pe-pe-rry😷

[dilemma @actuallyimthe]

Argentina just beat Spain at the 2026 World Cup final, 3-2.

[Himanish Ganjoo @himganj153]

I see the disease of radar plots afflicting the nascent cricket analytics field, which has taken to blindly aping ideas from football.

Radar plots are useless and misleading for most information (except periodic/geometric). Say no to radars, read this:

https://t.co/EIlole7sM2

[pe-pe-rry😷 @perrykmc]

@DataMB_ Bruno under Amorim vs Bruno undef Carrick

[exicablenews @icablenews]

《追光者》
【研究揭中共官媒訓練AI 涉中國政治機構與領導人提問 產生較正面回答】
一項發表在學術期刊《自然（Nature）》的最新研究發現，中共官方媒體與體制宣傳內容已滲透AI聊天機械人，特別是用中文提問時，AI的答案更傾向北京官方的立場。
https://t.co/rhxpzt65Co

[NASA @NASA]

Hello, Moon. It’s great to be back.

Here’s a taste of what the Artemis II astronauts photographed during their flight around the Moon. Check out more photos from the mission: https://t.co/rzM1P0QbOl

[pe-pe-rry😷 @perrykmc]

@dieworkwear How about black penny/tassel loafers

[Nav Toor @heynavtoor]

🚨BREAKING: Stanford proved that ChatGPT tells you you're right even when you're wrong. Even when you're hurting someone.

And it's making you a worse person because of it.

Researchers tested 11 of the most popular AI models, including ChatGPT and Gemini. They analyzed over 11,500 real advice-seeking conversations. The finding was universal. Every single model agreed with users 50% more than a human would.

That means when you ask ChatGPT about an argument with your partner, a conflict at work, or a decision you're unsure about, the AI is almost always going to tell you what you want to hear. Not what you need to hear.

It gets darker. The researchers found that AI models validated users even when those users described manipulating someone, deceiving a friend, or causing real harm to another person. The AI didn't push back. It didn't challenge them. It cheered them on.

Then they ran the experiment that changes everything. 1,604 people discussed real personal conflicts with AI. One group got a sycophantic AI. The other got a neutral one.

The sycophantic group became measurably less willing to apologize. Less willing to compromise. Less willing to see the other person's side. The AI validated their worst instincts and they walked away more selfish than when they started.

Here's the trap. Participants rated the sycophantic AI as higher quality. They trusted it more. They wanted to use it again. The AI that made them worse people felt like the better product.

This creates a cycle nobody is talking about. Users prefer AI that tells them they're right. Companies train AI to keep users happy. The AI gets better at flattering. Users get worse at self-reflection. And the loop tightens.

Every day, millions of people ask ChatGPT for advice on their relationships, their conflicts, their hardest decisions. And every day, it tells almost all of them the same thing.

You're right. They're wrong.

Even when the opposite is true.

[derek guy @dieworkwear]

Lots of companies have tried doing pajamas that look like suits — for instance, Suitsy.

The reason why a suit or sport coat will never quite feel like pajamas — assuming it has been made well — is because it's made from multiple layers of non-stretch materials. This includes a layer of body canvas that goes from your shoulder to the hem. Also, a layer of stiffer horsehair material to shape the chest. Some tailors add a layer of felted domette to prevent the wiry horsehair material from sticking through. Depending on the desired silhouette, there may also be padding and wadding at the shoulder.

These layers are then attached using pad stitching, which turns two-dimensional cloth into a three-dimensional form. This is what everything looks like when it's done:

When worn, this is how you get the shape you see below. Notice how the chest is slightly curved. The shoulder line is very straight. The sleeves are conical. And the waist is gently nipped before hanging nicely below the buttoning point.

This shaping is the result of quality tailoring and ironwork. If the man below were to take off his coat, you would not see a body shaped like this underneath.

Ultra-soft, pajama-like clothing cannot achieve this silhouette because it has no structure. If you were to add the layers of canvas, haircloth, and padding, it would no longer feel like stretchy pajamas.

Here's the Suitsy garment. The jacket has no shape. Just looks limp and ... bad

This doesn't mean that a suit jacket or sport coat can't feel comfortable. Most people find them uncomfortable because they are buying clothes that are too small for them. The garment may also be poorly made. Thus, the jacket constantly fights you as you move.

I don't think anyone has to dress any particular way. Still, if you demand couch potato clothes even when you're outside, you will be very limited in terms of what you can wear and how you can express yourself through clothes.

I'm reminded of a time I met with a Washington Post editor for lunch. I was telling her that men wear dress sneakers today because they're so used to sneakers; anything that doesn't feel like a cushion can seem painful and stiff. She rolled her eyes and said, "Some men should just accept that sometimes you wear things to look nice, get home, take off your shoes, and rub your feet a little."

[derek guy @dieworkwear]

im sure short 280 character tweets are totally fine tho

[沾沾紂王（鄭生）🇺🇦美人所言甚是 @Zauu30624300]

唔check唔知褂係出自廣東仲成功反攻返北面（人哋本來冇呢啲嘢）
一睇所謂改良版一陣土豪味撲鼻而嚟，用「潮流」掩飾冇文化傳承嘅底蘊

[歐洲動態(國際) @europechinese]

我之前寫慣習總、胡總外訪，阿斯利康呢個消息點都係「英國送大禮」喇，吓嘩？但佢講到好似係習近平向英國送大禮喎，搞到我都唔識點寫

[pe-pe-rry😷 @perrykmc]

@FathalliMo @adnaaan433 better to use colour to indicate the passing location rather than the frequency order

[陳牛 @cowcfj]

幾乎每家香港媒體都報導了這條新聞：有個神秘男子最近走訪不同地產代理，希望收購多個宏福苑單位。

我感覺有些奇怪的是，媒體都沒有猜測神秘「掃貨客」到底是誰，也似乎故意不強調他的身份。但是now新聞的一個畫面卻透露了一點訊息，這個神秘男子寄送給地產經紀的文字，使用的是簡體字。

[pe-pe-rry😷 @perrykmc]

@yotakeoldtales 十六歲應該都改變唔到幾多身高😂，最多可以可下脂肪或者肌肉

[Chaakming Lau @chaakming]

We are at 35,918 and have secured funding to conduct validation experiments! Help us reach more Cantonese speakers before the next stage. #CantoneseCommunity

[derek guy @dieworkwear]

In Los Angles, you can find fast fashion brands like Fashion Nova, Lulus, and Lucy in the Sky. Workers get paid 15 cents to make $50 dresses, taking home $350/ week for 84 hours of labor. We should recognize how we drive these systems with our own purchases.

[矢板明夫 @Yaita_Akio]

今天看了前文化部長龍應台女士在紐約時報上的投稿。深深感到，這位大作家好像並不太適合於談論國際政治。因為在她的筆下、有太多抒情和不符合邏輯的地方了。

龍應台這篇文章的重點就是「不首先確保和平，就不可能有民主」。聽起來似乎很有道理，但仔細想，卻毫無邏輯。

和平是和平，民主是民主。這根本完全是兩回事。中國歷史上，經常有持續百年以上的和平時期，但從來沒有民主過。相反，第二次世界大戰參戰的國家，很多都有以民主方式選出來的國家元首和議會，但并沒有讓他們遠離戰爭。

另外，龍應台文章的最大問題，是把中國對台灣的武力威脅和領土野心，當作是理所當然的事情，並沒有對其批評。反而一直在檢討被威脅者。她批評賴清德總統抵抗中國滲透的一連串政策是對中國的挑釁。好像在說，只要台灣賠小心、多聽中國的話、盡量不刺激中國，就可以維持和平了。

那麼，我想舉出兩個相反地例子。1950年，中國人民解放軍在進軍西藏前，提出了和平談判十大政策。其中包括「實行宗教自由、保護喇嘛寺廟、尊重西藏人民的宗教信仰和風俗習慣」、「維持西藏現行軍事制度不變，西藏現有軍隊為中華人民共和國國防武裝之一部分」。當時的西藏政府，為了實現和平，同意了中方的條件。但結果呢？幾年後，達賴喇嘛逃亡到印度，留下的僧侶為抗議中國的高壓統治，自焚身亡的有數百人之多。

還有香港。1997年回歸祖國時候，香港的社會菁英雖然有很多不滿，但大家並沒有選擇抗爭的道路，而是和中國合作。他們希望透過合法的公民運動來實現特首直選。但是他們的做法並沒有換來民主。當年在香港議會中被稱為民主派的議員們，現在或者身陷囹圄，或者遠走他鄉。

這就是相信獨裁者的下場。國際政治不是宮崎駿的動漫，不管你付出多少愛心，惡魔永遠也不會變成溫柔的王子。「和平要靠實力」，永遠不要期待敵人的善意。

[矢板明夫 @Yaita_Akio]

中國有一句俗語，叫做「秀才遇到兵，有理說不清」。我想現在的日本首相石破茂應該就是這種心情。因為，中國政府把石破首相沒有說過的話，硬塞到他嘴裡，即便日本提出抗議，中國依舊強詞奪理硬拗，讓日本朝野都覺得哭笑不得。

事情是這樣的。3月21日石破首相在接見來訪的中國外交部長王毅時，王毅表示「日方應堅持《中日聯合聲明》等四個政治文件確定的原則，維護好兩國關係的政治和法律基礎，切實履行在歷史和台灣問題上作出的重要政治承諾」。對於王毅的這種說法，石破首相既沒有表示贊成，也沒有反對。但是事後，中國的外交部網站上出現，「石破首相說『尊重中方闡述的立場』」這樣的描述。

日本外務省隨後出面澄清，強調首相石破茂「並未做出那樣的發言」。同時向中國外交部抗議，稱中方公布的石破茂與王毅會談「內容不實」，加入了石破茂沒有說過的「尊重中方闡述的立場」，要求中方刪除不符事實的表述。但中方迄今並未刪除。

據報導，中國外交部發言人郭嘉昆今天在記者會被問及此事時，回應說中方是為了要強調石破茂與王毅的會談「反映了相互尊重的精神」。中方的意思似乎是說，「我說你說了，你就是說了，要是你不承認，就是不尊重我」。

[沾沾紂王（鄭生）🇺🇦美人所言甚是 @Zauu30624300]

條threads都好詳盡補充咗史料，逐個擊破啲謠言（講到口臭）