And in a follow-up to the last post, here are President Obama's comments in their entirety:
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) Good evening, everybody. Good
evening. I could not be more thrilled to be here tonight -- (laughter) -- at
the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. This is great crowd. They’re already
laughing. It’s terrific.
Chuck Todd -- love you, brother. (Laughter.) I’m delighted to see some of
the cast members of Glee are here. (Laughter.) And Jimmy Kimmel, it’s an
honor, man. (Laughter.) What’s so funny?
My fellow Americans, we gather during a historic anniversary. Last year at
this time -- in fact, on this very weekend -- we finally delivered justice to
one of the world’s most notorious individuals. (Applause.) Now, this year, we
gather in the midst of a heated election season. And Axelrod tells me I should
never miss a chance to reintroduce myself to the American people. So tonight,
this is how I’d like to begin: My name is Barack Obama. My mother was born in
Kansas. My father was born in Kenya. And I was born, of course, in Hawaii.
(Laughter and applause.)
4.30.2012
2012 White House Correspondents' Dinner Highlights
I am posting this under the assumption that frequent readers are likely to enjoy 'Nerd Prom' humor. It also serves as another great reminder that Campaign 2012 is firmly underway...
Tip of the cap to NBC.
Tip of the cap to NBC.
4.27.2012
Semi-regular State of the Blawg Address
BlawgConomics recently hit a milestone as we published the 700th post on the site. While we have long-since stopped memorializing every century mark we passed through, hitting the big 7-0-0 seemed as good a reason as any to talk about some recent developments that our readers might want to hear about.
First off, we have had a bit of an uptick in traffic recently (it looks like this month will be our second or third biggest ever). I attribute this to both increased posting and a better grasp on my part of the various uses of Twitter and other social media for promotion. An SEO expert was recently in communication (until I explained that this is a no-profit venture) and probably could have identified some absurd, counterintuitive ways to push numbers up even higher, but I am pretty satisfied with the growth of the site as it is.
Second, I have updated (and in some cases reinstated) a few features on the site. One is an archive where readers can peruse posts from the past listed by year. Though some posts have lost their timeliness, and some from the early days are just plain bad, it has been personally interesting to go back and see what I was writing about at different times. In a move that often shines a light on more recent efforts, I have also included a section listing the top trending stories from the past week.
First off, we have had a bit of an uptick in traffic recently (it looks like this month will be our second or third biggest ever). I attribute this to both increased posting and a better grasp on my part of the various uses of Twitter and other social media for promotion. An SEO expert was recently in communication (until I explained that this is a no-profit venture) and probably could have identified some absurd, counterintuitive ways to push numbers up even higher, but I am pretty satisfied with the growth of the site as it is.
Second, I have updated (and in some cases reinstated) a few features on the site. One is an archive where readers can peruse posts from the past listed by year. Though some posts have lost their timeliness, and some from the early days are just plain bad, it has been personally interesting to go back and see what I was writing about at different times. In a move that often shines a light on more recent efforts, I have also included a section listing the top trending stories from the past week.
Op Ed: New Saints Scandal Much Bigger than Bounty Issue
I have gone on the record a few times now with my thoughts about the Saints headhunting scandal. For anyone who doesn't want to read the long version, the more concise version is that I don't believe, as some people do, that bounties are appalling in the context of what is an already brutal game. Additionally, I believe that many people who have condemned the Saints the most while enjoying the rest of the brutality of the sport are nothing short of hypocrites.
To further complicate the issue of hypocrisy surrounding bounties, many have speculated that the NFL only came down on the team as hard as it did due to the many lawsuits it is facing/will continue to face over concussions. Bill Simmons echoed some of the above thoughts with regards to the brutality of the game on Grantland about a month after I did. As Simmons is known for nothing as much as his knack for capturing the zeitgeist, it would appear that my original stance ended up having a bit more public traction than I had originally estimated it would.
After receiving some record-breaking penalties for the bounty issue, the Saints organization is in the news again. According to ESPN, going back to the early 2000's Saints management had the ability to tap into communications between opposing team's coaches. The allegations have been vehemently denied by the GM of the Saints, Mickey Loomis. The Volokh Conspiracy has details on the possible legal implications of such practices here if you are interested. Although Professor Orin Kerr notes there that the Saints could be in legal trouble over this, I would rather take a few minutes to discuss why this is morally wrong. Specifically, I believe that there is a strong argument that this behavior, if true, is more morally wrong than what took place in Bounty-Gate.
To further complicate the issue of hypocrisy surrounding bounties, many have speculated that the NFL only came down on the team as hard as it did due to the many lawsuits it is facing/will continue to face over concussions. Bill Simmons echoed some of the above thoughts with regards to the brutality of the game on Grantland about a month after I did. As Simmons is known for nothing as much as his knack for capturing the zeitgeist, it would appear that my original stance ended up having a bit more public traction than I had originally estimated it would.
After receiving some record-breaking penalties for the bounty issue, the Saints organization is in the news again. According to ESPN, going back to the early 2000's Saints management had the ability to tap into communications between opposing team's coaches. The allegations have been vehemently denied by the GM of the Saints, Mickey Loomis. The Volokh Conspiracy has details on the possible legal implications of such practices here if you are interested. Although Professor Orin Kerr notes there that the Saints could be in legal trouble over this, I would rather take a few minutes to discuss why this is morally wrong. Specifically, I believe that there is a strong argument that this behavior, if true, is more morally wrong than what took place in Bounty-Gate.
HOV Lane Proposal = Law and Economics Lesson of the Week
I saw a story on the local news in Massachusetts the other day that provided a perfect subject for a discussion on law and economics. In the story, the reporter discussed a proposal some Bay State lawmakers have mooted under which drivers would be charged a fee for use of what the state calls the HOV lane (it stands for high-occupancy vehicle; I have also seen them referred to as carpool lanes). Those who advocate for the change suggest that it would create income for a state which is mired in budget issues. From Wikipedia (which regular readers will of course know is a perfectly valid source):
The benefit to the driver is clear; quicker commute times. There are other benefits as well. The positive externality for society is cleaner air. There is even a free-rider benefit with regards to congestion for commuters who don't use the lane as drivers who do (as well as their passengers) are no longer on the main highway.
A high-occupancy vehicle lane...is a restricted traffic lane reserved at peak travel times or longer for exclusive use of vehicles with a driver and one or more passengers, including carpools, vanpools and transit buses. The normal minimum occupancy level is 2 or 3 occupants...HOV lanes are normally created to increase higher average vehicle occupancy and person throughput with the goal of reducing traffic congestion and air pollution.
The benefit to the driver is clear; quicker commute times. There are other benefits as well. The positive externality for society is cleaner air. There is even a free-rider benefit with regards to congestion for commuters who don't use the lane as drivers who do (as well as their passengers) are no longer on the main highway.
4.26.2012
A Quick (And Very Entertaining) Primer On Game Theory
If you have always wanted to know what game theory was all about and you have about 6 minutes to spare, take a look at this video. From a British game show named Golden Balls, it will give you just about all you need to know to get through your introductory econ class final or a date with an economics nerd.
Tip of the cap to S.W. and NPR.
Tip of the cap to S.W. and NPR.
More on Whether Who Wins the Presidency Matters
I recently wrote, maybe influenced by a minor bout of ennui, that I didn't feel that there was much difference between typical political candidates. I wrote that once individuals, specifically presidents, were in office, that most of paths they take on most issues are remarkably similar. I suppose the corollary of this would be that it doesn't matter an incredible amount, with respect to most day to day issues, who wins this November election.
A clever reader pointed out that elections were important because even if changes were small and incremental, that this helps to shift laws and norms over the long-term. While I conceded that point, and can think of many examples to support it, I am not sure I am willing to go all the way to the other end of the spectrum, which is that elections are so critically important for both the long-run and the short-run that a party one doesn't favor being in power is catastrophic.
For that viewpoint, check out the comment section of any online article from a major newspaper or Professor Neil Buchanan on Dorf. I think it is fair to give a brief warning that you won't like the analysis in his article if you plan on voting (R) this fall, but it is easy enough to find examples from the other end of the spectrum. Like here for example...
A clever reader pointed out that elections were important because even if changes were small and incremental, that this helps to shift laws and norms over the long-term. While I conceded that point, and can think of many examples to support it, I am not sure I am willing to go all the way to the other end of the spectrum, which is that elections are so critically important for both the long-run and the short-run that a party one doesn't favor being in power is catastrophic.
For that viewpoint, check out the comment section of any online article from a major newspaper or Professor Neil Buchanan on Dorf. I think it is fair to give a brief warning that you won't like the analysis in his article if you plan on voting (R) this fall, but it is easy enough to find examples from the other end of the spectrum. Like here for example...
Magarpatta Leading the Way In Innovative Economic Development
In India, the continuing national sociogeographical/economic shift from rural/agricultural to urban/technology-based has brought benefits, but also problems as officials have, in many cases, been unable to keep up with booming populations. In response to slow bureaucratic fixes to such problems, some enterprising communities have decided to take matters into their own hands and kill two birds with one stone. In what I will refer to below as the Indian model, communities are pooling low productivity agricultural land parcels of many residents and reorganizing them as self-contained corporate/industrial settlement entities which focus on community and economic development.
In exchange for their land, the former owners receive shares in the new company proportionate to previous land-holdings and a new home in the development. They also often find new work in the new businesses which are attracted to the area.
These new communities often attract highly-paid service businesses, can be built intelligently and sustainably rather than in the haphazard manner of many of the world's long-developing cities, and have, in some cases, proven profitable for the farmers who used to till the earth now resting under the skyscrapers they own shares in. Magarpatta in Maharashtra is one example of this phenomenon, and one which has been in the news frequently of late.
It got me wondering whether such a model could be utilized elsewhere. There could be some places in the Midwest of the US where they could benefit local residents, particularly right outside the Chicago area. The last time I was in town, it struck me that many communities seemed to be springing out of old cornfields almost as if by magic anyway. If the Indian model were used, it could benefit the communities more than the current model of developer buyout followed by re-parcelling and selling-off of lots. Under the Indian model, residents have more at stake in the land which in examples in India, has led to more interesting approaches than setting up a dozen cul-de-sacs playing ring around the Wal-Mart.
Indeed, it strikes me that such a model could be utilized anywhere 1. land is owned by numerous, disparate but cooperative individuals, 2. there are populations including many skilled, educated workers, and, 3. there is agricultural land which has become less profitable than the alternative. I am sure there are other places in Asia as well some pockets in Africa which could benefit from taking a look at the Indian model.
In any case, it is interesting to see innovative approaches to age-old problems. Some readers might bemoan the fact that many of the companies in the Indian townships are involved in outsourcing, and therefore the loss of American jobs. To them I would say that there is an easy way to combat this. Simply head to the Midwest, maybe even Iowa. For, as India has proven, if you build a township, the companies will come...
In exchange for their land, the former owners receive shares in the new company proportionate to previous land-holdings and a new home in the development. They also often find new work in the new businesses which are attracted to the area.
These new communities often attract highly-paid service businesses, can be built intelligently and sustainably rather than in the haphazard manner of many of the world's long-developing cities, and have, in some cases, proven profitable for the farmers who used to till the earth now resting under the skyscrapers they own shares in. Magarpatta in Maharashtra is one example of this phenomenon, and one which has been in the news frequently of late.
It got me wondering whether such a model could be utilized elsewhere. There could be some places in the Midwest of the US where they could benefit local residents, particularly right outside the Chicago area. The last time I was in town, it struck me that many communities seemed to be springing out of old cornfields almost as if by magic anyway. If the Indian model were used, it could benefit the communities more than the current model of developer buyout followed by re-parcelling and selling-off of lots. Under the Indian model, residents have more at stake in the land which in examples in India, has led to more interesting approaches than setting up a dozen cul-de-sacs playing ring around the Wal-Mart.
Indeed, it strikes me that such a model could be utilized anywhere 1. land is owned by numerous, disparate but cooperative individuals, 2. there are populations including many skilled, educated workers, and, 3. there is agricultural land which has become less profitable than the alternative. I am sure there are other places in Asia as well some pockets in Africa which could benefit from taking a look at the Indian model.
In any case, it is interesting to see innovative approaches to age-old problems. Some readers might bemoan the fact that many of the companies in the Indian townships are involved in outsourcing, and therefore the loss of American jobs. To them I would say that there is an easy way to combat this. Simply head to the Midwest, maybe even Iowa. For, as India has proven, if you build a township, the companies will come...
4.25.2012
State v. Zimmerman Trial Documents
Though I won't quite promise that I will post a piece with thoughts on the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman situation, I will say that I hope to have something up soon. In honesty, it has been a struggle for me to gather up all of my thoughts regarding Martin's death and Zimmerman's case, but I will address those issues further if such a post ever makes it to this page.
In the meantime, I would suggest that anyone interested in the situation take a look at the trial documents which the Florida court system has made available to the public. While this certainly isn't the whole story, and much of the available documents are just everyday courtroom paperwork, we do get insight into Zimmerman's bond hearing as well as the version of the story the prosecution will likely build its case around.
In the meantime, I would suggest that anyone interested in the situation take a look at the trial documents which the Florida court system has made available to the public. While this certainly isn't the whole story, and much of the available documents are just everyday courtroom paperwork, we do get insight into Zimmerman's bond hearing as well as the version of the story the prosecution will likely build its case around.
One for One...
I don't usually utilize this space to trumpet individual products or companies, but I recently came across a company which could be providing an example of a new model for socially responsible investing, TOMS Shoes and Eyewear. From the company's website:
'In 2006, American traveler Blake Mycoskie befriended children in Argentina and found they had no shoes to protect their feet. Wanting to help, he created TOMS Shoes, a company that would match every pair of shoes purchased with a pair of new shoes given to a child in need. One for One. Blake returned to Argentina with a group of family, friends and staff later that year with 10,000 pairs of shoes made possible by TOMS customers.'
'In 2006, American traveler Blake Mycoskie befriended children in Argentina and found they had no shoes to protect their feet. Wanting to help, he created TOMS Shoes, a company that would match every pair of shoes purchased with a pair of new shoes given to a child in need. One for One. Blake returned to Argentina with a group of family, friends and staff later that year with 10,000 pairs of shoes made possible by TOMS customers.'
Messi fans, or just inspired by a trip to Argentina?
I don't personally own any TOMS products, but a recent purchaser and friend of the site is a big fan. 'I like that they help children in need,' she told me. When I asked whether she cared that there is likely a mark-up of over 100% (just a guess based on the fact that half of their product is 'sold' for free and a recognition that the company needs some kind of profit to remain an ongoing concern), she responded, 'No. There are always mark-ups on products from wholesale to retail. At least with TOMS I know that my money is going to a good cause.' 4.24.2012
Federal Judges and Wikipedia
According to Joe Palazzolo, federal judges have cited Wikipedia in decisions nearly 100 times in the past 5 years. If Palazzolo is correct, it makes me feel a lot more comfortable about utilizing the dark arts of researching from time to time for this page. After all, though I tend to think the topics discussed on this blog are interesting, and sometimes even important, it can't be true that anything written here has more of an impact on society than an actual Circuit Court ruling.
Now, it isn't like the citations to Wikipedia are to cases. From what Palazzolo wrote, they are mostly to pop-culture references such as Blazing Saddles, Elvis Presley and happy hour. Nonetheless, the reliance on Wikipedia as a source, even for the most innocuous of tidbits, is certainly a vote of confidence from some of the nation's best minds in the ability of our society to police the flow of information to itself. That's an interesting thought indeed.
Now, it isn't like the citations to Wikipedia are to cases. From what Palazzolo wrote, they are mostly to pop-culture references such as Blazing Saddles, Elvis Presley and happy hour. Nonetheless, the reliance on Wikipedia as a source, even for the most innocuous of tidbits, is certainly a vote of confidence from some of the nation's best minds in the ability of our society to police the flow of information to itself. That's an interesting thought indeed.
On Presidentiality and Whether it Matters
Two articles in the Financial Times over this weekend caught my eye for their wildy different approaches to the same concept. Though both authors tackled the idea from very different angles, they both broadly addressed the idea of presidentiality, and what it could mean in some upcoming elections.
The first article, by Simon Kuper, dealt more with inate abilities of one particular candidate in the US in describing what he calls the 'CEO fallacy.' Essentially, in what appears to be a theoretical (he is not American) vote against Mitt Romney, he decries the assumption some people have that running a company is good experience for running a country. He is correct to point out that an economy has many layers, and that this is even truer in the case of a nation as a whole. He is also correct in stating that sometimes those layers conflict. Meanwhile, he contrasts CEOs who typically have one focus; profits.
Because of the myriad conflicts which need to be balanced in an economy, Kuper suggests that the job of president is infinitely more complicated than that of any lazer-focused CEO. All true in my opinion.
However, Romney supporters might point out that Kuper doesn't even bother addressing the main contra; that no experience running a company does give one the ability to run a nation. Of course he doesn't, because that would be absurd. However, perhaps a more even article would have pointed out that, while Romney having been 'in the economy' doesn't mean he can run it, neither did Obama's lack of experience mean he couldn't. Essentially, business acumen doesn't prove or disprove presidential abilities; neither does lack of business acumen. However, Kuper doesn't really hide his political allegiances in his pieces, and I would suspect that this line of reasoning wouldn't fit his narrative.
The first article, by Simon Kuper, dealt more with inate abilities of one particular candidate in the US in describing what he calls the 'CEO fallacy.' Essentially, in what appears to be a theoretical (he is not American) vote against Mitt Romney, he decries the assumption some people have that running a company is good experience for running a country. He is correct to point out that an economy has many layers, and that this is even truer in the case of a nation as a whole. He is also correct in stating that sometimes those layers conflict. Meanwhile, he contrasts CEOs who typically have one focus; profits.
Because of the myriad conflicts which need to be balanced in an economy, Kuper suggests that the job of president is infinitely more complicated than that of any lazer-focused CEO. All true in my opinion.
However, Romney supporters might point out that Kuper doesn't even bother addressing the main contra; that no experience running a company does give one the ability to run a nation. Of course he doesn't, because that would be absurd. However, perhaps a more even article would have pointed out that, while Romney having been 'in the economy' doesn't mean he can run it, neither did Obama's lack of experience mean he couldn't. Essentially, business acumen doesn't prove or disprove presidential abilities; neither does lack of business acumen. However, Kuper doesn't really hide his political allegiances in his pieces, and I would suspect that this line of reasoning wouldn't fit his narrative.
Constitutional Law Lesson of the Day, Featuring Ozzie Guillen
"I love Fidel Castro...I respect Fidel Castro. You know why? A lot of people have wanted to kill Fidel Castro for the last 60 years, but that [expletive] is still here." - Ozzie Guillen, Miami Marlins Manager, Time Magazine
Guillen's comments, while certainly correct in some respects, were also incredibly offensive to a lot of his neighbors in his new hometown of Miami, Florida. They also provide a wonderful reminder of the truism that, while the First Amendment protects the free speech rights of Americans, it does not provide any shield to the consequences of that speech.
This is a simple concept, but one which doesn't always seem to get captured by the refrains of 'it's a free country' which seem to ring out any time anything like Ozzie's comments make the news. Therefore, while I will hold back judgment on the comments themselves or the overall intelligence of antagonizing a large part of the fan base of a team you just started managing, I would like to thank Ozzie for providing this reminder.
The bottom line is that Ozzie had the right to make these comments, and the Marlins organization had the freedom to suspend him, which it did. After all, speech, while free, is not free of consequences.
Guillen's comments, while certainly correct in some respects, were also incredibly offensive to a lot of his neighbors in his new hometown of Miami, Florida. They also provide a wonderful reminder of the truism that, while the First Amendment protects the free speech rights of Americans, it does not provide any shield to the consequences of that speech.
This is a simple concept, but one which doesn't always seem to get captured by the refrains of 'it's a free country' which seem to ring out any time anything like Ozzie's comments make the news. Therefore, while I will hold back judgment on the comments themselves or the overall intelligence of antagonizing a large part of the fan base of a team you just started managing, I would like to thank Ozzie for providing this reminder.
The bottom line is that Ozzie had the right to make these comments, and the Marlins organization had the freedom to suspend him, which it did. After all, speech, while free, is not free of consequences.
4.23.2012
Drones Go Domestic
From the Wall St. Journal over the weekend:
"With little public attention, dozens of universities and law-enforcement
agencies have been given approval by federal aviation regulators to use unmanned
aircraft known as drones, according to documents obtained via Freedom of
Information Act requests by an advocacy group.
The more than 50 institutions that received approvals to operate remotely
piloted aircraft are more varied than many outsiders and privacy experts
previously knew. They include not only agencies such as the Department of
Homeland Security but also smaller ones such as the police departments in North
Little Rock, Ark., and Ogden, Utah, as well the University of North Dakota and
Nicholls State University in Louisiana.
The information, released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, came to
light as the Federal Aviation Administration gears up to advance the widespread
use of the drones. By the fall of 2015, Congress wants the agency to integrate
remotely piloted aircraft throughout U.S. airspace."
While there are clearly some interesting potential uses for this type of technology, including firefighting, crowd management at large events and law enforcement, this is the type of 1984-esque type of development which is sure to have privacy advocates up in arms for some time to come. My guess is that the deployment of these drones will lead to lawsuits which will help determine the outer bounds of their legal usage. Until then, caveat crimen...
What do our readers think? Is this a good use of technology which can help address some of the problems of modern society, or an example of Big Brother running rampant? Is it something in between? I look forward to thoughts in the comment section below.
A Quick Note on Online Currencies
A concept recently came across my desktop which intrigued me enough that I took a few minutes to look into it further. The concept is online currencies (like Bitcoin) and the exchanges upon which they trade (like Mt.Gox). As regular readers might recall, we have spent some time here and there pondering the merits and efficacy of alternative currencies, so it may come as no surprise that the concept of web-based currencies would be of interest.
While we are teetering dangerously into some internet concepts I admittedly have no expertise in, Megan Brown explained Bitcoins while writing for my legal alma mater's weekly in an article published late last year:
"Bitcoin is an example of a digital currency, a monetary system that stores value and can be exchanged on the Internet. While it is in some respects similar to the virtual currencies of some online games — such as the Linden Dollar in Second Life — Bitcoins can purchase real goods in the real world.
After downloading the Bitcoin software, a person can acquire Bitcoins in two ways. One can either “mine” Bitcoins or purchase them at an exchange, akin to exchanging US dollars for a foreign currency. “Mining” Bitcoins refers to creating a new algorithm to verify past Bitcoin transactions in return for a small number of new Bitcoins.
No central authority like a central bank or clearing agency regulates the use of Bitcoins. This makes them appealing to those who disapprove of the role central banks play in monitoring the monetary supply."
Brown also notes that the founder of Bitcoin has gone by the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto since creating the peer-to-peer network in 2009.
At this time, it is unclear to me whether Bitcoin is a practical alternative for anything other than niche, small-scale web-based transactions. It is also a concept which would seem ripe for nefarious interference. That said, it is certainly intriguing and I will be sure to post on any interesting updates I see.
UPDATE: For those of you on Twitter, @DigitalCashNews is a good source for the latest news on this topic.
While we are teetering dangerously into some internet concepts I admittedly have no expertise in, Megan Brown explained Bitcoins while writing for my legal alma mater's weekly in an article published late last year:
"Bitcoin is an example of a digital currency, a monetary system that stores value and can be exchanged on the Internet. While it is in some respects similar to the virtual currencies of some online games — such as the Linden Dollar in Second Life — Bitcoins can purchase real goods in the real world.
After downloading the Bitcoin software, a person can acquire Bitcoins in two ways. One can either “mine” Bitcoins or purchase them at an exchange, akin to exchanging US dollars for a foreign currency. “Mining” Bitcoins refers to creating a new algorithm to verify past Bitcoin transactions in return for a small number of new Bitcoins.
No central authority like a central bank or clearing agency regulates the use of Bitcoins. This makes them appealing to those who disapprove of the role central banks play in monitoring the monetary supply."
Brown also notes that the founder of Bitcoin has gone by the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto since creating the peer-to-peer network in 2009.
At this time, it is unclear to me whether Bitcoin is a practical alternative for anything other than niche, small-scale web-based transactions. It is also a concept which would seem ripe for nefarious interference. That said, it is certainly intriguing and I will be sure to post on any interesting updates I see.
UPDATE: For those of you on Twitter, @DigitalCashNews is a good source for the latest news on this topic.
Op Ed: Han Han and Lessons for the US
Han Han is China's most popular blogger. As a fellow blogger, I envy his millions of page views. As an average male, I envy hobbies which would serve as full-time endeavours for less energized individuals (race car driver and best-selling novelist) and his financial security. What I don't envy is his inability to speak his mind without allusions and the cat and mouse games he has to play with censors. I don't envy the very real threat he faces of having his blog shut down without any notice. And I certainly don't envy the fact that if Mr. Han were to run too far afoul of the authorities, site shutdowns may be the least of his troubles in a country where prison is often seen as a viable means of controlling dissent.
I, similar to any writer whose web-based work can be found nearly effortlessly by a colleague, relative, or future employer of course self-censor to some extent. I try to be provocative without being inflammatory. I try to stay above the mud-slinging level in political issues (which ironically very likely costs me page views in our hyper-polarized society) and attempt to give both sides of an issue, even if my instincts tilt more heavily in one direction than another.
However, this is not due to fear of government reprisal. As far as I know, there have not been any cases of government shutdowns of sites purely on speech grounds in the US (not counting situations where individuals equate allegedly pirated materials or unauthorized logos to speech). As a result I have never posted anything with the fear that the content could be removed or the entire site shut down as a result. This is emblematic of the general idea that, to this point, the internet has served as the ultimate forum for freedom of speech. I, and many other content users and developers, tend to think this is a very good thing.
It is the erosion of this freedom which is so concerning to many people in the face of some of the recent internet regulation legislation that has been proposed, debated and voted upon at both the state and federal levels. While it might on its face seem innocuous to give the government the freedom to restrict access to the internet, or to prosecute individuals who use malicious language in commenting forums, it is very disturbing that some of the offenses which have been described in various bills have been so broadly defined.
I, similar to any writer whose web-based work can be found nearly effortlessly by a colleague, relative, or future employer of course self-censor to some extent. I try to be provocative without being inflammatory. I try to stay above the mud-slinging level in political issues (which ironically very likely costs me page views in our hyper-polarized society) and attempt to give both sides of an issue, even if my instincts tilt more heavily in one direction than another.
However, this is not due to fear of government reprisal. As far as I know, there have not been any cases of government shutdowns of sites purely on speech grounds in the US (not counting situations where individuals equate allegedly pirated materials or unauthorized logos to speech). As a result I have never posted anything with the fear that the content could be removed or the entire site shut down as a result. This is emblematic of the general idea that, to this point, the internet has served as the ultimate forum for freedom of speech. I, and many other content users and developers, tend to think this is a very good thing.
It is the erosion of this freedom which is so concerning to many people in the face of some of the recent internet regulation legislation that has been proposed, debated and voted upon at both the state and federal levels. While it might on its face seem innocuous to give the government the freedom to restrict access to the internet, or to prosecute individuals who use malicious language in commenting forums, it is very disturbing that some of the offenses which have been described in various bills have been so broadly defined.
4.20.2012
GW Solar Institute Annual Symposium Video, Part III
I can't think of a better way to get through the fading remnants of the work week than by taking a look at the latest video from the GW Solar Institute annual symposium last week. This video includes a discussion of the state of solar power. Have a nice weekend everyone.
The Man of the Moment
During the past decade or so, a number of intellectuals have made names and fortunes for themselves by taking academic pursuits to the masses. All have taken somewhat difficult, or at least obscure concepts and, no not dumbed them down, but made them more accessible.
It is a winning formula for sales to those book buyers who have a desire to be both timely and smart for their dinner parties; reading a bestseller which increases knowledge kills those two birds with one stone. The names in this genre are familiar; James Surowiecki, Malcolm Gladwell, Levitt and Dubner...all have taken ideas which used to be the province of academics and brought them to coffee tables across the US.
The next name which seems destined for the list above is Jonah Lehrer. Already an author twice over before the recent publication of Imagine: How Creativity Works, Lehrer is a 30-something American who hopes to bring some difficult scientific material to the broader public via the example method a la Freakonomics.
Before Twitter told us what the trends of the day were, they needed to be identified by personal surveillance of print and televised media. It is in the former medium where I have seen sparkling reviews of Imagine quite frequently lately. With time constraints I have not had the pleasure of reading Lehrer's work yet. However I plan to, and at that time I will try my hand at a quick review exclusively for our readers.
Update: Not all of the reviews are good...for the flip side of the discussion, check out Steven Poole of The Guardian here.
It is a winning formula for sales to those book buyers who have a desire to be both timely and smart for their dinner parties; reading a bestseller which increases knowledge kills those two birds with one stone. The names in this genre are familiar; James Surowiecki, Malcolm Gladwell, Levitt and Dubner...all have taken ideas which used to be the province of academics and brought them to coffee tables across the US.
The next name which seems destined for the list above is Jonah Lehrer. Already an author twice over before the recent publication of Imagine: How Creativity Works, Lehrer is a 30-something American who hopes to bring some difficult scientific material to the broader public via the example method a la Freakonomics.
Before Twitter told us what the trends of the day were, they needed to be identified by personal surveillance of print and televised media. It is in the former medium where I have seen sparkling reviews of Imagine quite frequently lately. With time constraints I have not had the pleasure of reading Lehrer's work yet. However I plan to, and at that time I will try my hand at a quick review exclusively for our readers.
Update: Not all of the reviews are good...for the flip side of the discussion, check out Steven Poole of The Guardian here.
The List: The World's Most Valuable Soccer Teams
As we have in the past, we thought we might take a few minutes to discuss Forbes' latest soccer rich list. The top five of this list of most valuable teams is predictably composed of the European elite of Manchester United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Arsenal and Bayern Munich. Mike Ozanian, the author of the piece, dutifully points out that Forbes' $2.24 billion valuation of the Red Devils makes them the most valuable team in all of sports, outpacing baseball's New York Yankees and the Dallas Cowboys of the NFL by at least $385 million each.
As fans might be able to tell you the rich of soccer always seem to be getting richer. This is most evident in Europe, from where all the top twenty clubs hail. There, the Champions League competition, with worldwide broadcasting deals, provides a boon for participants. As revenue from the competition grows the further teams make it, it is often the biggest clubs which receive the biggest payouts, allowing them to remain the biggest clubs in a self-perpetuating cycle. Even the second-tier Europa league can be a nice source of revenue for clubs, most of whom believe that the money they make in that competition could provide the funds for the signing or two it might take to get them to the big show.
If you would like more than the photo gallery version of the who's who of wealthy clubs, I would suggest taking a look at this report from Deloitte, which provided much of the source material for the Forbes list. It has insights on what sources drive revenue for the big clubs as well as analysis on teams outside the Big 5 European leagues. And, not to fear; despite treating soccer like the business it is, utilizing a plethora of charts and tables, the folks at Deloitte were sensible enough to not dispense with the use of pictures (though using Berbatov to represent United is a bit short-sighted if my inside sources are right...).
As fans might be able to tell you the rich of soccer always seem to be getting richer. This is most evident in Europe, from where all the top twenty clubs hail. There, the Champions League competition, with worldwide broadcasting deals, provides a boon for participants. As revenue from the competition grows the further teams make it, it is often the biggest clubs which receive the biggest payouts, allowing them to remain the biggest clubs in a self-perpetuating cycle. Even the second-tier Europa league can be a nice source of revenue for clubs, most of whom believe that the money they make in that competition could provide the funds for the signing or two it might take to get them to the big show.
If you would like more than the photo gallery version of the who's who of wealthy clubs, I would suggest taking a look at this report from Deloitte, which provided much of the source material for the Forbes list. It has insights on what sources drive revenue for the big clubs as well as analysis on teams outside the Big 5 European leagues. And, not to fear; despite treating soccer like the business it is, utilizing a plethora of charts and tables, the folks at Deloitte were sensible enough to not dispense with the use of pictures (though using Berbatov to represent United is a bit short-sighted if my inside sources are right...).
Quick Thoughts on the Columbia Scandal
As per usual, I am not going to spend a lot of time on morals when it comes to the Secret Service scandal in Columbia. As I have noted in the past (an old post on Tiger-gate comes to mind) I put too much store in cliches about throwing rocks and glass houses to join the ranks of the appalled. Not to be too flippant about it, but if grown men want to pay for sex where it is legal, that is between them, their families and maybe their doctors.
However, aside from the moral angle, there is an element of this story which should be troublesome for all Americans. When Secret Servicemen behave badly, it is a huge security risk for the United States. While President Obama was not in the country when this scandal occured, the actions of his sworn protectors nonetheless put him in danger. Whether a honeytrap might have been in play, an angry pimp is involved, a connection to a drug cartel perhaps, all of these scenarios and more could potentially create security risks for the United States and its elected officials. In any case, this is yet one more reputational stain on the flag in another part of the world where we need friends and allies, not countries whose governments and populations are against us.
I know that it is very very difficult to get into the Secret Service, as it should be. But it appears that once someone is in, they quickly become entrenched. With the ranks of unemployed veterans becoming more swollen by the day, there are likely many eager and well-trained individuals who can take the places of those involved in this latest embarrasing scandal. Here's hoping that they do.
However, aside from the moral angle, there is an element of this story which should be troublesome for all Americans. When Secret Servicemen behave badly, it is a huge security risk for the United States. While President Obama was not in the country when this scandal occured, the actions of his sworn protectors nonetheless put him in danger. Whether a honeytrap might have been in play, an angry pimp is involved, a connection to a drug cartel perhaps, all of these scenarios and more could potentially create security risks for the United States and its elected officials. In any case, this is yet one more reputational stain on the flag in another part of the world where we need friends and allies, not countries whose governments and populations are against us.
I know that it is very very difficult to get into the Secret Service, as it should be. But it appears that once someone is in, they quickly become entrenched. With the ranks of unemployed veterans becoming more swollen by the day, there are likely many eager and well-trained individuals who can take the places of those involved in this latest embarrasing scandal. Here's hoping that they do.
4.19.2012
PSA: GW Solar Institute Annual Symposium Video Part II
Our posting of the Economics/Policy session of the GW Solar Institute's Annual Symposium a few days back has generated quite a bit of traffic, leading me to believe that our readers might want to see more of the event. Below you will find video of one of the afternoon panels, The Private Sector is the Driver. Enjoy.
4.18.2012
Lessons in Marketing: Today Brought to You by Dunkin' Donuts
Dunkin' Donuts has recently been running a commercial (I couldn't find it on YouTube, so you will have to bear with me) where a typical putz tries to impress two lovely ladies he is with by defining 'artisanal.' His (incorrect) analysis of the Latin- and Greek- rooted components of the word is offered in response to their enjoyment of New Dunkin' Artisan Bagels!
Now I know that the terms artisan and artisanal has been diluted over the past decade or so. Something that used to (and still does in some quarters) roughly mean a person expertly making hand-crafted goods in small batches using traditional methods now means that real wheat is used and grains are sprinkled over the top before the subject good is baked. I guess we can blame the Paneras and Starbucks of the world for this shifting definition among the masses. However, neither of those companies has gone so far as to point out that the word artisan does have a meaning that is rooted in something entirely different than what they are using it for (suffice to say it has nothing to do with the type of mass-production which is of course a necessary component of any big-chain product roll-out).
Of course this might not all matter at some level. At the point of sale, if someone wants a bagel, they will get one, whether it is called artisan or whether there are fancy grains baked on top or not. This is probably especially true for the die-hard Dunkin' customers. That said, it must matter a little; otherwise Dunkin's shareholders wouldn't tolerate money being spent on both product development and advertising.
If the folks at Dunkin' ever asked me (and of course they won't) I guess what I might say is that selectively introducing 'artisanal' products to go head to head with Starbucks while retaining the donuts and saccharine sweet coffees that differentiate the companies is probably a strong move. Taking advantage of public perceptions of what artisanal means these days is no sin, particularly if your competitors were responsible for that shifting paradigm. However, that said, artisan still means something to some people, many of which could be potential customers. Therefore I might not go quite so far in brazenly pointing out that your products aren't exactly what you say they are...
p.s. - I happen to be a fan of Dunkin', Starbucks and Panera and have favorite products at all of these publicly-traded companies. This doesn't mean we can't have some fun discussing the butcherings of the English, French, Latin, Greek, or any other language, which are undertaken by each.
Now I know that the terms artisan and artisanal has been diluted over the past decade or so. Something that used to (and still does in some quarters) roughly mean a person expertly making hand-crafted goods in small batches using traditional methods now means that real wheat is used and grains are sprinkled over the top before the subject good is baked. I guess we can blame the Paneras and Starbucks of the world for this shifting definition among the masses. However, neither of those companies has gone so far as to point out that the word artisan does have a meaning that is rooted in something entirely different than what they are using it for (suffice to say it has nothing to do with the type of mass-production which is of course a necessary component of any big-chain product roll-out).
Of course this might not all matter at some level. At the point of sale, if someone wants a bagel, they will get one, whether it is called artisan or whether there are fancy grains baked on top or not. This is probably especially true for the die-hard Dunkin' customers. That said, it must matter a little; otherwise Dunkin's shareholders wouldn't tolerate money being spent on both product development and advertising.
If the folks at Dunkin' ever asked me (and of course they won't) I guess what I might say is that selectively introducing 'artisanal' products to go head to head with Starbucks while retaining the donuts and saccharine sweet coffees that differentiate the companies is probably a strong move. Taking advantage of public perceptions of what artisanal means these days is no sin, particularly if your competitors were responsible for that shifting paradigm. However, that said, artisan still means something to some people, many of which could be potential customers. Therefore I might not go quite so far in brazenly pointing out that your products aren't exactly what you say they are...
p.s. - I happen to be a fan of Dunkin', Starbucks and Panera and have favorite products at all of these publicly-traded companies. This doesn't mean we can't have some fun discussing the butcherings of the English, French, Latin, Greek, or any other language, which are undertaken by each.
Adventures in Supply and Demand: The Great Chocolate Shortage of 2020
I have recently noted a large number of reports claiming that the world is headed for a chocolate shortage. According to industry insiders, the potential for a shortage exists as a demand issue; as more people become able to afford chocolate around the world, and as more people are developing sweet tooths, more chocolate needs to be in the market to satisfy cravings. Estimates are that if demand increases at the same rate over the next few years as it has over the past few, it will outstrip supply by 2020.
However, in addition to increasing demand, there are also fears on the supply side. Not only are there concerns about supply failing to keep up with demand, there are additionally fears that supply could actually decrease soon. Factors contributing to these concerns are the limited number of places (with varying levels of political and social stability) where the cocoa tree can be grown, fungi and parasites and even climate change. All these factors and others are contributing to an increasing fears of a supply shock which could further foil efforts to keep up with demand.
Luckily, two of the benefits of modern science may be able to help out. First off, as the Scientific American article linked-to above notes, the production of cocoa is very inefficient at the present; yields may only be 33% of their potential. Proper use of chemical insecticides and fungicides could increase that number dramatically. The other area of science which could help is genetic engineering. Apparently, unlike, say corn, which has thousands of different strains, there are only 10 varieties of cocoa plants, all of which are in the same species. This of course makes populations vulnerable to disease, an issue a collaboration between industry and the Department of Agriculture is trying to address through genome mapping and subsequently, breeding programs.
Aside from a personal stake in this issue as a hopeless chocolate lover, it is also an issue which fits nicely into this site's area of expertise. Though science will help to solve this problem, it is also one that can be uniquely discussed using economics. Demand is on the rise. A supply shock is a real possibility due to disease. On a mixed macro/micro level, it is a huge export crop and creator of jobs in many equatorial nations. The increase in demand points to the rise of middle classes in developing nations across the world. You could almost build a first year economics course load just around the cocoa plant.
Here's hoping the scientists can figure it out. I am guessing that with the amount of money at stake, research will be moving ahead at breakneck speed and will ensure that the Great Chocolate Shortage of 2020 will always be more of a headline than an actual problem. That said, if any of our readers know how long a Hershey bar will keep in the freezer, I would appreciate a note in the comments section...
However, in addition to increasing demand, there are also fears on the supply side. Not only are there concerns about supply failing to keep up with demand, there are additionally fears that supply could actually decrease soon. Factors contributing to these concerns are the limited number of places (with varying levels of political and social stability) where the cocoa tree can be grown, fungi and parasites and even climate change. All these factors and others are contributing to an increasing fears of a supply shock which could further foil efforts to keep up with demand.
Luckily, two of the benefits of modern science may be able to help out. First off, as the Scientific American article linked-to above notes, the production of cocoa is very inefficient at the present; yields may only be 33% of their potential. Proper use of chemical insecticides and fungicides could increase that number dramatically. The other area of science which could help is genetic engineering. Apparently, unlike, say corn, which has thousands of different strains, there are only 10 varieties of cocoa plants, all of which are in the same species. This of course makes populations vulnerable to disease, an issue a collaboration between industry and the Department of Agriculture is trying to address through genome mapping and subsequently, breeding programs.
Aside from a personal stake in this issue as a hopeless chocolate lover, it is also an issue which fits nicely into this site's area of expertise. Though science will help to solve this problem, it is also one that can be uniquely discussed using economics. Demand is on the rise. A supply shock is a real possibility due to disease. On a mixed macro/micro level, it is a huge export crop and creator of jobs in many equatorial nations. The increase in demand points to the rise of middle classes in developing nations across the world. You could almost build a first year economics course load just around the cocoa plant.
Here's hoping the scientists can figure it out. I am guessing that with the amount of money at stake, research will be moving ahead at breakneck speed and will ensure that the Great Chocolate Shortage of 2020 will always be more of a headline than an actual problem. That said, if any of our readers know how long a Hershey bar will keep in the freezer, I would appreciate a note in the comments section...
4.17.2012
Austerity Without the Name is Austerity All the Same
Readers will hopefully indulge me in spending a few paragraphs trying to develop a concept with could easily be the subject of a much more well-developed study and/or thesis. For those who can't grant me such leeway, well, maybe the blogosphere isn't for you... At any rate, the thought is this: while America has not had to collectively sacrifice in the same way during the current wars as it has with past wars, it has nonetheless become mired in a period of austerity, just without the same benefits.
In other words, during World War II there was shared economic sacrifice in the form of rationing and price freezes. These were stated policies which the government appealed to the public for. Coming out of that period America was treated to a baby-making, manufacturing, infrastructural boom. Meanwhile, during the wars of the 2000's there were increases in spending and a lack of corresponding cuts which the public sat idly by for. The uncertaintly these conditions caused for business led to shared sacrifice in the form of lost jobs, slowed output and overall malaise. And since the sacrifices in the latter wars were more haphazard and less concrete; a tax cut here, a stimulus plan there, the groundwork has not been set for a correlated subsequent boom.
This is, of course a problem with political roots. While the invasion of Afghanistan was popular, the invasion of Iraq was less so, and both campaigns lost their sheen in short order. This is unlike World War II which, while entry was unpopular in some quarters, had the support of the American public after Pearl Harbor. It was politically feasible for FDR to ask for sacrifice during the earlier war; neither Bush nor Obama would have dared during their times in charge.
However, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars still cost a lot of money. And that money had to come from somewhere...or maybe more ethereally it had to be created. While WWII saw the manufacturing plants of America running 24/7, the wars of the 2000's were marked by the continuous running of the Treasury's printing presses. The former scenario set the country up for a proud boom led by the Greatest Generation, the former has created the Great Recession with standard bearers who are more likely to Occupy local parks than boardrooms anytime soon.
This thesis is of course a bit simplified. It doesn't account for the role of women in the workforce, the impact housing prices have had on the ability to start a family, inflationary pressures, differences in national infrastructure and the fact that our monetary system is markedly different now than it was in the 1940's. I will grant a careful reader-cum-history student out there these points and many more. However, I believe very strongly that there is something in this concept.
Commentators have said again and again that, despite the extreme sacrifices our many of our servicemen and women that the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan have not been marked by sacrifice at home. I disagree wholeheartedly. Though no public official has had the fortitude to say so to his or her constituents, the American public has sacrificed greatly during the wars of the 2000's. Unfortunately, and due to a lack of acknowledgement along the way of the ultimately backdoor sacrifice those wars would take, that sacrifice looks like it will continue long after the gunfire finally, happily stops.
In other words, during World War II there was shared economic sacrifice in the form of rationing and price freezes. These were stated policies which the government appealed to the public for. Coming out of that period America was treated to a baby-making, manufacturing, infrastructural boom. Meanwhile, during the wars of the 2000's there were increases in spending and a lack of corresponding cuts which the public sat idly by for. The uncertaintly these conditions caused for business led to shared sacrifice in the form of lost jobs, slowed output and overall malaise. And since the sacrifices in the latter wars were more haphazard and less concrete; a tax cut here, a stimulus plan there, the groundwork has not been set for a correlated subsequent boom.
This is, of course a problem with political roots. While the invasion of Afghanistan was popular, the invasion of Iraq was less so, and both campaigns lost their sheen in short order. This is unlike World War II which, while entry was unpopular in some quarters, had the support of the American public after Pearl Harbor. It was politically feasible for FDR to ask for sacrifice during the earlier war; neither Bush nor Obama would have dared during their times in charge.
However, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars still cost a lot of money. And that money had to come from somewhere...or maybe more ethereally it had to be created. While WWII saw the manufacturing plants of America running 24/7, the wars of the 2000's were marked by the continuous running of the Treasury's printing presses. The former scenario set the country up for a proud boom led by the Greatest Generation, the former has created the Great Recession with standard bearers who are more likely to Occupy local parks than boardrooms anytime soon.
This thesis is of course a bit simplified. It doesn't account for the role of women in the workforce, the impact housing prices have had on the ability to start a family, inflationary pressures, differences in national infrastructure and the fact that our monetary system is markedly different now than it was in the 1940's. I will grant a careful reader-cum-history student out there these points and many more. However, I believe very strongly that there is something in this concept.
Commentators have said again and again that, despite the extreme sacrifices our many of our servicemen and women that the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan have not been marked by sacrifice at home. I disagree wholeheartedly. Though no public official has had the fortitude to say so to his or her constituents, the American public has sacrificed greatly during the wars of the 2000's. Unfortunately, and due to a lack of acknowledgement along the way of the ultimately backdoor sacrifice those wars would take, that sacrifice looks like it will continue long after the gunfire finally, happily stops.
PSA: GW Solar Institute Annual Symposium Video
Readers who follow the Twitter feed may have seen my message about attending the GW Solar Institute's Annual Symposium on Thursday of last week. It was, as usual, a fantastic event with dynamic speakers and enthusiastic attendees. For the many of you who were unable to attend, the Institute has posted a video of the keynote by California Utilities Commissioner Tim Simon, as well as the first of the panel videos here. I have additionally posted what I thought was an extraordinary panel discussion on economic and policy barriers to the solar industry below.
4.16.2012
Redefining Plagiarism in the Internet Age
I recently email blasted some friends of the site excitedly throwing around terms like 'plagiarism' and 'internet theft.' Why? Bill Simmons had written and posted an article on Grantland regarding the NFL headhunting scandal that hit awfully close to home. In fact, it seemed to be almost a mirror of a piece I had posted just about one month prior to Mr. Simmons going to press. Of course I was only half-joking about the theft of the article, particularly after some of my kind-hearted readers gently reminded me about my past claims of government surveillance (maybe true) and Chinese efforts to spam the site (definitely true, maybe) that I had made in the past.
Aside from any propensity to cry wolf, I also failed to take my own claims of Simmons' impropriety seriously just because of the nature of the world we live in today. There is so much information, so many different threads coming from different sources all the time that it is very possible, and indeed it is highly probable, that different writers coalesce around similar ideas without directly having seen each other's work.
I guess if you are a high school student, this means that the internet has made it both more easy and more difficult to get caught for cheating; if you go word-for-word, a quick Google search will sniff you out. However, if you are merely reflecting the general feelings of some segment of the population, then it actually may provide a valid excuse to the accused.
Things are similarly complicated for writers, whether they run one of the biggest websites in the country or a micro-blog with twenty-ahem...ergh, excuse me, readers a day. Of course when you are in law school, or journalism school and you write a paper you are expected to cross numerous t's and dot both the i's and the j's while researching and writing. In short, my old legal writing adjunct probably could have had an uncomfortable talk with Mr. Simmons if he handed in a paper like his article a month after I did the same with mine.
However, in the internet age, with 24-hour talk radio, smartphones, e-readers and the like, more and more people are informed, more and more people are forming opinions based on that information and more and more people (like myself) have fora in which to discuss them. In short, the likelihood of me and Bill Simmons writing similar articles and having them posted in a forum for all the world to see has never been higher.
So how to redefine plagiarism in the internet age? I am not quite sure. Indeed, at least half of the articles I write are in direct response to something I have read somewhere. While I always attribute such articles and their writers, I am not exactly following standard rules when I do so. Often it is merely a link to their work. In fact, and in a nice example of The Circle of Life I referenced no less than two Grantland articles in the headhunting article I wrote.
I am also not sure it matters in most contexts. Of course we want to avoid student plagiarism to ensure that they are doing their own work and participating in the prescribed educational processes. I also might feel a bit differently if I suspected someone had lifted some of my more academic work without a cite. And I am sure some paid-websites would have something to say about merely linking to their work (I myself have had to scrap a few ideas here and there, or at least get data from a different source, after some particularly nasty legal auto-generated legal warnings).
However, in most garden-variety situations, the internet should exist as a democratizing force in the area of information. If someone uses my ideas, if people link to my articles, if Bill Simmons runs across one of my posts and it inspires him, all of these are benefits of the internet, not causes of friction. I think to a great extent that this has been one of the markers of the internet world. I guess I am just writing to say that I hope it stays that way.
Aside from any propensity to cry wolf, I also failed to take my own claims of Simmons' impropriety seriously just because of the nature of the world we live in today. There is so much information, so many different threads coming from different sources all the time that it is very possible, and indeed it is highly probable, that different writers coalesce around similar ideas without directly having seen each other's work.
I guess if you are a high school student, this means that the internet has made it both more easy and more difficult to get caught for cheating; if you go word-for-word, a quick Google search will sniff you out. However, if you are merely reflecting the general feelings of some segment of the population, then it actually may provide a valid excuse to the accused.
Things are similarly complicated for writers, whether they run one of the biggest websites in the country or a micro-blog with twenty-ahem...ergh, excuse me, readers a day. Of course when you are in law school, or journalism school and you write a paper you are expected to cross numerous t's and dot both the i's and the j's while researching and writing. In short, my old legal writing adjunct probably could have had an uncomfortable talk with Mr. Simmons if he handed in a paper like his article a month after I did the same with mine.
However, in the internet age, with 24-hour talk radio, smartphones, e-readers and the like, more and more people are informed, more and more people are forming opinions based on that information and more and more people (like myself) have fora in which to discuss them. In short, the likelihood of me and Bill Simmons writing similar articles and having them posted in a forum for all the world to see has never been higher.
So how to redefine plagiarism in the internet age? I am not quite sure. Indeed, at least half of the articles I write are in direct response to something I have read somewhere. While I always attribute such articles and their writers, I am not exactly following standard rules when I do so. Often it is merely a link to their work. In fact, and in a nice example of The Circle of Life I referenced no less than two Grantland articles in the headhunting article I wrote.
I am also not sure it matters in most contexts. Of course we want to avoid student plagiarism to ensure that they are doing their own work and participating in the prescribed educational processes. I also might feel a bit differently if I suspected someone had lifted some of my more academic work without a cite. And I am sure some paid-websites would have something to say about merely linking to their work (I myself have had to scrap a few ideas here and there, or at least get data from a different source, after some particularly nasty legal auto-generated legal warnings).
However, in most garden-variety situations, the internet should exist as a democratizing force in the area of information. If someone uses my ideas, if people link to my articles, if Bill Simmons runs across one of my posts and it inspires him, all of these are benefits of the internet, not causes of friction. I think to a great extent that this has been one of the markers of the internet world. I guess I am just writing to say that I hope it stays that way.
4.12.2012
Crowdfunding and Democratization of Economics Writing
Here at BlawgConomics, we are big proponents of the idea of crowdfunding. We believe that the recent easing of restrictions on this investment strategy could pay huge dividends for the type of economic development America desperately needs.
Among the more interesting ways we have read about crowdfunding being used recently is an attempt to publish an economics text on aid programs. For those new to the world of economics, it doesn't get more rockstar than crowdfunding your next book. Indeed, in what is typically a fairly staid profession, it may be akin with Dylan going electric, but I digress.
Best of luck to Eva Vivalt and her team. If she is successful, our readers can fully expect to see desperate pleas to throw some excess funds Kickstarter's way for a project bringing us to the read world rather than just the virtual sometime very soon.
Among the more interesting ways we have read about crowdfunding being used recently is an attempt to publish an economics text on aid programs. For those new to the world of economics, it doesn't get more rockstar than crowdfunding your next book. Indeed, in what is typically a fairly staid profession, it may be akin with Dylan going electric, but I digress.
Best of luck to Eva Vivalt and her team. If she is successful, our readers can fully expect to see desperate pleas to throw some excess funds Kickstarter's way for a project bringing us to the read world rather than just the virtual sometime very soon.
4.11.2012
Campaign 2012: President Obama's Comments at the White House Forum on Women and the Economy
Yes, I am late on a topic again. Life has come calling quite a bit recently. However, I did want to take a brief moment to address President Obama's recent comments to the White House's Council on Women and Girls at a forum established to address the 'critical role women play in driving our economic progress.' A full transcript of the President's comments can be found here.
While addressing the role of women in the economy is of course a worthy endeavour in itself, I nonetheless thought that the more striking takeaway from this event was the continuance of the President's shift to full-on campaign mode. Among the more pertinent examples of this follow:
While addressing the role of women in the economy is of course a worthy endeavour in itself, I nonetheless thought that the more striking takeaway from this event was the continuance of the President's shift to full-on campaign mode. Among the more pertinent examples of this follow:
The Response...
Though I am a few days behind on this, I nonetheless think that the recent 'homework assignment' given to The Justice Department was interesting enough to merit a (very) quick post. For those who haven't been following, Judge Jerry Smith of the 5th Circuit recently requested that the U.S. Department of Justice file a three-page letter discussing the principles of judicial review in light of prior comments by President Barack Obama in which he was critical of the doctrine (at least with respect to this particular court and his signature healthcare law).
Some questioned the wisdom of President (and former Constitutional Law Professor) Obama's comments in the first place. Some questioned the wisdom and/or viability of the resulting judicial request. However, in any case, the DOJ complied, and its response can be found here. Meanwhile, the letter Attorney General Eric Holder might have wished he had written can be found here.
Tip of the hat to ATL and Garrett Epps
Some questioned the wisdom of President (and former Constitutional Law Professor) Obama's comments in the first place. Some questioned the wisdom and/or viability of the resulting judicial request. However, in any case, the DOJ complied, and its response can be found here. Meanwhile, the letter Attorney General Eric Holder might have wished he had written can be found here.
Tip of the hat to ATL and Garrett Epps
4.05.2012
A Little Bit of Economics in the Law...
As long-time readers might recall, one of the reasons I started this blog was a lack of desire (credentials?) to join a traditional law school journal. Therefore, I am not intimately familiar with the mechanics behind submissions and acceptances of articles. However according to people in the know, some basic elements of game theory are applied by potential authors on a fairly regular basis during application season in an attempt to work their ways into the more prestigious journals.
This is no surprise as successful publication in journals correlates to, and indeed is often a prerequisite of, grants of tenure and pay increases (incidentally this might explain why I was never again asked to do an article review after I gently panned a piece a while back). This correlation only becomes stronger with the prestige of the journal.
However as journal editors apparently rate structure and organized processes above the excitement I get from legal geeks utilizing rational economic decision-making, there is apparently a movement afoot to quash the more strategic maneuvering some submitters seem to be fond of. More on this at Dorf On Law here.
This is no surprise as successful publication in journals correlates to, and indeed is often a prerequisite of, grants of tenure and pay increases (incidentally this might explain why I was never again asked to do an article review after I gently panned a piece a while back). This correlation only becomes stronger with the prestige of the journal.
However as journal editors apparently rate structure and organized processes above the excitement I get from legal geeks utilizing rational economic decision-making, there is apparently a movement afoot to quash the more strategic maneuvering some submitters seem to be fond of. More on this at Dorf On Law here.
Maybe Smart People Just Realize that Skipping Work Isn't Good for Career Prospects...
Over the past few days, papers in the UK have been touting a recently released study entitled The association between childhood cognitive ability and adult long-term sickness absence in three British birth cohorts: a cohort study which links intelligence levels to sick leave. From the abstract:
The authors aimed to test the relationship between childhood cognitive function and long-term sick leave in adult life and whether any relationship was mediated by educational attainment, adult social class or adult mental ill-health...The authors used data from the 1946, 1958 and 1970 British birth cohorts. Initial study populations included all live births in 1 week in that year. Follow-up arrangements have differed between the cohorts.
And from the summary:
We examined associations between cognitive ability measured in childhood and long-term sickness absence in adult life across three British birth cohorts. In all three cohorts, the effects after adjustment for sex and social class at birth were similar, and all three demonstrated a clear dose–response effect whereby lower childhood cognitive ability was more strongly associated with long-term sick leave. In each cohort, there was little attenuation when previous history of depression was included. There was some attenuation of the effect when adult social class and, particularly, educational attainment was included, and this attenuation was greater for those of lower cognitive ability. This suggests that some of the effect of lower cognitive ability is mediated by educational attainment. For example, low educational attainment might lead to more insecure jobs or more manual jobs that could be more difficult to sustain in the context of disability. However, educational attainment does not fully explain the association.
As foreshadowed in the title of the post, could this explanation gap simply be filled by the idea that smarter people have a better understanding of the consequences of playing hooky? We eagerly await the results of a study by any sociologist with the the moxy to test that hypothesis. Until then we would appreciate reader feedback on additional or substitute causes for the relationship between cognitive ability and sick leave in the comments section below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)