Ian Sudbery
@iansudbery.bsky.social
Senior Lecturer in Bioinformatics at the University of Sheffield. Likes gene regulation, 3' UTRs, non-coding RNA and dancing. He/Him/His
Also at [email protected]
Also at [email protected]
If feels to me that through out history and all over the world, emergency powers are more often used to create emergencies than solve them.
But perhaps that's just my bias memory of history - you don't remember it when powers are used as intended.
But perhaps that's just my bias memory of history - you don't remember it when powers are used as intended.
January 18, 2026 at 9:29 AM
If feels to me that through out history and all over the world, emergency powers are more often used to create emergencies than solve them.
But perhaps that's just my bias memory of history - you don't remember it when powers are used as intended.
But perhaps that's just my bias memory of history - you don't remember it when powers are used as intended.
Much as I think the current government are a complete in competent and occasional malicious shower, I don't actually see the problem with "U-turns". To me a government should make lots of U-turns, is that not what being responsive to circumstances demands?
January 14, 2026 at 3:13 PM
Much as I think the current government are a complete in competent and occasional malicious shower, I don't actually see the problem with "U-turns". To me a government should make lots of U-turns, is that not what being responsive to circumstances demands?
Could go either way.
With printers, it was the cheap models that had the attached ink subscriptions.
With cars, the smart features are seen as "premium".
With printers, it was the cheap models that had the attached ink subscriptions.
With cars, the smart features are seen as "premium".
January 14, 2026 at 2:30 PM
Could go either way.
With printers, it was the cheap models that had the attached ink subscriptions.
With cars, the smart features are seen as "premium".
With printers, it was the cheap models that had the attached ink subscriptions.
With cars, the smart features are seen as "premium".
To be fair, that would be preferable to the other alternative - that its not possible to buy one without.
January 14, 2026 at 9:39 AM
To be fair, that would be preferable to the other alternative - that its not possible to buy one without.
There is some need for speed as well. It really shouldn't take over an hour to get from Sheffield to Manchester, a journey of only 30 miles. But I don't know that that's primarily about the maximum possible speed of the trains, which are definitely capable of going more than 30mph.
January 14, 2026 at 8:41 AM
There is some need for speed as well. It really shouldn't take over an hour to get from Sheffield to Manchester, a journey of only 30 miles. But I don't know that that's primarily about the maximum possible speed of the trains, which are definitely capable of going more than 30mph.
Although some people do pay quite a lot to have their lighting voice activated.
January 12, 2026 at 12:09 PM
Although some people do pay quite a lot to have their lighting voice activated.
The average American has a carbon footprint twice that of the average European, yet lifestyles are broadly comparable. Europeans have no less access to pocket computers, reliable food, and for the most part modern medicine.
January 11, 2026 at 4:22 PM
The average American has a carbon footprint twice that of the average European, yet lifestyles are broadly comparable. Europeans have no less access to pocket computers, reliable food, and for the most part modern medicine.
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
January 10, 2026 at 12:17 PM
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Saturday Morning - home-baked bread, coffee and doing
the FT weekend magazine crossword together.
the FT weekend magazine crossword together.
January 10, 2026 at 10:40 AM
Saturday Morning - home-baked bread, coffee and doing
the FT weekend magazine crossword together.
the FT weekend magazine crossword together.
2. Employers need to allocate time to academics to do that review. Our employers tells us we will lose our jobs if we don't submit enough grants, tell us reviewing must be done on our own time, not theirs.
January 9, 2026 at 10:45 AM
2. Employers need to allocate time to academics to do that review. Our employers tells us we will lose our jobs if we don't submit enough grants, tell us reviewing must be done on our own time, not theirs.
This is all very well and good, but there are two problems here;
1. I don't get asked to do three reviews for every application I submit. Its not like I'm saying no to lots of applications.
1. I don't get asked to do three reviews for every application I submit. Its not like I'm saying no to lots of applications.
January 9, 2026 at 10:45 AM
This is all very well and good, but there are two problems here;
1. I don't get asked to do three reviews for every application I submit. Its not like I'm saying no to lots of applications.
1. I don't get asked to do three reviews for every application I submit. Its not like I'm saying no to lots of applications.
No university has the expertise or resources to assess academics (who will be more expert than anyonendoing the assessing) on anything other than metrics. And assessment on metrics will always lead to the gaming of those metrics to the detriment of science.
January 7, 2026 at 2:18 PM
No university has the expertise or resources to assess academics (who will be more expert than anyonendoing the assessing) on anything other than metrics. And assessment on metrics will always lead to the gaming of those metrics to the detriment of science.
Personallyi don't think there is any way out of the current problems while we still occupy the same system. And key to that is the desire to assess academics. Everything flows inevitably from that.
January 7, 2026 at 2:18 PM
Personallyi don't think there is any way out of the current problems while we still occupy the same system. And key to that is the desire to assess academics. Everything flows inevitably from that.
For me, one of the key features of the Enshittification process, as outlined by Doctorow, was that is was an inevitablly and unavoidable feature of the system. No one was to blame.
January 7, 2026 at 2:18 PM
For me, one of the key features of the Enshittification process, as outlined by Doctorow, was that is was an inevitablly and unavoidable feature of the system. No one was to blame.
Yet others will draw supported conclusions from good data. Or the data will be flawed, either through a known or unknown problem with the techniques, or a missing control etc. And some are just completely made up.
AI is like a credulous undergrad, and treats everything it reads as true.
AI is like a credulous undergrad, and treats everything it reads as true.
January 6, 2026 at 2:08 PM
Yet others will draw supported conclusions from good data. Or the data will be flawed, either through a known or unknown problem with the techniques, or a missing control etc. And some are just completely made up.
AI is like a credulous undergrad, and treats everything it reads as true.
AI is like a credulous undergrad, and treats everything it reads as true.
Clearly some papers are more wrong than others. Some will just draw conclusions that are incomplete. Others will draw perfectly reasonable conclusions on the basis of their data and the existing paradigm, but it turns out something about that paradigm is wrong.
January 6, 2026 at 2:08 PM
Clearly some papers are more wrong than others. Some will just draw conclusions that are incomplete. Others will draw perfectly reasonable conclusions on the basis of their data and the existing paradigm, but it turns out something about that paradigm is wrong.
Depends on what you mean by "wrong". But I'd say that probably close to 100% of papers are wrong in some form or other.
January 6, 2026 at 1:59 PM
Depends on what you mean by "wrong". But I'd say that probably close to 100% of papers are wrong in some form or other.
Back in the time when the "court" was the an audience with the king (who was the only judge), discussions over whether the king was bound by the law must have been very similar to our discussions on international law.
January 6, 2026 at 11:15 AM
Back in the time when the "court" was the an audience with the king (who was the only judge), discussions over whether the king was bound by the law must have been very similar to our discussions on international law.
I may be wrong, but I believe people talked about "law" before there were formal legal codes, courts and professional judges, even on a domestic stage?
January 6, 2026 at 11:15 AM
I may be wrong, but I believe people talked about "law" before there were formal legal codes, courts and professional judges, even on a domestic stage?
I just want to say again how amazing I think this resource is. It really is the missing textbook in human genetics. I feel we could just give this to our undergraduate geneticists and say: this is it - just learn this. (Particulalry with the new complex trait draft sections)
January 6, 2026 at 9:53 AM
I just want to say again how amazing I think this resource is. It really is the missing textbook in human genetics. I feel we could just give this to our undergraduate geneticists and say: this is it - just learn this. (Particulalry with the new complex trait draft sections)