Monday, August 27, 2007

Torture and Black Sites

A recent article in the New Yorker details a good deal about both the methods and the problems of torturing subjects for information. It's a bit long, but worth reading. It isn't graphic or gratuitous, yet it can be hard to stomach. I usually keep things short, but I wanted to include two passages (among many) that I found chilling.

This first is about the immediate consequences to those administering "advanced interrogation techniques."
The former officer said that the C.I.A. kept a doctor standing by during interrogations. He insisted that the method was safe and effective, but said that it could cause lasting psychic damage to the interrogators. During interrogations, the former agency official said, officers worked in teams, watching each other behind two-way mirrors. Even with this group support, the friend said, Mohammed’s interrogator “has horrible nightmares.” He went on, “When you cross over that line of darkness, it’s hard to come back. You lose your soul. You can do your best to justify it, but it’s well outside the norm. You can’t go to that dark a place without it changing you.” He said of his friend, “He’s a good guy. It really haunts him. You are inflicting something really evil and horrible on somebody.”
The following quotation is about how psychologists--in this case James Mitchell--advised and provided theoretically underpinnings for the interrogation program.
Steve Kleinman, a reserve Air Force colonel and an experienced interrogator who has known Mitchell professionally for years, said that “learned helplessness was his whole paradigm.” Mitchell, he said, “draws a diagram showing what he says is the whole cycle. It starts with isolation. Then they eliminate the prisoners’ ability to forecast the future—when their next meal is, when they can go to the bathroom. It creates dread and dependency. It was the K.G.B. model. But the K.G.B. used it to get people who had turned against the state to confess falsely. The K.G.B. wasn’t after intelligence.”

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

The Importance of Being Tyler Cowen Redux

I bought and started Tyler Cowen's Discover Your Inner Economist. My review in short: it's mediocre. My impression is that the book is short on teaching and reasoning and long on recommendations for behavior. In the parlance of writers it tells too much and shows too little. Part of this, I believe, is that Cowen himself wrote it. If he'd had a ghostwriter or a better editor, we might've gotten a book that shows us more.

My next complaint is that the book doesn't build a small set of surprises or insights. There's too much in the book for it to give one an aha. Again, a good editor would have understood that too much information is as bad as too little. The pace at which the book moves through different topics left me feeling that I hadn't really been satisfied on the previous point before being dragged to the next one.

As a final criticism, I found the book lacking in references. The endnotes were even thinner than I had feared. I know something about some of Cowen's many topics and needed some of the references to counterbalance my own views. More importantly, I really would have liked to follow some of the research that interested me.

To be fair, the book is worth more of your time than many books. But of course, most books are below average. Well, at or below the median anyway.

Iraq and the Sunk-cost Fallacy

The OpEd section of the USA Today has an editorial about the sunk-cost fallacy and the war in Iraq. First, while this editorial isn't the first place to point out our sunk-cost reasoning on this matter, I still think it's well done. Second, it does a good job of teaching us about the sunk-cost fallacy, which we all fall prey to on a regular basis.

Link to article

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

Epistemology Naturalized

Maybe I'm a bit slow, but reading this paper, I realized that economics has inherited Quine's program of naturalized epistemology.

Microeconomics and so-called neuroeconomics are both an attempt to understand human judgment (as opposed to choice) under uncertainty. Interestingly, I argued some time ago that Quine's suggestion was doomed to commit, essentially, the naturalistic fallacy.

In short, I'm becoming persuaded that I was mistaken.

The Importance of Being Tyler Cowen

Tyler Cowen is a member of the venerable economics department at George Mason. He's got a book entitled Discovering Your Inner Economist. It's due for release tomorrow (2 aug 2007). Here's a fascinating and glowing review from New York Magazine online.

There are a number of reasons that I thought this deserved a blog entry. First, the book sounds great. Second, the economics department at George Mason is a marvel--a distinguished department within a small, good--though not great--university. The department is home to two Nobel Laureates and one future Nobel Laureate, Larry Iannacconne. Finally, Tyler Cowen's Marginal Revolution Blog is a favorite of mine.

I'll include some stuff from the book in later posts.

Monday, July 30, 2007

New Gift Idea

Check out this article from DiscoveryNews.com. Only July and already I know what to get my brothers for Christmas...

Friday, July 20, 2007

Noise, not Music

Some friends and I took our kids to the Harry Potter book release party in Harvard Square tonight. There was a free concert. The opening band was ridiculous. It was a three kids between 5 and 8 years old, who couldn't play any instruments. The older boy wailed on a bass guitar and sang off key to ~3000 people in Harvard Yard. I should mention that it really gave me flashbacks to the old days at Fender's Ballroom in Long Beach, CA. (Links to video from Fender's as I remember it and a list of shows--some of which I remember going to.)

Here's a link to their website, so you can get a flavor for their "work." Unfortunately, they were even more off-key and off-lyric tonight.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

F*** Microsoft

The new "Open xml" format that Microsoft's Office 2007 uses has just stolen 40 minutes of my time. I'm adding it to the hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars Microsoft has taken from me. Like I've always said, "f*** Microsoft."

Anyway, I'm linking a useful page here, in hopes that you don't have to go through the same thing.

Is Karl Rove an Atheist? Part II

In a previous post, I quoted Christopher Hitchens saying (essentially) that Karl Rove is an atheist. In today's post, I quote President Bush (41). I know I'm crossing over from one Bush administration to another, but so have most senior advisers...

At a press conference in Chicago on August 27, 1987, Vice President George HW Bush said the following:
No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Of course, 41 wasn't just saying this out of the blue. He had been asked a provocative question by a reporter from a journal with an atheist bent. Here's the lead-up (the reporter is Robert I. Sherman).
Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?

Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.

Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?

Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
I don't want to make more of this than there might be. Specifically, I'm not interested in making some case that the Bush family are hypocrites or liars or whatever. For one thing, I have a hard time believing it to be true. The Bush family seem like perfectly normal people to me--basically good; have their own quirks; want to help people; want to be well thought of; etc. (Or maybe there's something wrong with me and/or the way I see other people.)

My view of this is that George HW Bush was being hyperbolic--and probably intentionally misleading. I don't think it's any more than what we all do on a regular basis. I know, someone more righteous than me will say, "That doesn't make it right...." But my own behavior makes me feel as if (1) it really isn't that big of a deal and (2) I certainly have no right to throw that particular stone.

For me, 41's statements are interesting because of their delicious irony, given Karl Rove's prominence in 43's administration.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

WSJ Editorial--Laffable

So, maybe I'm oversimplifying things, but this graph seems ridiculous to me.

Last week (7/13/2007) a WSJ editorial used this Laffer-curve diagram to support the claim that the US needs to decrease its corporate tax rates in order to increase its revenues. I don't want to argue the merits of this view. I merely want to point out that the data on this graph would be better with a straight-line correlation--with Norway, and possibly Luxemborg, being outliers. In which case, the point would be that the higher the taxes the greater the revenue.

Friday, July 13, 2007

Is Karl Rove an Atheist?

Just found this interview with Christopher Hitchens, who seems to say that Karl Rove is an atheist (strictly speaking, Rove seems to hold a "weak atheist" view). This, if true, would be a delicious twist on this strategist's use of and connection to the religious right. What does he think of this teeming mass of believers? And why can't anyone get an interview to find out?

Link to the interview

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Bring on the Aliens

A recent paper on immigration concludes that immigrants are much less likely than we native-born residents of the US to commit crimes. From the abstract, it appears that this study includes illegal immigrants as well--"deportation does not drive the results."

Link to the abstract

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Bush Administration vs. Science, Again

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this article and the steadily strengthening chorus of voices complaining about the Bush Administration enforcing their views--however crazy--and consolidating their power. I've got to say, though, that the White House spin is amazing.

Background: former surgeon general tells, nay testifies, to a congressional committee that Bush administration kooks pressured him and his office to make science fit policy. They went so far as to tell him to include President Bush's name three times per page in his speeches! Knowing docs, this was likely to be the single most insulting thing for Dr. Carmona.

White House Spin: It's a shame Dr. Carmona squandered his chance to represent his views.
Emily Lawrimore, a White House spokeswoman, said the surgeon general “is the leading voice for the health of all Americans.”

“It’s disappointing to us,” Ms. Lawrimore said, “if he failed to use this position to the fullest extent in advocating for policies he thought were in the best interests of the nation.”

F*** Fruit Flies

Since I'm cursing things (see, "F*** Ketchup" below), I thought I'd add fruit flies. As summer gets into full swing, we start to get fruit flies on occasion. Frankly, they don't bother me much. My wife, however, _hates_ them. So I thought a link to how to get rid of fruit flies would be useful.

Link to How to Get Rid of Fruit Flies

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Why I Have Daughters

A book (to be released this fall) explains why Heather and I have three girls and just one boy. I've wondered about this, and considered different theories of our family's gender distribution: conception dates, I'm a born sprinter, and a number of other theories.

But after all of this, it turns out that we have more girls because we're beautiful! Hooray for us.

Link to article, summarizing the book.

Best Visual Illusion, 2007

A simple illusion, comprised of two photographs of the leaning tower of Pisa side by side, won the prize for best visual illusion of 2007.

Link to the illusion

F*** Ketchup

According to research by and at University of Connecticut, we are more likely to trust avatars in Second Life whose genders are not ambiguous.

What is even more surprising in this study is that the ketchup-bottle avatar was ranked almost near the bottom in credibility. Like I've always said, "f*** ketchup."

Link to the paper