Sunday, June 30, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Rêveuse au chapeau rouge, 2024 by Irina Biatturi (French, b. 1973)

Rêveuse au chapeau rouge, 2024 by Irina Biatturi (French, b. 1973)



























Click to enlarge.

Saturday, June 29, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Nightvision, 2018 by Henni Alftan (Finnish, b.1979)

Nightvision, 2018 by Henni Alftan (Finnish, b.1979)

















Click to enlarge.

Soldier and Girl at Station, 1953 by Alex Colville

Soldier and Girl at Station, 1953 by Alex Colville















Click to enlarge.

Friday, June 28, 2024

The emperor has no cognitive clothing

We all know the folktale of The Emperor Has No Clothes.  I have long argued that folktales, fables, metaphors, adages, etc. are a form of cultural programing.  They are effectively lines of code which build individual knowledge, norms and awareness.  

We have had, for a variety of reasons, a great insistence from the Democratic Party, the government, and the legacy mainstream media that their candidate, Joe Biden, was on top of things and effective in his role.  Others, argued otherwise; that he is old, tired, and not only past his prime but perhaps deep into decline.  

His handlers keep him out of the public eye, and even the eye of the media, with few events and even fewer interviews and virtually no press conferences.  It is easy to infer that he is simply no longer up to those cognitively taxing events.  That is a plausible interpretation but certainly not proven.  

Within the past week, we have had the White House press office trying to push a claim that videos circulating of Biden distracted and befuddled were somehow "cheap fakes" to be dismissed as unreal.  Despite the fact that these were videos made and released by otherwise sympathetic political allies in the mainstream media.

In addition, there are continuing rumors and press releases of various Administration efforts to manage Disinformation and Misinformation despite those activities being in clear violation of the First Amendment.  

After last night's presidential debate, it feels like all the lies and gas lighting are vaporizing.  CNN and the president's handlers demonstrated for ninety minutes that all the claims of misinformation, disinformation, and cheap fakes were mere cons.  The president has no cognitive clothes.

There are valiant efforts in some quarters to continue to push the narrative of mental acuity and capability but those seem to be desperate rear guard actions.  Everyone saw what was going on.  Everyone saw enough to be truly concerned about who is even managing the executive branch.  

I have two reactions.  One is human anger - the handling of Biden almost constitutes elder abuse.  Yes, yes, it's complicated, and maybe he is doing what he wants to do.  But the odor of self-serving abuse is rank.  

The second reaction is almost of astonishment.  I know about cascades.  I know about the Emperor's clothes.  I know about gaslighting.  I have been confident for a year or more that Biden's cognitive capabilities were increasingly impaired.  

But for it all to come together in ninety minutes for everyone to see, and for everyone, friend and foe alike, to reach similar conclusions - Pretty astonishing.

Maybe it was just a randomly bad debate night performance.  Maybe.  But I think the winds have shifted.

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

A Walk in the Country by Bill Farnsworth (American, b.1958)

A Walk in the Country by Bill Farnsworth (American, b.1958) 






























Click to enlarge.

Thursday, June 27, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Sur les remparts d’Antibes, 2023 by Irina Biatturi (French, b. 1973)

Sur les remparts d’Antibes, 2023 by Irina Biatturi (French, b. 1973)






























Click to enlarge.

Our political times - The incumbents definitely deserve to lose and their opponents don't deserve to win.

I wonder for how many of the OECD democracies would it be true that more than half the population strongly believes:

The incumbents definitely deserve to lose and their opponents don't deserve to win.  

To a first order of approximation, I would guess - All of them.  

Wednesday, June 26, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Lake Attersee, 1900 by Gustav Klimt (Austrian, 1862-1918)

Lake Attersee, 1900 by Gustav Klimt (Austrian, 1862-1918)

























Click to enlarge.

Tuesday, June 25, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Data Talks

 

Dancing, c. 1920 by Wladyslaw Roguski (1890 - 1940)

Dancing, c. 1920 by Wladyslaw Roguski (1890 - 1940)




























Click to enlarge.

Monday, June 24, 2024

History

 

The central planner wolf in philanthropic clothing

From Why I stopped being a YIMBY by Simon Cooke.  The subheading is The YIMBY movement has lost its way becoming just another planning-led and illiberal group that believes its vision, a Young Fogey version of Le Corbusier’s cities in the sky, should be imposed.

I keep intending to write an essay and never get around to it because of its sprawling nature.  The core argument is that the governing powers around the world have largely abandoned the straightforward agenda that is the wants and priorities of their constituents.  These, broadly, are something like, and in no particular order:

Steadily growing productivity which leads to 

Steadily growing economy

Steadily growing real income 

Choice of jobs

Good education institutions

Good public safety (personal and property)

Equal application of the law

Respect for human rights (freedom of speech, religion, association, etc.)

Sound money (low and predictable inflation)

Sound public finance

Good public infrastructure

Low cost of living

Better, cheaper, safer pretty much covers it.

These are not novel.  Most people want most of these things most of the time though the relative priorities might shift around over time.  

And the delivery of these things isn't really rocket science either, though it does require discipline and the willingness and capacity to make trade-off decisions.  A public policy not working?  Cancel it!  Benefits from a program of activity less than costs?  Cancel it!  Expenses greater than tax revenue?  Cut them!

Bad government is substantially a choice made consciously by bad leaders.  Citizens should be voting losers out of office on a routine basis instead of giving them more time to continue failing.

Cooke is touching on one example, Yes In My Backyard (YIMBY) a movement theoretically grounded in prosocial philanthropy, encouraging land owners in cities to agree to a degradation in the quality of life in their single family residential neighborhoods in order to increase housing available in the city through increased densification.  

It is, and always has been, an emotional argument, slipping in coerced central planning to achieve redistribution aims of central planners, inevitably of one variant form of Marxism or another.  

You want more housing and cheaper housing in a city?  Don't coercively force densification on neighborhoods that don't want it.  Reduce taxes, reduce regulations, accelerate the construction approval process, get rid of corrupt city employees who gum up the building process, encourage commercial activity within the city by increasing rule of law and improved market access and participation.  Implement that plan and you will get more housing.  Not necessarily where central planners think it ought to be.  Not necessarily in the form they prefer.  Not necessarily at the price points they want.  But it will happen on its own and it will be what residents want.

But that is not what the central planners want.  They want their YIMBY central planner wolf in philanthropic clothing.  Which is the point Cooke is making.

I stopped being a YIMBY because the advocates of building new homes don’t want to allow the building of homes according to what people want but rather according to their grandiose vision of future urbanism. What we get is a twee version of Le Corbusier’s planned urban communities where, rather than brutalist modernism we get a world filled with dull pastiche of Maida Vale mansion blocks. 

[snip]

At first YIMBYs were consistent in seeing that the way to resolve the housing crisis was to increase the supply of land for development. Depending on where you lived there were different priorities - stopping single family zoning, scrapping urban growth boundaries, removing expectations of planning gain and making the permit process faster and more predictable. The feature of all these campaigns was that the way to ameliorate - hopefully end - the housing crisis was to reduce regulation and do less planning. Everywhere the cry was ‘build more houses’.

The problem, however, is that YIMBYs were young(-ish), ideologically left wing and living a childless life in big cities. The simple truth about housing supply (if you increase the supply of land for building, the market will meet need and housing costs will become affordable) wasn’t good enough. Voices began to say it was more complicated and, as criticisms of YIMBYism arose, the YIMBYs backed away from their simple recognition that supply and demand is real and does largely determine values. The new urbanism stopped being about how you dropped house prices and reduced rents by building houses and began to embrace elements of trendy urbanism: a shift to talk about affordable homes not simply homes per se; an obsession with urban densification; and the embrace of environmentalism especially in the form of public transport. As a result YIMBYs stopped simply campaigning for more land supply and more homes, and instead began to talk about planned urban environments, agglomeration theory and using development to make public transport systems economically viable.

Read the whole thing.  YIMBY started out at least with a theoretical good goal - let the market function in order to increase the supply of housing.

In an odd inversion, YIMBY has become the very thing that has lead to the housing crisis in the first place - a central planning nightmare.  It involves pursuing goals incompatible with those listed at the top of this essay.  Central planners want what is ideologically appealing to them and DO NOT want residents to choose different objectives.  So we end up with:  

Imposed densification

More money dumped in mass transit which no one rides

Penalties for cars which everyone prefers

Imposed speed limits to make commutes longer (Vision Zero)

Aspirations towards walkable cities

Imposed DEI principles

Redistribution and subsidy based on race and other preferred attributes

Imposed energy restrictions in pursuit of AGW goals (Net Zero and 100% clean or renewable energy)

Rent control

Set asides (a percentage of new construction set aside for the poor)

Focus on Affordable Housing (and Housing First) rather than focusing on Housing in general

Expanded imposed environmentalism

Anti-family and more specifically anti-children policies (in effect if not explicitly acknowledged)

Higher costs of everything

Less economic growth and dynamism

Less choice/freedom

Listen to your constituents.  Observe rule of law and equality before the law.  Let markets function.  Focus on growth.  Focus on cheaper, safer better.  Everything else - jettison.  It is expensive and deceptive junk making everything worse for everybody.  

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

We found that over 3/4 of textbooks contained inaccurate statements.

From What Do Undergraduates Learn About Human Intelligence? An Analysis of Introductory Psychology Textbooks by Russell Warne, Mayson C. Astle, and Jessica C. Hill.  From the Abstract:

SCIENTIFIC Human intelligence is an important concept in psychology because it provides insights into many areas, including neurology, sociology, and health. Additionally, IQ scores can predict life outcomes in health, education, work, and socioeconomic status. Yet, most students of psychology do not have an opportunity to take a class on intelligence. To learn what psychology students typically learn about intelligence, we analyzed 29 textbooks for introductory psychology courses. We found that over 3/4 of textbooks contained inaccurate statements. The five most commonly taught topics were IQ (93.1% of books), Gardner’s multiple intelligences (93.1%), Spearman’s g (93.1%), Sternberg’s triarchic theory (89.7%), and how intelligence is measured (82.8%). We learned that most introductory psychology students are exposed to some inaccurate information about intelligence and may have the mistaken impression that nonmainstream theories (e.g., Sternberg’s or Gardner’s theories) are as empirically supported mainstream theories (such as Spearman’s g).


Night Walk, 1981 by Alex Colville

Night Walk, 1981 by Alex Colville

























Click to enlarge.

Sunday, June 23, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Shipwreck by Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky

Shipwreck by Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky




















Click to enlarge.

Saturday, June 22, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

The Arrival of the Jarrow Marchers in London, Viewed from an Interior, 1936 by Thomas Dugdale Cantrell

The Arrival of the Jarrow Marchers in London, Viewed from an Interior, 1936 by Thomas Dugdale Cantrell






























Click to enlarge.

Friday, June 21, 2024

Philanthropy - Just another form of the Daughter from California syndrome?


"Daughter from California" syndrome is a phrase used in the American medical profession to describe a situation in which a hitherto disengaged relative challenges the care a dying elderly patient is being given, or insists that the medical team pursue aggressive measures to prolong the patient's life. In California, the "Daughter from California" is known as the "Daughter from New York"; the "Daughter from Ontario" is a Canadian variant. The "Daughter from California" is often described as angry, articulate, and uninformed.

Further:

Medical professionals say that because the "Daughter from California" has been absent from the life and care of the elderly patient, they are frequently surprised by the scale of the patient's deterioration, and may have unrealistic expectations about what is medically feasible. They may feel guilty about having been absent, and may therefore feel motivated to reassert their role as an involved caregiver. In his 2015 book The Conversation: A Revolutionary Plan for End-of-Life Care, American physician Angelo Volandes ascribes this to "guilt and denial", "not necessarily what is best for the patient"

Is almost all philanthropy just a dressed up version of the Daughter from California.  Emotional insistence that the donor knows best without either knowledge or skin in the game.  Actions driven by their emotional self-tending rather than the welfare of the beneficiary.  




Emotional stability, extraversion, and conscientiousness together are highly correlated with Life Satisfaction

From Most people's life satisfaction matches their personality traits: True correlations in multitrait, multirater, multisample data by R. Mõttus, et al..

Despite numerous meta-analyses, the true extent to which life satisfaction reflects personality traits has remained unclear due to overreliance on a single method to assess both and insufficient attention to construct overlaps. Using data from three samples tested in different languages (Estonian, N = 20,886; Russian, N = 768; English, N = 600), we combined self- and informant-reports to estimate personality domains’ and nuances’ true correlations (rtrue) with general life satisfaction (LS) and satisfactions with eight life domains (DSs), while controlling for single-method and occasion-specific biases and random error, and avoiding direct construct overlaps. The associations replicated well across samples. The Big Five domains and nuances allowed predicting LS with accuracies up to rtrue ≈ .80–.90 in independent (sub)samples. Emotional stability, extraversion, and conscientiousness correlated rtrue ≈ .30–.50 with LS, while its correlations with openness and agreeableness were small. At the nuances level, low LS was most strongly associated with feeling misunderstood, unexcited, indecisive, envious, bored, used, unable, and unrewarded (rtrue ≈ .40–.70). Supporting LS’s construct validity, DSs had similar personality correlates among themselves and with LS, and an aggregated DS correlated rtrue ≈ .90 with LS. LS’s approximately 10-year stability was rtrue = .70 and its longitudinal associations with personality traits mirrored cross-sectional ones. We conclude that without common measurement limitations, most people’s life satisfaction is highly consistent with their personality traits, even across many years. So, satisfaction is usually shaped by these same relatively stable factors that shape personality traits more broadly. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Harlech Castle by Ronald Lampitt

Harlech Castle by Ronald Lampitt





























Click to enlarge.

Thursday, June 20, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Woman, Man, and Boat by Alex Colville

Woman, Man, and Boat, 1952 by Alex Colville
















Click to enlarge.

Wednesday, June 19, 2024

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

Throughout his presidency, as with all presidents, there have been videos of President Biden, stumbling upstairs, falling over cables, and the usual pratfalls to whuch anyone, particularly someone more elderly, is at risk when moving through unfamiliar environments.  Gerald Ford nearly fifty years ago was especially mocked for such accidents but he was still a relatively young sixty-one and a relatively vigorous former college football athlete.  

Still, this episode from Season 1, Episode 4 of the then new Saturday Night Live in 1975 seems strangely prescient of the material available today.  Except that you won't see SNL mocking a sitting Democratic president.

Double click to enlarge.

In the past couple of years, the volume of video of President Biden doing strange things, beyond mere pratfalls, keeps increasing by the month.  It would appear that there is a rising issue with cognitive decline as illustrated by disorientation, confusion, loss of focus, etc.  More and more footage of his wife or members of his entourage or peers intervening to address some addled action (see A deft kindness for a recent example.)

This past month has seen a cascade of video of incidents of inattention, confusion, disorientation, freezing in place, etc.  Multiple videos from many angles of each incident.  

You can read into each more or less significance as one might be inclined to do, but they each and all happened.  There they are, on video.  Lots of video.  From different sources.  From different angles.

The legacy mainstream media, as an extension of the White House administration, are working hard to hide the videos or recast them.  The White House anchors and their pet journalists have worked their way through claims of deep fakes (AI enhanced CGI-type new content of things that did not happen but can be made to seem as if they did) to misinformation (deceptive editing or unsubstantiated claims based on the video) and now are reaching to the bottom of the bag for . . . cheap fakes?   

Yep.  There is so much of the disturbing behavior that they had to come up with a new name to try and hide it.  Cheap fakes.  The deception is laughable.  
The CNN anchor is working hard to refute the representation in the video that Biden wandered aimlessly away from his peers, diverted by something happening off screen.  Critics are of course representing this as the cognitive confusion, distraction and inattention of an elderly man in decline.  The CNN anchor shows us one of the more common versions of the video which seems to show pretty much exactly that.  

But, she claims, it is a cheap fake.  

But actually, he, if you widen the frame out, you can see he was talking to one of the members of the military that was participating in that demonstration.  

AND THEN SHE DOES NOT SHOW THE SUPPOSEDLY CONFUTING VIDEO!

I have seen perhaps 3-6 versions of the incident from slightly different angles and of varying length from 30-90 seconds.  They all appear to show the same thing.  Biden losing situational awareness, getting distracted by something offscreen, breaking away from his peers in the photo-op to go talk to someone, and then being guided back to the photo-op.

The CNN anchor would have us disbelieve our lying eyes and makes the verbal claim that there is video that shows he is not distracted and wandering but she doesn't show that purported video.  It becomes very difficult to believe that they are not doing anything but straight up lying to their audience.

Perhaps there is an angle and a length of video that makes Biden's action seem natural and alert.  Perhaps.  But all you have to do is show that video.  To claim and then not show?    That is just childishly insulting.

To borrow NPR's favorite formulation, the CNN anchor has claimed without evidence that Biden's critics are using a tactic involving a new technique known as "cheap fakes" to misrepresent his cognitive condition.  She has refused to show supposedly refuting video.  She makes the unsupported argument and moves straight to a claimed "expert" to discuss

How prevalent are deep fakes and how big a problem will they be in this election?

We are deep into George Orwells' 1984 where:

To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself.

Followed by

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

The Mandarin Class, the glitterati, the legacy mainstream media, the deep state "government", the CNN anchors - they are telling us to reject the evidence of our eyes and ears, to reject the otherwise indisputable so called "cheap fakes."  Add in the profound incoherence of the Woke ideology and Critical Theory and we are well down the path of War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength.  

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

The 1% are the 15-40%

From Diversifying Society’s Leaders? The Determinants and Causal Effects of Admission to Highly Selective Private Colleges by Raj Chetty, David J. Deming & John N. Friedman.  From the Abstract:

Leadership positions in the U.S. are disproportionately held by graduates of a few highly selective private colleges. Could such colleges — which currently have many more students from high-income families than low-income families — increase the socioeconomic diversity of America’s leaders by changing their admissions policies? We use anonymized admissions data from several private and public colleges linked to income tax records and SAT and ACT test scores to study this question. Children from families in the top 1% are more than twice as likely to attend an Ivy-Plus college (Ivy League, Stanford, MIT, Duke, and Chicago) as those from middle-class families with comparable SAT/ACT scores. Two-thirds of this gap is due to higher admissions rates for students with comparable test scores from high-income families; the remaining third is due to differences in rates of application and matriculation. In contrast, children from high-income families have no admissions advantage at flagship public colleges. The high-income admissions advantage at private colleges is driven by three factors: (1) preferences for children of alumni, (2) weight placed on non-academic credentials, which tend to be stronger for students applying from private high schools that have affluent student bodies, and (3) recruitment of athletes, who tend to come from higher-income families. Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm. Ivy-Plus colleges have much smaller causal effects on average earnings, reconciling our findings with prior work that found smaller causal effects using variation in matriculation decisions conditional on admission. Adjusting for the value-added of the colleges that students attend, the three key factors that give children from high-income families an admissions advantage are uncorrelated or negatively correlated with post-college outcomes, whereas SAT/ACT scores and academic credentials are highly predictive of post-college success. We conclude that highly selective private colleges currently amplify the persistence of privilege across generations, but could diversify the socioeconomic backgrounds of America’s leaders by changing their admissions practices.

Part of the continuing war on the private sector, on merit and for central planning and authoritarian governances.

But their work does have some of the data which helps me to the answer to a question I had.  To what degree do graduates of elite universities dominate academia, arts, industry and government?  

From a different paper (Expertise in Journalism: Factors Shaping aCognitive and Culturally Elite by Jonathan Wai and Kaja Perina), we know that elite graduates constitute:

WSJ editors/writers: 50%
NYT editors/writers: 44%
Senate: 41%
Fortune 500 CEOs:41%

I would include public sector and all Most Competitive universities as elite (Georgetown University, Georgia Tech, Caltech, Rice University, etc.)  Chaty's work, with a more restrictive definition,

found that less than 1% of Americans attend the eight Ivy League schools, the University of Chicago, Duke, MIT, and Stanford, but these graduates account for 15% of those in the top 0.1% of the income distribution. 

Another reading of Chaty's work yielded:























That doesn't quite answer my question but begins to offer some parameters.  A Fermi Approximation might give us something like 

The 1% of the population who attend most competitive universities are responsible for 15-40% of the most coveted outcomes in government and enterprises.

It is Pareto's law all over again.  The 1% (by IQ, by effective behaviors, and by appropriate goal setting) take a disproportionate share of the winnings.  Not terribly surprising but upsetting to some.

Isle of Shoals - Moonlight, 1892 by Childe Hassam

Isle of Shoals - Moonlight, 1892 by Childe Hassam





















Click to enlarge.

Tuesday, June 18, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Still Life with Self Portrait by Marc Gertler (1891-1939)

Still Life with Self Portrait by Marc Gertler (1891-1939)



























Click to enlarge.

Monday, June 17, 2024

History

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

The walled garden, 1958 by Ronald Lampitt

The walled garden, 1958 by Ronald Lampitt





















Click to enlarge.

Sunday, June 16, 2024

History

 

An Insight

 

I see wonderful things

 

Offbeat Humor

 

Data Talks

 

Girl in a Picture Frame, 1641 by Rembrandt (Dutch, 1606–1669)

Girl in a Picture Frame, 1641 by Rembrandt (Dutch, 1606–1669) 































Click to enlarge.