Nick Bailey

Interested in evolution, genetics, statistics, computer science, and their intersection (“bioinformatics”)

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

Excited to announce my first resource publication “Correcting for Bias in Estimates of Watterson’s theta
and Tajima's D From Missing Data in Next-Generation Sequencing” out now in Molecular Ecology Resources! Article linked below in short thread 👇

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@AlexTISYoung By analogy most actions we take can plausibly have non-zero effects on generations well after ours. Just saying a procedure can pass on effects to multiple generations seems like the start of argument about those effects, not much of point by itself.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@AlexTISYoung I've heard a similar argument against consumer genetics. Any info on your genome is some info on later generations, who may not consent. Seemed sensible to me then I realized to some degree since we're all related so anyone consenting to it provides non-zero info on everyone else

[Gideon Bradburd @gbradburd]

postdoc alert 🚨! NIH-funded postdoc in my lab to work on Ancestral Recombination Graphs in space. Please spread the word widely, and please reach out if you're interested! (2-3yr position, start date flexible, pay/benefits good!).

details:https://t.co/kExy35JSEj

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@aigleeson Totally agree that slow and carefully thought-out work should be praised and rewarded more and that Knuth is a prime example. This post exaggerates his single-mindedness though. Knuth has written other books, papers, and has even gone on podcasts (like Lex Fridman’s).

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@realPeterCrerar I do this but I'm honestly not sure of my main motivation. I use websites to track books I've read, video games I've played, and TV episodes and movies I've watched. It's nice to go through and relive some memories, and to some extent it helps me moderate how much I consume...

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@heynavtoor @TimSweeneyEpic So basically the First Encyclopedia of Tlön?

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

Perhaps a good start on reading would be understanding that “Darwinism” is a vague term comprising multiple ideas (e.g. 5 listed here): https://t.co/f5QjRfunRa and only one (common descent) presents notable problems in the interpretation of Scripture

[Ligonier Ministries @Ligonier]

In short, take your time. Do some prayerful reading and research. You might be surprised to find out how weak the case for Darwinism really is.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@RichardHanania Redemption is always possible:

Ephesians 1:7

“In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace”

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@akpinion1 I didn’t have the space and assumed it might be a well-known enough reference to suffice. It’s a textbook called Molecular Evolution: A Statistical Approach and authored by Ziheng Yang. I have it as a PDF but forget where I got it.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@Thepeoplesfool @kareem_carr I just mean that it’s a bit trivial to point out than an individual vote only makes a difference in a tiebreaker. That doesn’t obviate the purpose of voting, which relies on an aggregate of people uncertain what all the other votes are and making a decision in that uncertainty.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@Thepeoplesfool @kareem_carr I’d say it has moral value in the face of uncertainty. It’s one vote amongst many, of course it won’t make the decision single-handedly, just as it wouldn’t in an election or something.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@Thepeoplesfool @kareem_carr I vote red because I suppose then it really is only my life that is affected by my decision.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@IronPatriot9098 @jtheace2 @kareem_carr I agree that people may falsely think they would pick blue if this really happened, which is why the poll serves as some imperfect evidence of what would happen in real life. I would call that a mistaken belief, not a virtue signal, that may be semantics though.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@Thepeoplesfool @kareem_carr Hmm, I don’t think so, but I may be unusual in believing people shouldn’t commit suicide for any reason (for religious reasons). I admit I’d at least have a rethink if I knew ALL blue voters actually wanted to die.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@IronPatriot9098 @jtheace2 @kareem_carr Maybe so but that isn’t perfectly related to the poll since not all commenters voted and not all voters commented. For example, someone can vote red but say ITT that they voted blue. The anonymous poll results are what they are, >50% voting blue. They can’t be virtue signalling.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@sisneruza @brew_that @kareem_carr Both actions can cause people to die depending on how many people can take them, that’s inherent to the rules. The best strategy explicitly accounts for what half the population will do rather than pretending an idealized rational population.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@IronPatriot9098 @jtheace2 @kareem_carr Agreed the poll doesn’t definitively prove what would happen but it’s certainly evidence. Also bizarre to describe an anonymous poll as virtue signalling, the anonymity helps remove the signalling aspect to get closer (again not perfectly) to real decisions people would make.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@guardianowl @kareem_carr Better analogy but perhaps conflating red and blue, I’m
not sure. Enough people on blue track will shift the trolley off completely, I agree red are standing on the path not already being hit by trolley though.

[Nick Bailey @NickBailey596]

@brew_that @kareem_carr There’s a post ITT that says something like people need to stop assuming “if everyone does X”. Not everyone will vote red (“understand the primary effects”), you know that, the poll shows it, and accounting for it isn’t “noise”.