at Tamaki. not sure why they gave the Tamaki kids any exposure to her at all.

i think it might have been just that...

then teh quality of the teaching turned to...

well... we had a lecture on 'who wins the health system olympics' whereby new zealand is somehow proclaimed to be first in virtue of dragging it's heels as the last of the developed nations (which somehow makes it the best because we are patting ourselves on the back we are doing better than very veyr very corrupt nations (allegedly).

and watching sicko.

and so on.

and reading what the idiot from otago thinks... the management guy with the mustache he thinks makes him look.... i have no idea.

his whole hierarchy thing. how we can't all be surgeons.




why would you train a dog to detect cancer?

Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:28:29

In reply to insurance, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 4:44:18

i mean, i get that you don't want to pay your workers...


suppose a dog can be trained to detect ovarian cancer in urine samples... wouldn't it be a better idea to train a machine to detect the signal?

i'm sure it's not like they haven't been trying... all the people at MIT and so on...

but otago wants to train dogs.

mmm hmm.

i'm trying to think how that goes...

does a pathologist train the dog? to reward it when it agrees with the judgment of the pathologist and not reward it when it doesnt?

like training the rock and mine detector of... oh... yawn... the 1960's?


then when the dog gets it wrong oh well.

like when the surgeons from sydney directing the surgery from their x-box controller accientally... go offline.

system update.

5G takeover

that kind of a thing?


not slightly plausible. at all.

suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure. let's invest $250,000 in training a dog.

that's a terrific idea for the development of medicine in nz.

well done, there.


Re: why would you train a dog to detect cancer?

Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:33:46

In reply to why would you train a dog to detect cancer?, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:28:29

and so... why don't they, then?

why don't they just run the information through the computer and get the computer doing diagnostics.

oh, wait, they are?

they've been working on it...

they've been working on it for quite some time?


who would have thought...

but, then, why are they still training pathologists?

not here. overseas. in developed nations.

i mean i understand it's part of the whole 'you are replaceable we will fire you and get a dog to do your job for free' abuse tactics thing...

but really...

the lengths we go to to refuse to get with the program, already.


Re: why would you train a dog to detect cancer?

Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:43:27

In reply to Re: why would you train a dog to detect cancer?, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:33:46

if a neurone could talk what would it say?

bleep bleep bleepity bleep bleep.

i'm trying to understand the programme...

so you show it a picture... something with a hard edge, say. black and then white. and you record from neurones. bleep. bleep. bleepity bleep.

and 'cracking the neural code' would be... what, exactly.


i'm trying to understand what that would or could look like.

suppose we find a 1:1 correlation. i know we haven't. but suppose that we did.

wouldn't that be like the map with the 1:1 ratio that you couldn't unroll for fear of upsetting the farmers? what does that mean. i'm not sure. in this context i think it means something like: a restatement or repetition of the explanadum is not iteself an explanation. it is not even illuminating.

but somehow that was the 'best case' -- right? we might find a neurone that fires when (and only when) one is looking at a picture of ones grandmother.

or maybe looking at a microscope picture of cancer.

historical slides that developed into. you know. after years and years and years and years of no intervention.

but no 1:1 correlation. hard to know what that would look like given the neurone fires or doesn't. fires at some base frequency. then alters the firing which must signal... something...

if we could find a correlation (at some level of analysis). right?

oh... a particular neurone is irrelevant. really it's populations of neurones coding for things. so a activity distributed across an area. just as well because many of our detection techniques are coarse grained.

but now what are we looking at or for? blippity blip beep beep? a correlation (at some level of analysis)?

what would a correlation at any level of analysis... how would that help explain?

finding the homunculus in the brain isn't a solution it's simply a restatement of the problem. the problem recurs. i don't understand this as a research project that apparently justifies...

the murder of animals.

to crack the neural code.

which is... what, exactly? trying to get a handle on what that would even look like...

trying to understand or comprehend the research project...

dismantling the computer trying to find where my essay of last month got to...

but all this was worked out... yawn...



Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:45:44

In reply to Re: why would you train a dog to detect cancer?, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:43:27

i suppose the issue, really, is that the dog isn't going 'well, this is the urine sample we have from 6 years ago. and then here's the one from 5 years ago and here's 4 and 3 and 2 and this is the one we just got.

better or worse or much the same??



Re: woof

Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:52:20

In reply to woof, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:45:44


aka 'smells like a c*nt to me'


what the f*ck, even.

i imagine people from the USA just f*ck*ng laughting their *ss*s off that people from new zealand spend any time at all on this sh*t.

it's a f*ck*ng joke -- right?


alex is supposed to be doing maths.


alex is wondering: why?

for the 'experience' of university?

(oh please have some money for that. oh please have some more money for that. what? more money for you? more money for you for that? mooooooooooooooooooooooore moooooooooooooooney. mooooooooooooooooooooore money for youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu. so you can take my money and tell me i don't have the most basic of reading comprehension skills anymore. i can't write a passable first year essay anymore. oh please. oh please. just keep taking my money and producing garbage output)

so algebra...

what's it for?

i don't see any of it in medicine.

step one... not seeing it. step two... nope. clinical skills? clinical knowledge? step three?? nope.

thinking of the talks i used to go to...

in the early days of otago.

before they got... got to.

talks where people (from overseas usually) presented their statistics.

with titles and labelled axes and keys and error bars. plotting all their data points. seeing them all lay down and seeing where they cluster.

because i am not an idiot.

and you don't need to spend generations studying statistics to spy when people are trying to be confusing. and when people are confused themselves.


and i don't want to do immoral and inhumane experiments on involuntary patients... only to 'clean' the data to render the whole thing worthless... in some stupid attempt to partially conceal the fact that i'm a f*ck*ng psychopath.




Re: woof

Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:55:32

In reply to Re: woof, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:52:20


keep training your dogs to tell you whatever it is that you want to hear. as, of course, you do.

i don't imagine it's pathologists who have taken to training dogs to be patholgoists. i imagine it's people who aren't patholgoists trying to avoid having to pay patholgoists.

i mean... why pay a pathologist when you can give a dog handler $250,000 to train a dog?

it makes total sense.


(not really)

This is the end of the thread.

Show another thread

URL of post in thread:

Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ

[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,

Script revised: February 4, 2008
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.