« December 2007 | Main | February 2008 »
Haven't used this advice yet, but it could come in handy some day: "The Ultimate Consumerist Guide to Fighting Back".
The Door is pleased to present its most important link ever.
Here's the ultimate resolution to the debate about whether big government or the market is better: Washington Post reporter Anne Applebaum asks--and answers--"Where Did All Those Gorgeous Russians Come From?"
The art of a good columnist: an entertaining meditation on the modern world set off by a broken shoelace.
Kinda obvious but still interesting: the Net is good for introverts.
Your U.S. Congress at work. (As Thomas Sowell asked recently, since McCain-Feingold, have you noticed any lessened effect of money on politics?)
Seemingly balanced Washington Post piece on the weird phenomenon that is "Morgellons disease". After reading it, I lean toward believing there is a significant psychological component, but the article seems to raise some reasonable questions.
A nice profile of Woody Allen, a man who describes himself as "the luckiest guy in the world".
My father used to say--quoting somebody, I forget who--that the harder he worked, the luckier he got.
This article prompts me to think of Dana Carvey doing Johnny Carson: "This is some weird, wacky stuff."
People don't die because their cells are deprived of oxygen; they die when the oxygen returns.
Journalist and blogger Tim Blair was recently diagnosed with bowel cancer. But he was encouraged by a message he got from a well-known person with cancer:
Keep your spirits up, your attitude aggressive and positive. We live in an age of miracles, and researchers are finding new treatments every day.
Interesting idea: Cal Tech graduate student correlates the "top ten" books among students at colleges (as computed by Facebook) with the average SAT scores of the colleges.
The books that correlate most with high SAT scores: Lolita, 100 Years of Solitude, Crime and Punishment, Freakonomics, Catch-22, and Atlas Shrugged.
Link via Marginal Revolution.
A terrific profile of USC football coach Pete Carroll. He was fired from two pro jobs in three years. I remember some of the things that were written about him then: he knew nothing about football and even less about coaching; he was this dopey cheerleader kind of guy, totally unsuited to be a football coach; he was an idiot and a laughingstock.
But for the last six years he has been the most successful Division I football coach in the country.
Supports one of my beliefs. Almost everybody has a place. Sometimes it just takes time to find out what it is.
(Link via the ever-wonderful Sports Guy.)
P. J. O'Rourke lays waste to British journalists, the EU, some prominent Europeans, both U.S. political parties, all the U.S. presidential candidates, and lots more. I don't agree with it all, but most of it is funny. Like this:
Hillary Clinton is Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown. Hillary Clinton is "America's ex-wife."
Speaking of one of the Door's least favorite presidential candidates, isn't it interesting how, all of a sudden, lots and lots of people are realizing that having H. Clinton as president would have certain . . . unappealing aspects? Especially four more years of That Guy, Slick Willie?
Here's the Charlotte Observer, not mincing words: "The Many Lies of Bill Clinton". Here's Vanity Fair's Bruce Feirstein: "Bill Clinton, Nasty Man". Here's the Washington Post's Colbert I. King, "Billary's Adventures in Primaryland". Bob Herbert: "Questions for the Clintons". William Grieder: "Slick Willie Rides Again". John Nichols: "It's Time tor Retire Bill Clinton". Finally, here is uber-Liberal Jonathan Chait asking--gasp! horrors!--"Is the Right Right on the Clintons?" (No, he asserts, but they're uncomfortably close.)
Going into the campaign, most of us liked Hillary Clinton just fine, but the fact that tens of millions of Americans are seized with irrational loathing for her suggested that she might not be a good Democratic nominee. But now that loathing seems a lot less irrational. We're not frothing Clinton haters like . . . well, name pretty much any conservative. We just really wish they'd go away.
I am curious to see how long these sentiments last should Ms. Clinton become the nominee. I don't think they'll last longer than the morning dew. But for now, they are greatly entertaining.
Scott Adams--of Dilbert fame--notes that scientists "might be closing in on a drug that eliminates the need for sleep and has no side effects" and wonders what the social and economic effects would be.
As I have noted repeatedly, we at the Door are all about important news, "news you can use" (as U.S. News & World Report used to advertise).
So here's some: Australia has a "nationwide sperm shortage".
Steven Landsburg eviscerates the "stimulus" package. And in doing so, he issues this memorable line: "As a general rule, economic policies command bipartisan support only when they're incoherent."
Researchers at USC have "created baker’s yeast capable of living to 800 in yeast years without apparent side effects."
I well understand that yeast are a long, long way from people.
And I also have seen, all my adult life, early claims of wonderful drugs--including more than few cancer "cures"--not pan out at all.
But still . . . I believe we're going to see some amazing things in biology over the next 20 or 30 years.
(Link courtesy of Mike Sproul.)
If a stock Maybach 57 is just too ordinary for you, a company named Brabus will be happy to modify it for you. (You can get one that will top out at 205 mph.)
Crime map of New York City (.pdf file).
In case you don't already know it, we economists can sometimes be amazing. Sports Illustrated discusses a model formulated by three economists that predicts--so far pretty accurately--where high school football prospects will go to college.
"Small Business 101: How to Get Started".
"The best management ideas" co-presented by Harvard Business School.
Nora Ephron is pretty funny.
This is two years old, but quite impressive if you haven't already seen it. Hans Rosling of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden reviews the huge changes in the economics of the world since 1962. (Link via a comment by Dave Tufte.)
It's all good, but I especially liked the beginning. He demonstrates that the best Swedish undergraduates know less about a vital aspect of the world than chimpanzees do.
Which, in turn, reminded me of the great, cranky line about today's students from Stand and Deliver: "It's not that they're stupid, it's just they don't know anything."
This New York Sun article claims that not only is giving to charity positively correlated with happiness, there is good evidence that causality runs from giving to happiness rather than the reverse. Supposedly, endorphins are involved.
Thoughtful, interesting, and a bit unusual. Many are bulls-eyes.
I do disagree with #10, though: "Empathy is the greatest virtue". For me, it would be a close contest between patience and bravery, with patience probably winning by a nose.
Why academic bloggers will soon demand that blogging count toward tenure.
From actor Richard Dreyfuss comes a beautiful, four-minute speech on the urgent need to teach our kids U.S. history and government and civics.
Which is what my wife teaches. I have long thought she was doing very important work, and Dreyfuss explains why.
(Link via The Austrian Economists.)
An Associate Professor of Media Studies and Law at UVa offers some interesting "Advice on Academic 'Job Talk' Visits".
1) They are never fun. Never.
. . .
9) Their number-one concern will be whether they like you. They already have opinions about your scholarship. They already know you can teach. So you can relax a bit. Just be funny and comfortable with them. If you have a chance to lament the losing ways of the football team with someone, by all means do it. Show them you are a real, cool American. Order steak at dinner. Enjoy your meal and complement them on the restaurant choice. Most of all, act like you could be buddies with everyone for a long, long time. They are considering hiring someone who would work there for 30 years. So they don't want someone snotty, snobby, or whiny. It will only take a few minutes to show them that you are none of those things.
Robert J. Samuelson speaks truth to power:
The big lie of campaign 2008 -- so far -- is that the presidential candidates, Democratic and Republican, will take care of our children. . . .
A moral cloud hangs over our candidates. Just how much today's federal policies, favoring the old over the young and the past over the future, should be altered ought to be a central issue of the campaign. But knowing the unpopular political implications, our candidates have lapsed into calculated quiet.
They pay lip service to children but ignore the actual programs that will shape their future. The hypocrisy is especially striking in Obama. He courts the young, promises "straight talk" and offers himself as the agent of "change." But his conspicuous omissions constitute "crooked talk" and silently endorse the status quo..
This sounded to me like fabulous news. I thought that Amgen stock would surely skyrocket and maybe the biotechs generally. Nothing happened. I infer that either 1) it wasn't news, or 2) nobody believes the drug will pan out.
The FCC wants to fine 52 TV stations a total of $1.43 million for airing an episode of NYPD Blue that showed a woman in "full dorsal nudity, and the side of one breast is shown".
Understand, if the stations had aired the program at 10:00 p.m., it would have been A-OK. But since they showed it at--I'm guessing--9:00 p.m., it's really, really bad.
In a time in which any eight-year-old can find far racier stuff on the Net in thirty seconds, who does the government think it's kidding?
Joel Spolsky argues passionately that American universities are doing a lousy job teaching kids how to program.
I believe it.
My mother used to say, "If you wait long enough, everything comes back."
Score another one for Mom: vinyl records "are suddenly cool again".
New York magazine asks, how can rich parents give their kids the right values? Apparently, it's not easy.
I keep trying not to post more "Vista stinks" articles. But this one has some practical advice: "Life After Vista: Going Back to XP".
Big Arm Woman finds out that parents today have at least one problem not experienced by earlier generations.
"A pill is being created to let hamburger-and-chips lovers eat their favourite fatty foods without putting on too much weight. . . . As a side-effect, the pill will cut the risk of developing cancer by mopping up free radicals, the substances that damage body cells."
What do you bet that if the pill works as advertised we'll find out later that there are some significantly bad side effects?
Pricehub supposedly lists actual transactions prices for cars and trucks.
Ever want to know what this Bob Dylan-written, Jimi Hendrix-famously-performed song means? Go here. (Link via Metafilter.)
A list--unfortunately, no links to video--of the top 50 Saturday Night Live impressions.
Number one is Billy Crystal's Sammy Davis, Jr. Hard to disagree with that. Two is Dana Carvey's Ross Perot. Ditto.
He has been amply honored--and his awards include a Nobel--but still, many more people should know about the work of Norman Borlaug. He helped prove Malthus wrong; he pisses off extreme environmentalists; and he is a living monument to human ingenuity and to the human spirit.
Three bits from this Technology Reivew article I think especially noteworthy:
Collecting wheat varieties from around the world, he began a massive cross-breeding program. Such work is "mind-warpingly tedious," he tells Hesser. "There's only one chance in thousands of ever finding what you want, and actually no guarantee of success at all." [Sounds like Edison's work on the light bulb.]
Raised on a farm, Borlaug thinks many of his detractors would benefit from a week or two in the fields.
. . . when journalist Gregg Easterbrook sought a publisher for a popular biography, "they said he was boring," the self-described "environmental optimist" says. "If he'd killed someone instead of saving hundreds of millions of lives, then they'd have been interested."
Guess what office workers are starting to do during lunch time.
Applying three different methods, the estimate is $10 to $20 million.
Interesting blog post. The tagline is "Why a Jewish New-Yorker Who Graduated From Berkeley and Lives in San Francisco Ended Up a Republican".
(Especially interesting to me. I've never lived in NY, I didn't go to Berkeley, and I don't live in SF. But I share the other two key attributes with the author.)
I imagine that you--the Door's readers--have been around, have seen lots of things.
But have you ever seen a duck stampede?
Christopher Hitchens at the top of his form, "The Case Against Hillary Clinton":
What does matter is that she has since altered her position and attempted, with her husband's help, to make people forget that she ever held it. And this, on a grave matter of national honor and security, merely to influence her short-term standing in the Iowa caucuses. Surely that on its own should be sufficient to disqualify her from consideration? Indifferent to truth, willing to use police-state tactics and vulgar libels against inconvenient witnesses, hopeless on health care, and flippant and fast and loose with national security: The case against Hillary Clinton for president is open-and-shut. Of course, against all these considerations you might prefer the newly fashionable and more media-weighty notion that if you don't show her enough appreciation, and after all she's done for us, she may cry.
Apparently, one can make a living there days providing almost any type of personal service. The NY Times looks at one woman who's in the business of teaching teenaged boys how to organize.
Once again, we hear that Moore's Law may soon be over. I don't believe it this time, either.
I recently saw Charlie Wilson's War and thought it was pretty good. I also thought that it had a conservative message. But then I thought: a Hollywood movie? A Hollywood movie written by Aaron Sorkin?
David Whitehouse--holder of a Ph.D. in astrophysics and former Science Editor for BBC News Online--asks "Has Global Warming Stopped?"
What, doesn't the man know there is a Consensus?
UCLA researchers offer a possible explanation for why omega-3 might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's.
Interesting article on how the iPhone has upset the cellphone industry. An example of Newmark's draft definition of "entry barrier": An entry barrier is something that someone with a good idea, some guts, and a bit of money can destroy.
Nicely complemented by this Mark Steyn piece. You've already heard that this year's election is all about "change". Mr. Steyn examines what the true agent of change is. Hint: it starts with "cap" and ends with "ism".
Innovation drives change, the market drives change. Government "change" just drives things away: You could ask many of the New Hampshire primary voters who formerly resided in Massachusetts.
This is a (pleasantly) surprising article. A former advisor to Tony Blair appeals to "progressives" to look at the bright side:
There is a different story to be told about our world. It is a story of unprecedented affluence in the developed world and fast-falling poverty levels in the developing world; of more people in more places enjoying more freedom than ever before. It is a story of healthier lives and longer life expectancy (obesity may be a problem, but it is one that individuals have more chance of solving than rickets or polio). Think of how we thrive in the diversity of modern cities. Think, in our own country, of rivers and beaches cleaner than at any time since the Industrial Revolution. . . .
Progressives want the world to be a better place. We bemoan its current inequities and oppression - yet if we fail to celebrate the progress that human beings have made, and if we sound as though the future is a fearful place, we belie our own philosophy. Instead, we need to address a deficit in social optimism that threatens the credibility of our core narrative.
And if you haven't seen it yet, here's a recent argument that "In a number of key categories, the amount of ground gained or regained since the early 1990's is truly stunning."
"45 Things You Can Learn Online for Free".
Links to articles, tutorials, and textbooks about (college-level and higher) mathematics.
An interesting story about the redemption of a stock pimp.
Congratulations to Tom Brady and the Patriots. I watched most of their game last night and Brady was astonishing. Three touchdowns. 26 for 28 and the other two were dropped.
To me, he is now is in the company of only a very few other athletes: MJ, Tiger, Mariano Rivera, for examples. He is consistently doing something surpassingly difficult and he is making it look easy.
New York Times article on the low morale of many laywers and doctors.
I feel a little sorry for the ex-lawyer who thought being a lawyer would be like L.A. Law or Ally McBeal. When I was a senior in high school I heard an ex-lawyer explain in detail that practicing law was "not Perry Mason". It sure helped me.
Ms. Alberta Hunter--82 years young--recorded singing "My Castle's Rockin'".
"The Worst of the European Airports". Heathrow first; de Gaulle second.
Edward Lazear explains that the Peter Principle is just another example of the ubiquitous regression to the mean.
Everybody, it seems, is playing poker.
Youngsters are flocking to poker as never before, attracted by its growing cachet and the ever-expanding pots. The plethora of books, blogs and DVDs now easily accessible, and the rapid growth of poker online, means newcomers can learn the art much more quickly than in earlier eras.
"The Trouble With Microsoft". A recounting of some of Microsoft's recent mistakes.
In the end, we have to ask ourselves. Did Microsoft release Vista only to show us what an excellent example of software craftsmanship Windows XP is?
Two on medical care.
Why do some people believe so much in remedies rejected by medical science?
Sensible advice for getting the most out of your doctor.
Last--for me--of the "Best of 2007" lists:
"The 70 Best Lifehacks of 2007".
"Top Web Apps & Sites of 2007".
"Best of What's New '07" (Popular Science), including an "infinitely geared bike".
"The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration."
Link via my colleague, Denis Pelletier.
About three months later than promised, here’s my review of a (relatively) new book by Yale economist and lawyer, Ian Ayres, titled Super Crunchers. I thank Jason D. Gordon, President of Precedent Media, Unlimited for sending me a copy.
As an old joke begins, “There’s good news and there’s bad news . . .”
The good news.
This could well be an interesting book for a high school or college student who is curious about applications of statistics. This could well be a useful book for a businessman who is unacquainted with statistics and who wants to know how experiments might help him run his business. For everybody else, there are a handful of good stories. The stories are about how, according to Ayres, “We are in a historic moment of horse-versus-locomotive competition, where intuitive and experimental expertise is losing out time and time again to number crunching. . . . Business and government professionals are relying more and more on databases to guide their decisions. . . . What is Super Crunching? It is statistical analysis that impacts real-world decisions.” (p. 10)
Here are the stories that I think are interesting.
Donald Lacombe, Ohio University associate professor of economics, is teaching a course that "concentrates on the reading of weblogs devoted to economic analysis".
Cool. I wish him the best of luck with the course.
(Here's a news release relating Don's winning of a University Professor award at Ohio U.)
Ilya Somin at The Volokh Conspiracy disagrees sharply with bioethicists and others who worry about extending the human lifespan.
To me, and to most libertarians, it seems pretty obvious that life extension is an extraordinarily good thing in and of itself. Perhaps some negative second-order effects of this technology could outweigh its vast benefits. But those negative effects would have to be truly enormous to outweigh the massive benefits of decades or centuries of extra lifespan. This is especially true, given the fact that life extension research seeks to extend not merely lifespan, but "healthspan" - the length of time during which we will remain reasonably vigorous and healthy . . .
A nice article on how Earvin "Magic" Johnson is doing--16 years after being diagnosed with HIV.
One of the many useful conclusions of elementary economics is "taxes don't necessarily stay where they're put". James Pethokoukis summarizes some recent research that finds a substantial part, maybe most, of the burden of the corporate income tax is on labor. He adds,
Now, if these results hold up, they are very important from a political point of view. The corporate income tax occupies a very interesting position in the tax structure. It doesn't bring in very much money, compared to the personal income tax or the payroll tax. And it's kind of funky from a theoretical perspective, since corporate profits mostly get taxed at the individual level as well.
The main justification for the corporate income tax is its progressivity--and if it's not progressive, there goes a lot of its political support.
Article in the New York Times that argues in favor of one of the Door's long-held beliefs: if you must drink to excess, don't do it while you are young. Wait until you're old.
If you must binge, start at age 40, not at age 16 — and always have someone else drive. Just as youth is wasted on the young, so perhaps is alcohol.
Commenters at Marginal Revolution address the question of why Australia is growing faster than New Zealand. Interesting, and a cautionary illustration that identifying what's an exogenous determinant of economic growth is really hard.
Two articles on the theme of what's been called the second biggest lie in life: "Hi, we're from the government and we're here to help you."
John Lott, Jr. on "The High Cost of Higher MPG Restrictions".
Andrew Ferguson on the coming ban of incandescent light bulbs: "A Nation of Dim Bulbs".
A common criticism of economists is "You guys never agree." So, to amuse myself--in a minor way--I occasionally like to read about disagreements in other academic disciplines.
In physics, an interesting observation is that the parts of the observable universe seem to be accelerating away from each other. One explanation for this is dark energy. But recent research by David Wiltshire and colleagues argues that a better hypothesis is that matter is unevenly distributed throughout the universe. And some Spanish physicists conjecture that time itself may be slowing down.
It's not just economists, folks.
"Classical Computer Science Texts". Several dozen, all online, free.
I was intrigued by the title of a Donald Knuth piece, "All Questions Answered". Here's the opening:
In every class that I taught at Stanford, the last day was devoted to “all questions answered”. The students didn’t have to come to class if they didn’t want to, but if they did, they could ask any question on any subject except religion or politics or the final exam. I got the idea from Richard Feynman, who did the same thing in his classes at Caltech, and it was always interesting to see what the students really wanted to know.
Interesting. I've actually tried a small-scale version of this. On a few occasions when I've been really tired and I note the students look tired, too, I've started class by asking "So, what do you want to talk about today?"
The result is usually stunned silence, even after I repeat the question and add that I really am willing to consider other topics for ten or fifteen minutes or so.
But one time I got some interesting questions.