Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK

Perth - Geneva - Madison - Reading - Melbourne

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@abertini1 From a UI perspective, Germany's and Brazil's convey the information best. Score, time, nations with both abbreviation & flag, minimal clutter, time below score for easy visual separation.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@GrahamY @DrCameronMurray So an "investor rush into new builds" won't incentivise the building of more new builds?

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@araujohistorian So each time you resubmit an article to a different journal with a different referencing format, you completely rewrite it by hand?

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

Pretty astonishing figures.
One important question is the extent to which people's votes are swayed by each seat's candidates. And whether that's the same across different segments of the electorate.
A stereotype might be that in rural areas the individual candidates matter more.

[Kos Samaras @KosSamaras]

National polls are one insight. But this is what fragmentation actually looks like on a map.

Take our RedBridge Accent Research May MRP and sort all 150 seats by where people live.

Labor still dominates the cities, 34 of 43 inner-metro seats, 30 of the outer suburbs. One Nation dominates the other Australia, 28 of 39 rural seats and 10 of 17 provincial ones.

The action is in the middle. In the outer-suburban mortgage belt, One Nation is already on 15 seats and climbing, while the Coalition is down to five. In provincial Australia the Coalition is gone entirely, wiped out...leaving a straight One Nation v Labor fight.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@AvidCommentator Stagflation. When was the last time we had that in Australia?

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@DeanRosario Results in friendlies, especially right before a WC, are pretty meaningless.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@neon76 @Adrian_Arciuli @AlexiLalas @Socceroos @SOTUWithAlexi Australia's 27 in both FIFA & ELO rankings. USA ranked 16 by FIFA but 36 by ELO. They're not as good as their FIFA ranking suggests. Turkey & Paraguay are ranked much higher by ELO (13, 22) than FIFA (22, 40). Turkey to finish 1. USA, Australia, Paraguay to scrap it out for 2nd.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@MrRexPatrick @JAParker29 Won't we basically be paying the US to take a nuclear sub disposal problem off their hands. Then saddled with older subs that need lots of maintenance, which has been a crippling cost even with our conventional subs. Then we'll have to pay the US again to dispose of them?

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@SamRo It’s a terrible question for anyone not familiar with the mathematical definition of “expected”.

Under the more general English language usage, for both lotteries one would expect to not win, and thus for both, expected winnings would be zero.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@DeanRosario Effective, but trashed the attractive Dutch playing style & went for a brutally physical style instead. I thought it was sad to watch.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@Josemanu_Rivera @FabrizioFauno @grok Well no one expects, or wants, a world cup in which only the 16 “best” teams (on what basis is that decided?) make the top 16. The idea is that teams can perform above their level.

Currently there are 2 teams ranked in the top 16, teams at 21,22 and 27,28. Seems ok to me.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@Josemanu_Rivera @FabrizioFauno @grok True. What are you basing your statement about it being unbelievable on?

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@Josemanu_Rivera @FabrizioFauno @grok Of those 8 teams, 5 have made it to the group stage or further in previous world cups, which is equivalent to round of 16 this time round. So nothing unbelievable about it.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@Globalbiosec @RageSheen This leads to the 2003 (!!) book, "Wenzel RP. (2003). Prevention and control of nosocomial infections."

So at best, the latest WHO guidelines are based on three successive copy-pastes of a categorical statement about droplet transmission, derived from a book published in 2003.

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@Globalbiosec @RageSheen That takes us to a far more substantial document - the 156-page WHO guidelines! From 2014. So much for updated knowledge on droplet transmission... Still, maybe there's evidence given? Um, no. We see the exact same statement again. But there's a new reference [5]! Let's go...

[Raina MacIntyre @Globalbiosec]

Just reviewed these #Ebola and #Marburg #PPE guidelines, dated 2026. It's shocking for those of us who advocated for better Ebola PPE in 2014. It uses the 1m rule and states "Paradoxically, wearing excessive PPE can increase a person’s risk of infection." Where is the evidence? 1/4 https://t.co/ZpljXiTsfe

[Tom Johnstone BunurongCountry AU EU UK @itjohnstone]

@DrCameronMurray But the asymmetry is that there are far more future home buyers than there are home buyers from last year. Or indeed the last 5 years, should prices drop that much.