Adrian Fry | Founder, Accord Analytics

DM if you want to stop paying for fraud. No fraud, no fee.

@jordanhknight_ Most people don't argue about CGT, just move their business to Singapore and continue on. CGT madness is the reason for the extremely low levels of economic diversification in Australia.

The Australian government has orchestrated the economy in such a way that the only chance you have to get ahead now is if you work in the Australian government

@CaroDiRusso Most people don't argue about CGT, just move their business to Singapore and continue on. CGT madness is the reason for the extremely low levels of economic diversification in Australia.

‘But here is the kicker: rather than minimising intergenerational inequity, the negative gearing and CGT changes will actually entrench it. The rules Albanese used to build up his property portfolio, will be protected for people like him but denied to younger generations. Keating tried to remove negative gearing in the 80s; it resulted in a rental crisis and had to be wound back two years later. We’ve been around this mountain before, but sure, let’s do it again.’ Me for @SkyNewsAust #auspol

@clairlemon Most people don't argue about CGT, just move their business to Singapore and continue on. CGT madness is the reason for the extremely low levels of economic diversification in Australia.

Have been arguing with people on Reddit about Chalmers' budget & CGT changes. The people defending the budget seem to think that only rich people start small businesses & that anyone with a capital gain won't notice they're paying half of it to the government.

@shaw_davidm @AndrewAndy63 Sure - in terms of artistry that makes sense - but a functional test should be blind to who constructed it. The question is are your assessments functional or artistic in nature?

@AdrianFry23 @AndrewAndy63 The example in my head is something like comparing a machine rendered plate from IKEA and a hand-crafted plate from Japan. They’re both plates but Is it right to judge them as comparable? That’s how I feel about judging an essay that’s been AI-influenced vs one that hasn’t.

If I have two students submit the same assessment and one is "hand-crafted" (no AI used), and the other is "machine-crafted" (AI assisted), am I marking like for like work, or does the difference in production mean I'm comparing apples and oranges?

Everyone who is up in arms about Trump "kissing Xi's ass" needs to understand that this is realpolitik and dealmaking. Trump is, by a mile, the most aggressive president America has had against the CCP in modern history. No one else imposed sweeping tariffs on Chinese goods, banned Huawei from domestic networks, put the entire CCP military-linked ecosystem on the entity list, restricted semiconductor exports, strengthened the Quad, and publicly called out China's currency manipulation, IP theft, forced tech transfers, and South China Sea aggression the way he did. Pre-presidency Trump was blunt. If you recall, as a candidate, he often complained about how "China was screwing us over." Literally in 2016 on the campaign trail, he said that "China is raping us." You need to understand that this posture completely shattered what was bipartisan elite consensus at the time - which was that more engagement with China on economic terms would liberalize and democratize China (ethnocentric projection once again), and that as China became more integrated into the global system, they would act more and more like responsible stakeholders. Every President since Nixon pushed closer economic integration while ignoring the OBVIOUS signs. This was especially supercharged under Bush, Clinton and Obama (but not Biden). And yet at the time, the mainstream media painted him as a xenophobe for this kind of rhetoric. It wasn't even a subtext - they directly alluded to how Trump was being racist against the Chinese for calling out their unfair trade practices. Once in office, Trump refined it into a strategy that actually moved the needle while dialing back his strong rhetoric. The personal flattery - calling Xi a "great leader," talking up respect for China, saying they'll have a "fantastic future together," is all Machiavellian Art of the Deal stuff. Flattery costs nothing and makes the other guy more willing to give ground without looking like he's folding domestically. The CCP's entire system is built on the leader's prestige. Publicly humiliating Xi or treating him like a subordinate would make him dig in, rally nationalists, and push him to retaliate harder just to save face. I don't actually think Trump knows about Chinese "honor culture" and the obsession with mianzi (face), but for whatever reason, Trump instinctively understands authoritarian psychology and how to work with it. The problem is that intellectual types, especially those steeped in liberal internationalist frameworks, tend to struggle with parsing the difference between rhetoric vs. revealed preferences. They're hard-wired to overweight the former. They treat diplomatic language as a window into the soul, as if it maps directly onto intent rather than as front-facing tool of statecraft. China weaponizes this brilliantly. It's a lesson everyone should've learned by now. With Trump, ignore the optics and ignore what he says. Just look at his actions, and look at his results.

@EnergyWrapAU Today the Federal Court of Australia became just as Quixotic as the sovereign citizen that they lament.

Not many things offend me but this legal decision does. Mother, wife, daughter. These words matter. They are not arbitrary. Not changeable. Not open to interpretation. You get what you get at birth. That’s it. Decision made for you, biology. It’s done. Shout whatever words you like, those chromosomes aren’t listening. If you choose to undergo ‘changes’ you therefore choose to enter another separate category. You cannot adopt an existing category. You cannot wear another biology like a mask, pretending it’s real. It offends me people accept this. It offends me a judge believes they can decide something beyond the scope of the law. I reject.

@BiddyOLoughlin Today the Federal Court of Australia became just as Quixotic as the sovereign citizen that they lament.

Devastating. Please donate to gigglecrowdfund.com HE is being funded by the state. 🤬 #sallgrover #gigglevtickle

Today the Federal Court of Australia became just as Quixotic as the sovereign citizen that they lament.

@lp9592 @amy_sargeant_ I said such as, not limited to.

@AdrianFry23 @amy_sargeant_ All women have good reason to want single sex spaces.

Moments after court adjourned, Sall Grover ran to her dad and started sobbing into his shoulder. The law is very clear: discrimination against trans women is not acceptable. Thanks to all involved for reaffirming this in such a powerful way. #TickleVGiggle

@shaw_davidm @AndrewAndy63 Are you able to tell which parts of your car were assembled by a human or robot?

@AdrianFry23 @AndrewAndy63 Well yes. But if I, as the lecturer know, because of student disclosure that something has been given a “helping hand” (so-to-speak); am I really marking the same *type of work as something that hasn’t had the same treatment?

@AndrewAndy63 @shaw_davidm Shouldn't the assessment assess the piece of work that's produced?

@shaw_davidm The hand crafted gets the higher mark for effort.

@Kat_Says_Stuff @amy_sargeant_ obviously not for those women that wanted to be part of this app - to the exclusion of men.

@AdrianFry23 @amy_sargeant_ And guess what? That’s already an exemption

@RobertCandelori It won't make much difference, in fairness to the judges they read the law pretty straight down the line. The issue isn't the judges, it's the law and the politicians who changed it.

Appeal.

@colonelhogans None of this case gives you any concern for the plight of women (such as victims of DV) who may have good reasons to want biologically restricted spaces?

Brilliant decision by the federal court! Breaking: The federal court has crushed Sall Grover’s appeal & upheld the 2024 ruling that excluding trans women is unlawful discrimination. Period. After trying to frame transphobia as "feminism", the law just gave Grover a reality check. Pay costs & move on. 🏳️‍⚧️ #TicklevGiggle Thanks to @strangerous10

Why found a startup in Australia when Singapore and NZ have zero % CGT?

@AutismCapital The dad did the right thing putting a helmet on them. Because of that they were well placed to deal with an unexpected hazard.

Being a Dad summarized in 10 seconds.

The answer is 'tokenisation" the lowest level of analysis for AI was often the word itself - so it couldn't answer how many Rs are in strawberry as strawberry was the lowest unit of analysis - strawberry was itself the lowest building block of the system, where as humans see strawberry as a construction of letters, AI for a long time didn't.

The problem with >99% of people talking about AI is that they don't know how it actually works, they literally don't understand any of the maths behind it. So it's the blind lecturing the blind. Here's my shibboleth question to figure out if someone knows what they're on about: Why was it the case that for many years AI models were unable to answer this question correctly, or even know if they had the right answer: "how many 'R's are in strawberry". If the person can't answer the question they don't understand what AI is

Death. Every time.

The best argument is that I can't find a way to have capital punishment that is also exempt of failure. Yep, this case seems clear, but the issue isn't this case - it's ensuring it we don't have any errors.