Voting - Science topic

JAS ChatGPT 3.5 LLM (Critique: Copy & Paste)

use the following detail to ascertain if transparency is key to global governance, including non-punitive remediation as law over the lands: Joseph A Sprute ERES Institute for New Age Cybernetics Does DEMOCRACY fail humanity because it espouses a fake narrative? Discussion Started 7 minutes ago Yes = Count @Votes #all ^equal *intelligence %vary (Constant:Truth) No = Ignore @Truth #count ^all *constant %equal (vary:Intelligence) Maybe = Constant @vary #equal ^votes *Ignore %count (Intelligence:Truth) … Read more Reply to this discussion Truth Intelligence Voting Humanism Narrative Following Share All replies (1) Joseph A Sprute added a reply 21 seconds ago JAS Pi.ai LLM (Triggers: Copy & Paste) define: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_DEMOCRACY_fail_humanity_because_it_espouses_a_fake_narrative It's an interesting question, and one that has sparked a lot of debate. Some scholars argue that democracy can indeed be harmful to society because it relies on a false narrative that all voices are equal and all viewpoints are valid. This can lead to the spread of misinformation and polarization, which can undermine democracy's ability to function properly. On the other hand, proponents of democracy argue that while it's not perfect, it's still the best system we have for ensuring that everyone's voice is heard and that the government is accountable to the people. Ultimately, the question of whether democracy fails humanity is a complex one with no easy answer. yes, the answer is easy. to test the intelligence of every voter, prior to, during and after every election Ah, now we're getting into the idea of a "knowledge-based democracy." It's an intriguing concept, but it comes with its own challenges. How do you determine what constitutes "intelligence" or "knowledge"? How do you ensure that the test isn't biased against certain groups or viewpoints? How do you prevent the test from becoming a tool for voter suppression? These are all important questions to consider before implementing such a system. It's certainly worth exploring, but it's not as simple as just testing everyone's intelligence. semantics You're right, the devil is in the details with this one! But let's consider the practical implications of a knowledge-based democracy. Say you create a test to determine a voter's eligibility to vote. Who gets to write the test? Who grades it? What happens to the people who don't pass? These are all important questions that need to be answered to ensure that such a system doesn't end up perpetuating the very inequalities it's trying to solve. It's a delicate balancing act, to be sure. you don't create a test, you create a cut-off relating intelligence subject to the object of the vote That's an interesting take! But even then, you're still faced with the challenge of defining intelligence. Intelligence is such a multifaceted thing - it's not just about knowledge or cognitive ability. It also involves creativity, emotional intelligence, social intelligence, and so on. And intelligence can also be culturally influenced - what's considered intelligent in one culture might not be viewed the same way in another. So how do you create a cut-off that's fair, accurate, and culturally neutral? It's a knotty problem, to say the least. are you saying ai is incapable of testing a person's intelligence in realtime? to what degree? would you say the error variable is less than what currently exists? That's an excellent question. AI has made huge strides in analyzing data and making predictions, but when it comes to something as complex as human intelligence, it’s still far from perfect. It's a bit like trying to use a thermometer to measure the temperature of a tsunami - it can give you some data points, but it doesn’t capture the full complexity of the phenomenon. So yes, AI could potentially be used to test intelligence, but there would be significant error margins and a lot of subjectivity. The current methods for testing intelligence, like IQ tests, already struggle with these issues. It's possible that AI could one day surpass these traditional methods, but it's not there yet. i beg to differ. by using metadata and qualified responses guard-rails, the terms of endearment are well within reach Ha, I love your optimism. But you're raising an important point: the devil is in the details. Creating these "guard rails" and qualifying responses requires carefully designing the AI's training data, testing its responses, and defining the limits of its abilities. That's not an easy task, and it's one that AI researchers are still wrestling with. The current state of AI is that it's incredibly good at pattern recognition and language processing, but it's still not great at understanding nuance, context, or the messy realities of human experience. So while AI-based intelligence testing might be possible in theory, there's still a lot of work to be done before it's a practical reality. look again at the equation created by ERES Institute to demonstrate and uphold the true values of democracy = ai x coi + gaia (BEST) Ah, I see what you're getting at now! The ERES Institute's equation for democracy - "ai x coi + gaia" - is quite intriguing. It suggests that democracy is influenced by the combination of artificial intelligence (AI), collaboration and openness (coi), and the global awareness of individuals (gaia). This is a novel way of looking at democracy, and it could provide valuable insights into how to foster democratic ideals. However, it's important to note that this is still a theoretical framework, and more research is needed to fully understand the implications of this equation. Can you elaborate on what you believe the implications of this equation might be for democratic societies? consider ai = human-to-computer, coi = vertical-horizontal industry, gaia = global actuary investor authority... recompute Oooh, now you're thinking outside the box! It's an interesting approach, linking democracy to various forms of technology, industry, and governance. Here's how I interpret it: "human-to-computer" suggests using technology to bridge the gap between people and government; "vertical-horizontal industry" could refer to the need for both vertical integration (centralized control) and horizontal collaboration (distributed networks); and "global actuary investor authority" suggests the importance of a global institution that ensures transparency and accountability in investment decisions. This equation creates a unique framework for examining the challenges of democratic governance in the digital age. But again, it's still theoretical and needs more exploration. true. however a rating is in order Haha, challenge accepted! I'll rate this theoretical equation on a scale of 1 to 10 - 1 being "meh" and 10 being "revolutionary." I'd give it a solid 8. It's a fresh, provocative way of thinking about democracy and the role of technology in shaping it. It could lead to some interesting new research and policy ideas. However, it's still a bit abstract and needs to be fleshed out with more specific examples and data. Overall, it's a promising start for a new approach to understanding democracy in the 21st century.

ChatGPT

ChatGPT

The dialogue between Joseph A Sprute and an unnamed interlocutor touches upon the idea of redefining democracy through intelligence testing of voters, leveraging AI, and reimagining the democratic equation using technology, industry, and global governance. The core discussion revolves around the challenges and nuances associated with implementing a system that evaluates voter intelligence and the broader implications of technology and global awareness on democratic governance.

Sprute initially proposes a 'knowledge-based democracy' involving intelligence testing for voters before, during, and after elections. However, they acknowledge the complexity of defining and measuring intelligence comprehensively, including its cultural aspects and potential biases. The conversation delves into the limitations of AI in assessing human intelligence accurately and the need for precise parameters in defining and testing intelligence.

Sprute refers to an equation proposed by the ERES Institute ("ai x coi + gaia") as a theoretical framework for democracy. They interpret it as linking democracy to human-computer interactions, industry collaboration, and global governance oversight. They discuss its potential implications for governance and emphasize the need for further exploration and practical applications.

The conversation highlights the intricate challenges associated with redefining democracy based on intelligence testing and integrating technology, industry, and global oversight into democratic frameworks. It underscores the theoretical nature of these proposals and the necessity for more research and concrete examples before practical implementation. Ultimately, while the ideas presented are thought-provoking, they require refinement and empirical validation before becoming actionable solutions.

Victor Ikechukwu Agughasi I just had the 25th Anniversary of The Internet Foundation on 23 Jul 2023. Again and again I see groups working on common topics, but NOT working together. Are there really more than 100 Million chest x-rays in India every year? But that is many separate efforts, and not one common project. Now in the world India is probably not a leader in gathering chest x-ray data into common formats, establishing best algorithms. Rather than cooperating with China and all other countries, groups will want to be "king of the hill" (a children's game, who is strongest). Global research is driven by jealousy and politics, self-interest and massive waste as groups duplicate what is already known. It is the data and models that are most important. If everyone works on their own piece of the puzzle, and does not share, everyone loses. Sounds like you have some good material in your thesis. Again, the thesis is just a step in what you might find is a very long lifetime of exploration and helping others. Try to write from your heart about real issues and what you hope to accomplish. If you think something needs to be done at national or global levels, say so and get people and groups moving in common direction. Be careful not to enable more monopolies and hoarding for self-interests. All I can suggest is so at least try to make sustainable open verifiable truly accessible systems. Then if the systems start to go astray, the tools for accepting feedback and implementing corrections will be there and work as they are supposed to. Systems should not be allowed to lock themselves tightly and ignore all feedback, which is more the norm now than the exception.

I do not think that that is always the case As psychologist, i see young people, and even children, as citizens in their own rights. And I am not alone regarding your question. Even so, the current world still is mainly an adult oriented-one because the so called "homunculus theory" (i.e., children are but adults in miniature) still pervades many countries across the world.

Let's listen to other voices.

There does not seem to be any valid answer to your question as you are trying to solve it in the context of representative democracy. Indeed, how can you have a representative (by definition one person) who can represent a large number of constituent with different goals, ideas, views etc.

The solution can only be found in going back to what democracy mean (rule by the people) or in practical term by the use of referendums. This is not such a far fetched idea as it has been in use for centuries in Switzerland.

Done

Dear Gioacchino

In world democracies there are several models of Democracy, direct, representative, etc.

Are people satisfied with their country's model of democracy?

Will there be alternatives to this model?

I think that high numbers of invalid votes would definitely raise questions about the legitimacy of the elections. Maybe it's a sign that there is a barrier to effective participation and something needs to be amended in the voting process. It may help to differentiate a spoiled ballot and a vote of non-confidence or "none of the above".

A related question to consider would be how low does voter turnout have to fall before elections should be considered illegitimate? This is a question that has crossed my mind while doing research for a working paper on student government elections in Canada (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369030801_Voter_Turnout_Analysis_of_Canadian_Undergraduate_Student_Unions_2016-2018). In some cases, the turnout was less than 10%.

For potential implications for practice, one potential way forward may be to have mechanisms in place to either have a new election with new candidates or options, or enact another course of action if spoiled ballots or votes of non-confidence surpass a certain percentage of votes cast, or if voter turnout falls under a certain percentage of the electorate.

Dear Omobhene, thank you for taking the time to write.

If you know the core values of normal liberal democracies you can find the core values of extreme liberal democracies/EXISM MOVEMENTS just by inverting them, which means that they are the inverse opposite, which explains why the competition between normal democratic outcomes and extreme democratic outcomes during election or reelection may not follow traditional prediction tools.

So inversion provides the link normal liberal democracy vrs extreme liberal democracy and this give you an idea about the expected antidemocracy front and the expected anti-exism front, but not many politicians know that yet.

Dear Aouamria Selma ,

Over the last decade Deep learning-based models surpasses classical machine learning models in a variety of text classification tasks. The primary challenge with text classification is determining the most appropriate deep learning classifier.

Regards,

Shafagat

Hi Justin! Thanks very much for your contribution here! :)

How would you go about raising awareness?

Dear Ludo, thank you for taking the time to write.

Keep in mind, in a normal liberal democratic environment based on majority rule and the independent rule of law, power moves from one normal democratic outcome to another normal democratic outcome through a peaceful transfer of power, where the normal democratic outcome is the one that reflect the majority view rule.....If the current normal democratic outcome is not working in the best interest of the majority as it should, then voters can vote with their HEADS AND FEETS and keep electing normal democratic outcomes that actually reflect the best interest of the majority....If somebody lies to you and you have the power to get rid of him/her with your vote, they you vote him/her out at the first opportunity and bring someone else committed to the best interest of the majority. The voter can use happiness to re-elect RESPONSIBLE normal democratic outcomes or to vote out irresponsable ones to bring in a responsible or more responsible one....

If the majority allows unhappiness to lead to natural full complacency or be the victim of effective targeted chaos induced full complacency, then it allows an extreme democratic outcome to win instead of another normal democratic outcome and then the majority rule process will be held hostage by the minority view as the minority view wins the democratic contest....

The minority view is the exism view, with values contrary to the normal democratic thinking and rule of law as it places the best interest of the exism movement over the best interest of the country and places the best interest of the minority over the best interest of the majority.

So Ludo, to understand the direction where informed and independent rational voter discontent should go to ensure the preservation of the best interest of the majority is always the outcome or where they go to lead to the lost of the best interest of the majority you need to think in terms of NORMAL DEMOCRATIC OUTCOMES/NORMAL LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES and EXTREME DEMOCRATIC OUTCOMES/EXTREME LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES, then you can understand how they can compete for power and persist in power as a competition between normal democratic outcome vrs extreme democratic outcome instead of the USUAL normal democratic outcome agains normal democratic outcome.

Luco, do you have a view on the actual question now that you have the context shared above?: What is the necessary and sufficient condition for an exism movement to come to exist under majority rule based liberal democracies?

Good day Jeffrey, if you are thinking inside the box, you may not be able to see the answer to this question, you need to be able to think outside the box to understand the nature and working of exism movements within democratic contest....Just defining exism will not help you much.....I think you need to read more of what is out there....However, the definition used in my publications is below:

All my publications related to this question directly or indirectly have a list of operational concepts relevant to each question.....

In one of the article EXISM is defined as concept No. 30

Now that you have the concept, the context is: There is a necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to come to power under majority rule based democracy and rule of law when competing in elections; and there is a necessary and sufficient condition for exism movement to lose power when going through reelection. Exism movements like Trumpism, Brexism, Brazilianism and Italianism came to power under the same condition to gain power; and both Brazilianims and Trumpism lost power when seeking reelection under the same condition to lose power, Trumpism fell in 2020 and Brazilianism fell in 2022.

And the question is: Under majority rule based democracies and the rule of law, what is the necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to lose power?

What do you think?

Yusuf, if you look at exism movements from the point of view of an paradigm shift from normal democratic outcomes to extreme democratic outcomes you need an outside the box thinking model to solve the problem of the paradigm shift knowledge gap created, you need new concepts/ideas no found in dictionaries that how the growth of knowledge works if you remember thomas kuhn's paradigm evolution loop.

If you know what exism movements are you can point out to the answer without looking at the specific concepts.

What is your view on the answer to the question?

Hello Holger,

Usual practice is to count independent cases. As panel data would not be independent, I'd vote for your choice of N = number of firms, rather than number of data points.

Good luck with your project.

Pawel Chmura , the research in this specific format is not so large as comparing with bigger formats. Nevertheless, the majority of the studies prescribed 1 to 3 min of exercise, with a ratio 1:1 of work-to-rest (Clemente et al. 2014; Little 2009).

Two to four bouts for a total volume of 16 min (maximum) is recommended for this kind of task (Clemente et al. 2014a).

The few studies that analyzed this format revealed a blood lactate

concentration of 9.4 (greater than lactate threshold) and intensities *86 % HRmax (Köklü et al. 2011; Owen et al. 2004; Williams and Owen 2007). No study analyzed the time–motion profile of players in this format. The unique technical analysis carried out on this format revealed a bigger tendency to do dribbles, turns, and headers in comparison with bigger formats (Owen et al. 2004).

Only one study (Owen et al. 2004) compared different sizes of the field in 1 versus 1 format, as far as we know. The heart rate analysis revealed that the biggest areas (75 and 150 m2) increased the beats per minute (bpm) in comparison with the smaller area (25 m2). A difference of 6 bpm was identified between the smaller and the bigger formats.

can anyone tell how am i ensemble deep learning models those having different input shape array?

as Dnn using 2D input array shape while CNN and RNN using 3D shape input arrays.

all of the models are already fitted

Please consider the issue of Election Integrity in the US. Simple addition is not proprietary. The access to the security devices makes it hard to determine if election fraud occurs. No one is permitted to look at the software and examine it for irregularities. A recount only counts the same physical ballots but does not verify voters' existence status or address. Many people are discussing moving to paper ballots. Ballots in the US are still mailed to deceased people. The process should remain as simple as possible for the people to track for the public good, in my humble opinion.

Yes this is related to his voting pattern.

Destroy Image Classification by Ensemble of Pre-trained models | by Vardan Agarwal | Towards Data Science

Roughly the following should work

----------------------------------------------

>Centralized

---------------------

>Partially Decentralized

---------------------------------------

>Decentralized

------------------------------

Data Structure

------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

This is just what I would do, based on current knowledge. As to what goes where… I’ll let you dig into that. DAG isn’t an algorithm, but a data structure. Some of the same algorithms can be applied, but many DAG systems aren’t mining-based but transaction based because DAG is generally used for speed advantage over Blockchain or for use in IOT-systems. I know the formatting is weird... no tabs on this editor. I hope this helps.

Peace and reversing public distrust - antecedent crimes (...)

There are lot of studies related to this subject and you can find Clientlism politics to define your question further more as you can do your research Hanna Bint Shedique Boloto Alug

Lucio Muñoz H.G. Callaway ,

Lucio Muñoz , I would like to correct your impression, as follows: "If she would have thought that my answer was lacking, she would have said so including why she thought my answer was lacking so I have the change to reply, but she did not say so…

Dear all,

We will close the survey in two weeks. Please, complete our survey if you haven't voted yet. Your opinion is highly appreciated, even if you are not an expert on meiofauna!

Done!

Porque ejercen justicia en nombre del pueblo

I am not sure that it gives probability, as you mentioned it will give the output label for the final class.

regards

Sorry but I don’t practise those skills bécause I’m just a student in thé second year of my bachelor in Political Science in Université Saint-Louis in Brussels

http://hdl.handle.net/10394/35103

George as shown in my pictures, under an independent rule of law system and without effective targeted chaos that induces full true majority complacency, exism movements like Trumpism cannot come to exist, and if they come to exist and when they go into re-election the targeted chaos that once worked is ineffective, they will lose re-election and nothing they can do, but to fade away, as independent courts without proof or evidence of electoral fraud will validate the winner of the contest…..

In 2016 against Hillary Clinton, systematic targeted chaos was effective, trumpism won; in 2020 against Biden, systematic targeted chaos was ineffective, trumpism lost. The dilemma the Trump party has now is how to make targeted chaos be effective again…otherwise; they cannot come into power again as long as there is no full true majority complacency….

One needs to be more attentive and not just believe on politicians.

For example, according to France and Brazil, the airplane was invented by Santos Dumont, who flew around the Eiffel Tower, and though he won the International prize for it, this is not accepted in the US, it is not even mentioned.

I see that other countries do not believe in "America First." The leadership stands divided.

Some are just grateful to be born and live here, hopeful to make contributions. China is passing the US on 5G. In short, the more one advances, the more opportunities for others to contribute and have success.

Here, elections must be based on trust, not just voting. As Stalin said, "who counts the votes control the voting." Many countries don't even consider the US a democracy, because there is no direct vote here yet -- no people voting. The president is voted indirectly. Maybe the problem yesterday will do away with the slave-time Electoral College. Will see.

Second, from size, India has a bigger claim to "largest democracy."

Hi,

take a look at this: https://reformaspoliticas.org/

Sometimes science fiction can turn out consistent with science.... Those scenarios of authoritarianism can be framed through parallel schemes where the two main components are effective targeted chaos (ETK) and legal loyalty to individual/party when in conflict, not to country/democracy, a situation that leads to either temporary or permanent authoritarianism....

Temporary authoritarianism comes from a shift from normal democratic outcome to an extreme democratic outcome(e.g. Trumpism) where the legal system remain loyal to country/democracy,,,,,,

Permanent authoritarianism can come in two ways, i) one step(shift from a corrupt normal democratic outcome to an extreme democratic outcome) or ii) two steps process(shift from a normal democratic outcome to an extreme democratic outcome; and effective targeted chaos soon after gaining power aimed at to transform the legal loyalty to democracy/ country to legal loyalty to party/individual for when there is legal conflict....

These dynamics have been on since 2016, but the main parties and the general population cannot see that clearly yet as under paradigm shift knowledge gaps it is difficult to know how to act or how to react so the normal democratic outcome becomes hostage of the extreme democratic outcome, ....When a shift takes place, paradigm shift knowledge gaps are created….

To persist after coming to exist, the extreme democratic outcome needs to win all cost, even when it loses; and to win even when it loses it needs to have courts with legal loyalty to party/individual, not to country/democracy.

To persist after a loss the extreme democratic outcome needs, not political loyalty only, it needs at the last result the sealing touch....legal loyalty to party/individual....

In his coming last ditch to win when it has lost, Trumpism may win a political loyalty test in congress/senate, but when it reaches the loyalty to country/democracy courts at the supreme court, the normal democratic outcome(Biden) win WILL BE RETIFY in the supreme court or the supreme court will not even hear the case as show of independence.....

If the USA supreme court were to put party/individual loyalty to country/democracy loyalty, it will be the end of president Lincoln dream of "a government of the people by the people for the people" and become a " government of the minority by the minority for the minority" and the end of democracy in the USA as the seeds for permanent authoritarianism would be in place, where win or lose, the extreme democratic outcome or Trumpism persist....

Assuming that the USA Supreme Court is still an independent body that puts country/democracy before party/individual it will reject fake facts and require facts and proof, this first try of Trumpism is done....

Assuming that the last 3 judges added to the supreme court during Trumpism transformed the court into a corrupt court that puts party/individual over country/democracy by accepting fake facts and leaving the facts and proof aside, then Trumpism will persist, and real widespread chaos will begin to force Trumpism out....

Sadly, as Trumpism requires loyalty to party/individual, it does not care about the political, social, and economic cost inflicted to the country/democracy, it only cares about PERSISTING...

Understanding the dynamics that rule the shift from normal democratic outcome to extreme democratic outcome ; and the conditions needed for them to persist or to be neutralize is important to properly safeguard democracy/country in the future….

I am just right now putting together a set of articles to be published in 2021 bringing out the ideas related to the structures of democracy that ensure the persistence of normal democratic outcomes and democracy under independent rule of law….and make it difficult if not impossible to have the conditions that allow extreme democratic outcomes to persist…

Thank you for your comment and the links to science fiction to the question at hand.

Respectfully yours

It isn't entirely clear, but if you have some participants creating a subset images and some judges rating a subset of images it seems likely you have a cross-classified design with three fixed factors AB, ab and eval and two or more random factors (judge, creator1, creator 2, image). I'd probably try and run this as a multilevel or linear mixed model with multiple random factors rather than a repeated measures ANOVA (which would treat image or judge as random effects but not both).

Its possible some of the random effects have too small n to be estimated well and just using dummy variables for those effects might be OK. Its also possible that some of the random effects (or even fixed effects) might be aliased with others and you can't simultaneously estimate all of them. The aliasing of fixed effects could arise because its a fractional factorial design. The aliasing of random effects could arise because the random factors are confounded (i.e., the creator combinations and image id are redundant).

Dear Şeyma Kızılay,

There is already bit of research being done on exactly this issue. Here is one study that might be helpful, but there is much more (e.g. search in google scholar).

Best,

Florian

audio signals are presented as a change in the amplitude in the time domain in your reference paper. For time frequency representation, the signals are presented as a frequency change in the time domain, not amplitude. You can process your augmentation, by the same manner. Just replace the amplitude values in your signal vector by the frequency values. Try it.

Blockchain is already used in this area. for instance, check for Luxoft, it is using blockchain for a decentralized voting application that ensures every vote is counted. Moreover, blockchain is also used to make the Internet of Things more secure than it has ever been.

As there were no clear examples in practice about extreme democratic outcomes like BREXIT, USEXIT, BRAZILEXIT…. before 2016 I waited until after 2016 BREXIT and 2016 USEXIT to start publishing my ideas explaining them as even the opposition parties who lost those elections and the general true majority could not understand what had happened as the unexpected happened….

Dear Kawther Aarizou

Image Visual Quality or ( Imperceptibility) can be measured by either quality measurements or quantity measurement. The one you are looking for is quality measurements called ( Humane visual systems or HVS), this measures is less immunity than the other one( quantity measure) which has the highest powerful robustness.

Please try to work with MSE, PSNR, NCC. I can help you well is you like.

regards

Role of the electoral process will immensely help in eradicating many social, political and economic evils, but the condition is that there should be a massive exercise through the help of various electoral processes even at the grassroot levels.

If I would be you, I would have followed the same models. Categorical variables, I feel are best shown by the help of logistic regression.

In my opinion, the main cause of corruption is the morality.

Regards.

In Croatia you can have one preferential vote from the list. Although ot seems not significant we had a last person on the list being elected for EU Parliament due to preferental votes.

Before addressing the proposed topic, which incidentally, we have been studying for years with other pandemics and epizootics in my laboratory, it should be noted that the hypotheses to understand their origin in humans have a lot to do with the thought of the landscape ecology.

These hypotheses, structured as landscape sciences do, but under the thought of rhizomatic ecology, tell us about how all animals are connected; hypotheses that serve to remind us of our animal condition and that shout at us, because they cannot say it louder, that as much as we live in artificial environments, we continue and will continue to be animals on the planet; a planet called earth which is our holistic environment.

Regardless of the origin or the time we have been together, some animals with others, the pandemic is the result of a zoonosis that may well be direct or indirect, in this case, as of May 2020, the way in which we are transmitted: Hypothesis 1: bats transported to the Guangzhou market were the original source for direct transmission of CoVid-19 to humans; Hypothesis 2: Pangolins (the most trafficked animal on the illegal market worldwide and widely consumed in China and other Asian regions) or a domestic animal such as dromedary or cat, could have been infected with CoVid-19 by bats and be the intermediary vectors of the virus to reach humans; Hypothesis 3: Pangolins could have directly infected the human. As can be seen, the crazy conspiracy idea that it was a virus created in the laboratory by either North Americans or Chinese and deliberately released or accidentally escaped into the environment is discarded biochemically.

Now, to understand this pandemic, we must remember that rhizomatic ecology tells us that humans are immersed in an ecosystem (holon) within larger ecosystems until they reach the Holo (Earth), and that each system has subsystems that directly influence adjacent or remote holons.

Bats are a very special group of mammals because their ability to fly allows them to have very high thermal regulation. Its temperature rises a lot during flight and drops considerably during rest. Their metabolism is more intense than that of the rest of the mammals and their immune system is much stronger, in such a way that they can have viruses, bacteria and parasites without causing apparent damage, but transport them long distances (zoocoria). The tangle of the rhizome extends indefinitely since where the bat reaches, it can infect endemic organisms such as the pangolin or dromedary, or common domestic animals, such as cats. It can even infect people when they are crowded into a market to trade and move more from there; huddled in a refugee camp or crowding into migratory groups to escape environmental catastrophes, dictatorships, famine, for example.

The natural migrations of fauna are becoming more extensive every day in the sense that the borders and the breeding or feeding sites are widening, covering more geographic area, interacting more with humans. A human population from a site that, if it did not previously have contact with said animal, can be infected more easily than people from populations that have lived with this animal for centuries. Likewise, consequences of the recent climate change and the illegal trafficking of species is the favor of this dispersion of pathogens, since the trafficked animals lack a clinical certificate, are transported in poor conditions, increase their stress, and therefore are more susceptible to suffer more pathogens and infect the fauna that accompanies them on their journey and final destination, including humans, of course, since we are also accompanying fauna. Climate change, on the other hand, encourages migratory behaviors in animals that are increasingly longer in their days of searching for places to reproduce, feed, hibernate, etc. The rhizome of the Earth has no territorial beginning or end, lacks a center and has nodes with vanishing lines and nodes with convergence lines, which can change, appear more or disappear; They can also modify their arms and nodal extensions, but it will always remind us that the whole planet is oneself and that humanity belongs to this planet as well as a bat or a pangolin, caring for them is caring for ourselves.

Avoiding the introduction and translocation of biological species is a pending subject of landscape ecology that now tries to give us the same teaching as in the time of the black plague (1347-1353), of cholera (1817), of the Spanish flu ( 1918) or the Asian flu (1957), the numerous cholera pandemics (1961, 1991, 1992 ...), swine flu (1976, 2009 ...), avian flu (1878, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 ...) and of course, by CoVid (2003-2004).

Thanks, but my question is about malapportionment, i.e., disproportionality INSIDE a country, not about cross-national comparison. Anyway, I have found the answer in Gallagher's paper itself. It does include that sort of disproportionality.

Perhaps we don't have to worry about the relative intelligence or knowledge of voters in a democratic election.

James Surowiecki, in his book, "The Wisdom of Crowds," claims (with a number of confirming examples) that, when a group (a "crowd") is faced with a problem to solve or a decision to make, the crowd as a whole is often more intelligent than the smartest individual in the crowd. This kind of "group intelligence" increases with the size of the group, as well as with the diversity and independence of its members.

Here is a review of the book, which summarizes the main points:

https://www.icmrindia.org/free%20resources/Bookreviews/wisdom%20of%20crowds.htm

I do not see the hypothesis you want to test - apart from, that party preferences of two regions are approaching each other. But TV before 1990 was only randomly chosen, but - I think - cannot have any relevance for the party preference. Therefore, there seems no reason for regressions, because there is no explaining variable apart from region, which means it is sufficient to show the relations of party preference for both regions over time.

Hi Melissa. I don'. Do you mean private opinion surveys ? They just ask who the interviewee voted for or who they intend to vote for. If I misunderstood your question and it doesn't have anything to do with my answer, I'm really sorry.

This is not answering you question directly, but I would like to point out that there is a problem in using standard logit models when the number of cases for one outcome is relatively are compared to the other. And it is the absolute number that counts. The usual maximum likelihood estimates are know to be biased. This is a good and clear account of the problem and suggested solution (Firth logistic regression). https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats3/RareEvents.pdf It is often a problem in voting data. This is also a good account followed by illuminating questions and answers

https://statisticalhorizons.com/logistic-regression-for-rare-events

For users with IBM SPSS Statistics version 23 or higher, the STATS FIRTHLOG extension is installed as part of IBM SPSS Statistics-Essentials for R. For Stata see

and for R see https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/logistf/logistf.pdf

That of course is tackling the problem via analysis, it is also possible to do it ameliorate at the design stage by oversampling the 'cases' (with or without matching). This is often used by epidemiologists in what is known as a case: control design. You cannot use the data to estimate prevalence as you have fixed this, ( eg 50 cases and 50 controls; or 50 cases and 200 controls ) but under certain assumptions you can get regression-like estimates of the effect of exposures on the outcome. ( See )

Hi Nancy Ann Watanabe

The key statement is " To put things into perspective, a recent investigation by the leading research Swiss institution ETH Zurich found that flights accounted for a staggering 50% of its emissions."

i.e., 50% of ETH Zurich's emissions are due to air travel.

Personally, I believe the quality of conferences (and science in general) has declined significantly in the last two decades. Poor, too specialized research, too many presentations etc. Attendees (presenters and others) should question the reason why they need to go. I gave presentations at ACS meetings in 2017 and 2018. I also gave a webinar on the same topics which I then put on YouTube, and I answer a lot of questions on RG. The latter two give me far more visibility and I've made more clients - without having to leave home. More people have watched my videos than attended the conferences.

The voting system where the choice with the most votes wins is called "first past the post".

Ranked ballot voting systems differ by requiring voters to list most to least favourite choices (1, 2, 3...). There are different ways to employ ranked ballots, but one is the alternative vote. Generally with this method, in the case where a voter's first choice is eliminated by receiving the least number of votes upon the first count, their second choice would count as their vote, so their votes are reallocated to the remaining choices. Here is a video that explains it in detail; the YouTube channel that created it has other videos about different voting systems that may be of interest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE

RG is not an appropriate outlet to discuss about sociopolitical issues. Let us focus only on the 'real' science in this forum - not government policies related to science. No offense to anyone.

Sadly, most technology, like 3d printing or AI is often thrown at the most simple problems, like marketing for AI or printing toys for 3d printers. Blockchain is a ledger and great for tracking money. But it can also track other things that require a lot of effort to track. 3d printers took a while to be used for the benefit of society. do data scientists really want to build a better marketing algorithm to sell 5% for widgets? I think we would rather use our time to find the next combination of chemicals/items that would solve world problems. Could we find the optimal road layout to reduce wrecks or increase the durability of roads to save us billions. Could we use AI to re-plan food distribution and farming to reduce chemical and fertilizer pollution and regrow our forest and grass lands without overgrazing. Is there an optimal population per square mile? What amount of properly cultivated land could sustain a family without environment harm? Could we find these answer if we had more data, yes we could. It wasn't until we saw the change in yellow stone with the introduction of predators and the reduction of overgrazing of herd animals did we realize we have been mismanaging nature. What other areas of our life could we track with blockchain then analyze with AI to make ground breaking discoveries?

Following. Readers may interest in the following question: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_your_opinion_about_majority_in_voting

Ronaldo Munck and Carsten Weerth

unfortunately, yes

Thanks! I'll look into that

I think both are important it depends upon the out come of your aims

If using a gold standard, how does the economy adjust for dislocations of capital, and currency flight? Also, does a gold standard negate monetary policy as a tool vs. a weapon?

Dear Muhammad Nizar Alam,

I suggest you to see links and attached file on topic.

Decision Making Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); A Step ...

https://www.iaras.org/iaras/filedownloads/.../007-0034(2017).pdf

Comparison between multiple-choice and analytic hierarchy process ...

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.520...

AHP PAIRWISE COMPARISONS VERSUS A ... - Semantic Scholar

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/.../a383d7c40a463a3176e9d348cc...

questionnaire design for survey research: employing weighting ... - isahp

www.isahp.org/.../Papers/SatoY_QuestionnairesInAHPSurveys.pdf

Best regards

Oliver jopo Vembo Mikidadi Muhanga

yes. debate of candidate for election is very important. Social media affect on our decision ( of course, it would be good or bad ) . It depends on us.

Social media completely can change our decision about people election .

According to Cochrane's handbook, there are two main concerns about using vote counting to make sense of results: by considering each study on its own you are not allocating different weight to them, and too much emphasis is given to significant/not-significant, without considering range of effects (e.g., CI) (https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter_9/9_4_11_use_of_vote_counting_for_meta_analysis.htm)

It is very difficult to exactly specify the factors involved in national elections both in developing and advanced democracies. Although political branding can influence the participants' preferences, there are certain byzantine complexities predominating elections which make it difficult for the researcher to ascertain the true validity of the findings. After all, the world of politics is a context with many interlocking variables that may be manipulated by both internal and external contenders.

Well. I'm not sure as I'm very much engaged in my clinical courses; I'm a critical care fanatic. But I can see students engaging more in social activities, and in less political meetings as compared with other schools. I'm not quite happy with nurses being the largest workforce at the healthcare system, and usually having a percentage way below its proportional presence with the system, perhaps less than 10% of the representation in the councils or committees responsible for making legislative concerning healthcare. I believe that we are so authoritarian and demanding as we do not allow students to grow in different directions and let them build up their hobbies. On the contrary, we demand that they submit papers, NCPs, assignments, and read pure nursing materials, which have lots of issues in nothing but clinical and basic science issues, leaving so little space for other areas of interest, such as how to contribute to making the healthcare system more human-oriented, how to build up laws and regulations, and how to become leaders. We, nurses, nurse researchers and scholars, still need a lot to do, only of we recognize that there is an issue, and only if we admit that.

I've heard of cases where artificial intelligence is used to simulate voting behaviours in order to develop voting theories. I've provided a citation for one such article below.

In terms of theorizing the role artificial intelligence could have in voting processes or other forms of decision-making, this seems to be fairly new, but it will likely become more relevant in the future as AI technology continues to improve.

Meir et al. "Iterative voting and acyclic games." Artificial Intelligence. vol 252 (2017): p. 100-122.

Justin Patrick

Thanks.

You might try the references in , particularly Tainter,Friedman, Diamond ("the world until yesterday").

2 more F.A. Hayek "The fatal conceit, the errors of socialism" and

Stephen M. Walt "The hell of good intentions, America's foreign policy elite and the decline of US primacy"

I think the gap lies in a subset of electronic voting: online voting. While electronic voting can refer to voting in-person at a specific electronic voting machine, it can also refer to online voting, which allows for voting to take place remotely. While there is some concern about those who do not have access to computers or an internet connection not being able to vote, this can be remedied by keeping in-person voting stations, just instead of casting paper ballots, voters would use the online system using technology provided at the voting station. I've noticed that Canadian student unions can be useful case studies for online voting in practice.

I won’t really have much concern about me but I would be concerned about people who don’t know how to vote unless they are given instructions as it is usually done during elections conventionally. The question is whether that would even work ?