June 2014 Archives

Sat Jun 28 22:57:48 EDT 2014

Items of Interest

Various web links I found to be of interest recently:

  • The Pitchforks Are Coming... For Us Plutocrats

    Memo: From Nick Hanauer
    To:       My Fellow Zillionaires

    If we don't do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn't eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It's not if, it's when.

  • The Disruption Machine

    What the gospel of innovation gets wrong.
    Jill Lepore, in The New Yorker June 23, 2014

    And the response, Clayton Christensen Responds to New Yorker Takedown of 'Disruptive Innovation'

  • SpiderOak

    Store. Sync. Share. Privately (and Securely)

  • Death Switch

    Secure access by others to your online data after you die.

  • What's So Bad About a SuperPAC?

    Lawrence Lessig, lawyer and reformer plan to fight money with money.

    Or more precisely, to change the way we fund elections, both directly and through SuperPACs, we needed a SuperPAC. We need, in other words, a powerful political engine to build the support that this movement will require. And we need one quickly.

    For more information on how to help fight the influence of money in politics see, MAYDAY PAC
  • Pulling back the curtain on Dr. Oz

    Rant by Erin May at Harvard policy lab

    Given his education and influence, there's no excuse for the unsubstantiated claims and sensational language that is so pervasive on his show. I'm not sure whether it's willful blindness or calculated deception that causes him to disregard rigorous scientific standards. But the result is that many of his recommendations are akin to the cure-all elixirs peddled by door-to-door salesmen in the patent medicine era of the late 1800s.

  • Spurious Correlations

    Tyler Vigen illustrates how correlation does not imply causation.

    The next time someone tells you about a coincidence they cannot explain, point them to this web site.

  • Is Atheism Irrational?

    Kelly J. Clark in Big Questions Online.

    Is atheism's connection with autism the silver bullet that proves once and for all that atheists are irrational? Given the complexities of both the human mind and human culture, it is impossible to tell.

  • The secret to desire in a long-term relationship

    Esther Perel, author of Mating in Captivity, TED talk.

    In long-term relationships, we often expect our beloved to be both best friend and erotic partner. But as Esther Perel argues, good and committed sex draws on two conflicting needs: our need for security and our need for surprise. So how do you sustain desire? With wit and eloquence, Perel lets us in on the mystery of erotic intelligence.

  • The Enron-Style Accounting That Deprives Americans Of Economic Growth

    John Tamny in Forbes

    Of course, the fact that GDP registered growth is the first clue that it's a more-than-worthless number. Diane Coyle, author of a new book 'GDP: A Brief But Affectionate History', wouldn't agree that the number is worthless, but she does acknowledge that it does not measure human wellbeing or welfare. No it doesn't, and while Coyle doesn't hide her bias in favor of the hubristic conceit that says economists can credibly measure country economic activity, her book is still an important read for, if nothing else, revealing to readers just how unwittingly fraudulent the practice of economics is.

  • 'How Not To Be Wrong' In Math Class? Add A Dose Of Skepticism

    Jordan Ellenberg, author of 'How Not To Be Wrong - The Power of Mathematical Thinking' interviewed on NPR's ALl Things Considered.

    Ellenberg tells NPR's Robert Siegel how he believes math courses should be taught and what sets math apart from other school subjects.

  • A Cell Phone App To Detect Cancer

    DermoScreen, developed by University of Houston professor Dr. George Zouridakis and the MD Anderson Cancer Center, works simply enough. Users snap a picture of a potentially problematic mole or lesion, then the app automatically analyzes the picture using algorithms based on the same criteria used by professional dermatologists to identify cancerous growths--namely the so-called ABCD rule, 7-point checklist, and Menzies' method.

    But here's the crazy thing: Early testing of the technology has shown it to be accurate about 85% of the time, which is similar to the accuracy rate for trained dermatologists--and more accurate than non-specialist primary care physicians.

  • The End Is A.I.: The Singularity Is Sci-Fi's Faith-Based Initiative

    I'm not arguing that machine sentience is an impossibility. Breakthroughs can't be discounted before they have a chance to materialize out of thin air. But belief in the Singularity should be recognized for what it is -- a secular, SF-based belief system. I'm not trying to be coy, in comparing it to prophecy, as well as science fiction. Lacking evidence of the coming explosion in machine intelligence, and willfully ignoring the AGI deadlines that have come and gone, the Singularity relies instead on hand-waving. That's SF-speak for an unspecified technological leap. There's another name for that sort of shortcut, though. It's called faith.

  • The Five Biggest Threats to Human Existence
    1. Nuclear war
    2. Bioengineered pandemic
    3. Superintelligence
    4. Nanotechnology
    5. Unknown unknowns

    Note that climate change is not in the top five.


Posted by mjm | Permanent link | Comments | Comments -->

Mon Jun 9 12:50:41 EDT 2014

Inequality (and Piketty)

Some pointers to discussion on the hot topic of income inequality and social mobility.

  • Thomas Piketty's book Capital in the 21st Century is being discussed everywhere
    (and these are just some early ones): For the most part there is a rather predictable pattern in the reviews from the left and the right.
    In the above link from Nate Silver, he sums it up:

    The closest thing to a solution is to remain appropriately skeptical, perhaps especially when the research finding is agreeable to you.

  • We need a new conversation about inequality

    Democrats are scared of class. But issues like inequality are why liberals exist, and talk can't be left to elites.

    When President Obama declared in December that gross inequality is the "defining challenge of our time," he was right, and resoundingly so. As is his habit, however, he quickly backed away from the idea at the urging of pollsters and various Democratic grandees.

  • Don't Give Money To Fancy Colleges

    A student at one of America's most-selective universities is fourteen times more likely to be from a high-income family than from a low-income family.

    Meanwhile, the demographics of highly selective institutions reveal that highly selective institutions remain what they always have been -- mechanisms for the perpetuation of inequality and hierarchy.

  • Income Growth and Income Inequality: The Facts May Surprise You

    Gary Burtless at The Brookings Institution offers a slightly contrarian point of view.

    CBO's newest estimates confirm the long-term trend toward greater inequality, driven mainly by turbo-charged gains in market income at the very top of the distribution. The market incomes of the top 1% are extraordinarily cyclical, however. They soar in economic expansions and plunge in recessions. Income changes since 2007 fit this pattern. What many observers miss, however, is the success of the nation's tax and transfer systems in protecting low- and middle-income Americans against the full effects of a depressed economy. As a result of these programs, the spendable incomes of poor and middle class families have been better insulated against recession-driven losses than the incomes of Americans in the top 1%. As the CBO statistics demonstrate, incomes in the middle and at the bottom of the distribution have fared better since 2000 than incomes at the very top.

  • Income Inequality in America - Fact and Fiction

    The extent of inequality differs with the measure used.

    This pre-tax, pre-transfer measure of inequality is, however, misleading because it fails to properly measure well-being. Upper-income individuals cannot spend the money that is taken away in taxes, so it gives them no benefit (other than, perhaps, higher social status). On the other hand, lower-income individuals clearly benefit from more spending power with, among others, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid, housing vouchers, and unemployment insurance. As such, it would be inaccurate not to include the latter in measures of their well-being.

    [Added 07/14/2014]

  • Ten Ways to Get Serious About Rising Inequality

    1. Establish a guaranteed minimum income for all American households.
    2. Abolish the payroll tax.
    3. Replace the payroll tax with a consumption tax.
    4. Raise the top rate of income tax.
    5. Tax wealth properly.
    6. Give ordinary Americans "homestead" grants.
    7. Nationalize the public-education system.
    8. Copy the Germans and greatly expand technical education.
    9. Abolish private schools and legacy admissions to private universities.
    10. Introduce a financial-transactions tax.

  • Social Mobility Hasn't Fallen: What It Means and Doesn't Mean

    Our estimates are still too imprecise to rule out modest trends in either direction. For the most part, though, our results for the cohorts born between 1952 and 1975 suggest that intergenerational income mobility in the United States has not changed dramatically over the past two decades.

    and

    We find that all of these rank-based measures of intergenerational mobility have not changed significantly over time. For example, the probability that a child reaches the top fifth of the income distribution given parents in the bottom fifth of the income distribution is 8.4 per cent for children born in 1971, compared with nine per cent for those born in 1986.


Posted by mjm | Permanent link | Comments | Comments -->