Jesse Bachir

“Evangelicals are missing from the halls of power. That’s a problem. The lack of evangelical Christians at America’s most prestigious institutions fuels mistrust.” Excerpt From “Opinion | Evangelicals are missing from the halls of power. That’s a problem.” Aaron M. Renn The Washington Post https://apple.news/ATJF-eGWhQMuuXvLnrj0ugQ This material may be protected by copyright.

Congratulations, WaPo, you did it, you published the worst take

Universities face a funding problem, so we should make them less accessible and further perpetuate inequality, by depriving people of the possibility of receiving an education at the institution that is for education. Makes total sense. 🙃

AI can't count, or do math, and hallucinates citations, can get concepts completely wrong, and so on.

Somehow we're supposed to think this is.... better?

I think he lacks the self-development aspect; he seems to have the Article 10 right to express 'Greens are still bad, we can double down and still do this', however.

Appealing to people on the basis of liberal values, meeting them where they are, communicating in their native language. These are apparently 'extremist' and 'the death of liberal democracy.'

Appealing to people on the basis of exclusionary politics, revocation of human rights? That's democracy!

The use of Artificial Intelligence and EdTech in Education - Committees - UK Parliament The Education Committee is looking to examine how artificial intelligence (AI) and EdTech are reshaping education across England, from early years settings to schools, colleges and universities. The C...

UK government inquiry into the use of “AI” in education is accepting comments. Have at it friends: committees.parliament.uk/work/9642/th... (yes I will do the housework in a bit)

He's using "begs the question" here incorrectly. And that bothers me.

Being generous: to point out that such 'aliens' obey other laws might be raising a different (but related) question, but it's not begging the question. The conclusion is not assumed by the premise.

Labour's/Starmer's "unity" at it again.

Starmer today putting out messaging that the by-election is about unity vs division.

Somehow, weirdly, I don't see the anti-immigrant and anti-trans views from the Labour Party as pro unity. Odd that.

"Unlike educators, who can interpret context, cross-reference prior performance, and recognise deeper insight beyond rubric descriptors, AI operates strictly within the limits of its prompt logic and rubric constraints."

Oh, so. You mean. It doesn't actually work? How surprising.

I think people should know that the person who took the position below is a member of the Texas bar and that her name is Mary Larakers.

Oh, we’re keeping the Associate Professor titles? I thought we might just go down to “AI Training Prompter and Reply Verification Instructor.”

It’s not supposed to read well?

Sorry, I thought one of the purposes of university was the provision of knowledge. An important part of which allegedly involves communication of that knowledge to the public in various forms.

Are we now just engines of AI slop?

*looks at our rule of law*

I don’t know, we seem to not be doing too terribly.

(Get back to me after the next election, though 😬)

The Anti-Authoritarian First Amendment and Its Limits

Here's @genevievelakier.bsky.social on some of the ways in which First Amendment doctrine should evolve in recognition of "the free speech dangers that are created by authoritarian structures of control in civil society" knightcolumbia.org/blog/the-ant...

At this stage, I feel fairly confident in saying that the NHS/national health agencies have been taken over by dangerously anti-scientific cranks and that it will probably take at least a generation (and several changes of government) to fully wash them out.

SCOTUS actually did its role and checked executive power?

I thought we loved the unitary executive, he can do whatever he wants theory? (Though it may now be the he can do whatever he wants until he starts messing too much with the money machine theory).

What, and when, is a purported law ‘the law’?

This is common good constitutionalism.

According to (some) Labour, they cannot change the FWS judgment. Since UKSC brought us “clarity.”

So, apparently PS is dead. Rewrite the textbooks!

Everything bad about tyranny & the arbitrary exercise of power, that republican political theorists warned about, is demonstrated endlessly by Republican politicians.

I had to teach judicial review today 😭😭

Bring on the gin. And/or wine.

Good that EHRC wrong on service provision; employment context certainly not favourable

Palestine Action JR ✔️
EHRC Interim Guidance 😐

*sigh*

"We accurately misreported the information, why are you coming for us?"

NHS closed Tavistock over care complaints – there were only eight An eye-opening FOI report has revealed that just eight people complained about the Tavistock gender clinic's care provision in 10 years.

In a functional country, this would be a scandal. A service suffering only from chronic underfunding was ripped apart because the media created a myth of 1000s of complaints of malpractice. The truth - as in my family’s experience - was very different.
www.thepinknews.com/2026/02/11/n...

I wish *someone* would just consult literally any competent philosopher that ever took even just one philosophy of mind module, once upon a time in undergrad, perhaps decades ago.

Because the tech bros have no idea what they're talking about, and please can we stop listening to them.

I cannot speak to cases for which I have no particulars, I can only state what the law actually holds. And, to point out the obvious: government can sometimes act unlawfully.

The difficulty is what is viewpoint vs non-viewpoint discrimination. And, we can think that Universities do engage and ought to engage in some kinds of viewpoint discrimination as a pedagogical function (e.g. choosing not to teach/invite poor scholarship).

There are (legal) principles here, at ECHR level, and similar US First Amendment law shares similar ideas around 'viewpoint discrimination,' which is what is typically engaged in these cases.

TL;DR: If government cannot rescind an invitation on the basis of viewpoint, neither can a university.