JBryan

[James Wright @JPBWFarm]

Natural England wants to remove 90% of Dartmoor’s ponies.

Our Exmoor ponies are next. These animals have been here for thousands of years.

A government quango, destroying the countryside and its heritage.

[Stuey Beef 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @stuey_beef]

Ed Davey has written to Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson demanding she WITHDRAW official EHRC guidance protecting female-only spaces in toilets and changing rooms.

Let that land.

The Equalities and Human Rights Commission — a statutory body — has produced legally grounded guidance telling employers and public bodies that biological men should not access women’s single-sex spaces.

This is not opinion.
This is not politics.
This is the settled legal position following the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on the meaning of “woman” under the Equality Act.

And Ed Davey wants it gone.

His stated reason?

The guidance is not “compatible with long-standing British values.”

British values.

He used those words to argue AGAINST protecting women’s single-sex spaces.

The same Liberal Democrats who lecture the country about tolerance, inclusion and human rights are now lobbying a Labour minister to tear up statutory guidance that protects every woman in Britain who walks into a changing room, a refuge or a hospital ward.

This is not a fringe position within the Lib Dems.

Their leader wrote the letter.

The party has chosen its side.

It is not the side of women.

Repost if you think women’s single-sex spaces should be protected.

[JBryan @J_Bryan52]

Meeting is utterly pointless! Resignations need to come first in order to even begin to rebuild trust!

[StateOfSwimming.com @StateOfSwimming]

Olympians Reject “Pointless” Offer To Meet Swim England Chair As Resignation Calls Grow Louder https://t.co/t48irOIhtW

[Spina Kicks🥇 @Spinaaaaa17]

Lang Lang the greatest classical pianist in the world walked up to emilio piano and asked him to play rush E, one of the hardest pieces ever.

What happened next... I can't believe it🔥🔥🔥

[AilaunchX @Ai_Tech_tool]

Instead of watching an hour of Netflix, watch this 2 hour hour Stanford lecture will teach you more about how LLMs like ChatGPT and Claude are built than most people working at top AI companies learn in their entire careers.

[JBryan @J_Bryan52]

Pretty sure many others would add to this voice 👏

[StateOfSwimming.com @StateOfSwimming]

An open letter from more than 20 Great Britain Olympians has called for key former and current members of the Swim England’s board to resign from their swimming governance positions in order to build stakeholder trust in the running of the sport
https://t.co/vM79MWz2Gf

[Matthardybladerunner @Matthardy_BR]

PLEASE SHARE......THIS IS WHAT DWR CYMRU ARE DOING TO OUR RIVER
Location is bottom of car park at Llanrwst library heading towards Gowers Bridge

[Politics UK @PolitlcsUK]

🚨 BREAKING: Labour MP Emma Lewell says she will defy Keir Starmer and vote for him to be referred to the Privileges Committee

"The way today's vote has been handled by the Government smacks once again of being out of touch and disconnected from the public mood"

[Nav Toor @heynavtoor]

Researchers sent the same resume to an AI hiring tool twice. Same qualifications. Same experience. Same skills. One version was written by a real human. The other was rewritten by ChatGPT.

The AI picked the ChatGPT version 97.6% of the time.

A team from the University of Maryland, the National University of Singapore, and Ohio State just published the receipt. They took 2,245 real human-written resumes pulled from a professional resume site from before ChatGPT existed, so the human writing was actually human. Then they had seven of the most-used AI models in the world rewrite each one. GPT-4o. GPT-4o-mini. GPT-4-turbo. LLaMA 3.3-70B. Qwen 2.5-72B. DeepSeek-V3. Mistral-7B.

Then they asked each AI to pick the better resume. Every model picked itself.

GPT-4o hit 97.6%. LLaMA-3.3-70B hit 96.3%. Qwen-2.5-72B hit 95.9%. DeepSeek-V3 hit 95.5%. The real human almost never won.

Then the researchers tried the obvious objection. Maybe the AI is just better at writing. So they had real humans grade the resumes for actual quality and ran the experiment again, controlling for it. The result was worse. Each AI kept picking itself even when human judges rated the human-written version as clearer, more coherent, and more effective.

It gets worse. The AIs do not just prefer AI over humans. They prefer themselves over other AIs. DeepSeek-V3 picked its own resumes 69% more often than LLaMA's. GPT-4o picked its own 45% more often than LLaMA's. Each model can recognize and reward its own dialect.

Then the researchers ran the simulation that ends careers. Same job. 24 occupations. Same qualifications. The only variable was whether the candidate used the same AI as the screening tool. Candidates using that AI were 23% to 60% more likely to be shortlisted. Worst gap was in sales, accounting, and finance.

99% of large companies now run AI on incoming resumes. Most of them use GPT-4o. The paper just proved GPT-4o picks GPT-4o 97.6% of the time.

If you wrote your own cover letter this week, you did not lose to a better candidate. You lost to a worse candidate who paid OpenAI 20 dollars.

Your qualifications do not matter if the AI prefers its own handwriting over yours.

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

Liver and onions was on the kitchen table of roughly every British household in the country, at least once a fortnight, from approximately 1850 to approximately 1985.

A Tuesday meal. Whatever day the butcher had lamb's liver in, or pig's liver if you were further down the week, or ox liver if the household was stretching the budget.

Your mother bought it that afternoon. Still warm, or nearly. Deep burgundy, slick and glossy on the butcher's paper. Half a pound. Tuppence. Change from a shilling.

She sliced it quarter of an inch thick, dusted it in seasoned flour, and laid it in a pan where a pound of onions had been going soft in bacon fat for twenty minutes. Two minutes one side. Two minutes the other. The middle still faintly pink. Overcooked liver was a mortal sin in a British kitchen, spoken of by grandmothers with genuine sadness, the way a priest might discuss a lapsed parishioner.

Pan juices deglazed with water and Worcestershire, poured over. Mashed potato. A pile of cabbage. A rasher of bacon laid across the top if it was a good week.

The whole thing cost, in 1962, approximately 8p per serving. It delivered, in a single plate, the highest concentration of bioavailable vitamin A in any food on earth, more B12 than any supplement will ever contain, haem iron at absorption rates a plant source cannot match, copper, zinc, choline, folate, and selenium.

Nobody called it a superfood. Nobody called anything a superfood. It was called Tuesday.

Then, between 1985 and 2005, liver quietly disappeared. Mothers stopped buying it. The butcher stopped ordering it. The supermarket stopped stocking it. By 2010, most British adults under thirty had never knowingly eaten it.

The word now carries a faint cultural embarrassment. A food your nan ate. Something to move past.

Meanwhile, 20% of British women of childbearing age are anaemic. The NHS prescribes them ferrous sulphate tablets that cause nausea and take six months to address a deficiency one plate of liver a fortnight would correct in weeks.

The women taking the tablets are, in many cases, the granddaughters of the women who ate the liver.

The deficiency is cultural amnesia with a prescription attached.

Your butcher still has lamb's liver in the counter. Ask him. He will be delighted. He might throw in the kidneys.

Flour. Bacon fat. Onions. Four minutes total. Worcestershire. Mashed potato underneath.

The grandmother is gone, but the dish remembers her, and so do you, whether you knew her or not.

Eat it. Pass it on.

[Helen Whately MP @Helen_Whately]

Ministers tried to force mandation through AGAIN.

Thanks to the Lords they failed.

No government should have control over where your pension gets invested.

[Kardashian de Software @oprimodev]

“Como as pistas de fórmula 1 são desenhadas”

[Dr Ali G (🦋 @dralig.bsky.social) @AlisonGeorge10]

This should be front page news🚨‼️

@wesstreeting & @SKinnock are removing OUR RIGHT to make referrals to secondary care & YOUR RIGHT to a specialist opinion/care/treatment/surgery etc.

Ignore the spin…

@UKLabour are smashing the #NHS up w/ a sledgehammer!

@LaylaMoran
1/3 🧵

[Anish Moonka @anishmoonka]

In 2020, a Stockholm University lab mixed sperm and egg fluid from 16 couples in a dish. Some men's sperm got pulled toward the fluid much harder than others. And in half the cases, the egg picked a stranger's sperm over the partner's.

The egg releases a chemical bait. Sperm carry tiny smell sensors on their heads that pick up that bait. When the smell matches, the sperm speeds up and swims straight at the egg. When it doesn't, the sperm slows down or loses its line. The lead researcher, John Fitzpatrick, called it a chemical breadcrumb trail.

The sperm race is mostly a myth. A man releases around 100 million sperm at a time. Only about 250 ever reach the egg. The rest die along the way. The vagina is acidic and kills most of them. The cervix makes thick mucus that traps them like flypaper. The womb's immune system attacks them as foreign invaders. And half of the survivors pick the wrong fallopian tube, because only one of the two tubes has the egg in it.

By the time anyone even gets close, the race is already over. Then the egg picks.

The egg is selecting for immune-system genes. The more different the father's immune genes are from the mother's, the wider the range of diseases their child can fight off later. So the egg favors sperm that bring more genetic diversity.

Fitzpatrick thinks this could explain some of the 30% of infertility cases doctors label "unexplained." For some couples, their bodies just don't chemically match, even when everything else does.

Out of 100 million sperm, your father's chemistry was the one the egg agreed to let in. Which means all of us are, in some way, the quiet outcome of a chemistry test no one studied for.

[Proudofus.uk @ProudofusUK]

Every weekend on earth started here. 🇬🇧

In the factory towns of Victorian England. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

In the early 1800s there was no weekend.

Six days a week. From first light to last. Sunday the only day off and even that wasn't guaranteed.

So British workers invented their own.

They called it Saint Monday.

If you'd worked hard enough by Saturday night, you simply didn't come in on Monday. Music halls opened Monday afternoons to catch them. Factory owners could not stop it.

In 1842 a campaign group called the Early Closing Association made a deal.

Give us Saturday afternoons. We'll give up Monday.

It took fifty years. But slowly, across the manufacturing towns of England, Saturday afternoons began to free up.

Then football arrived. The Football Craze of the 1890s needed a time to play. Saturday afternoon was right there. ⚽

But it was still only half a day.

In 1933, during the Great Depression, a man named John Boot opened a new factory - so efficient it produced far more than he could sell.

He had two choices. Lay workers off. Or give them Saturdays.

He gave them Saturdays. Full pay. No deductions.

It worked. Other factories followed.

The two-day weekend spread to America. To Europe. To Japan. To every country on earth that adopted the modern working week.

Every lie-in on a Saturday morning. Every Sunday afternoon. Every thank-God-it's-Friday.

Your ancestors fought for their right to own their time.🇬🇧

Make yours count. 👇

Your support pays for the research, production and hours it takes to get it right. Stories like theirs don't find themselves.

Be part of us. 👉 https://t.co/rih7iKwnvf 🙏

Be Proud Of Us.🇬🇧

[Sharron Davies HoL MBE @sharrond62]

Well look at that…. There’s always a tweet! 😁

[Katharine Birbalsingh @Miss_Snuffy]

PARENTS!

This is exactly what you are doing when you give your child unsupervised access to the internet. 😳

[Fraser Nelson @FraserNelson]

The 'Rhodesia Solution': How to use word tricks to 'disclose' a scandal to a Prime Minister while allowing him not to act. And to say, later on, that he wasn't really told...

[Stuey Beef 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @stuey_beef]

You go to work for 40 years (I'm currently at 42).

You’re forced into auto‑enrolment. You play by the rules, you save into a pension on the promise it’s yours.

Then Labour strolls in, waves through a law that lets ministers tell your scheme where to gamble those savings – not for your benefit, but to prop up their economic “strategy” and vanity infrastructure schemes that the market won’t fund.

This isn’t prudence. It isn’t “modernisation”. It is a straightforward transfer of control from the saver to the state.

Hands off our pensions. Share this before they pretend nobody noticed.

[Andrew Bridgen @ABridgen]

A Labour Government who can’t run the country or the economy just took powers to control your pension savings.
What could possibly go wrong ?

Rachel Reeves just seized control of your pension. https://t.co/vZf0PkXHcW