پیوندهای متنوع روز دوشنبه

Translating…

Comments

#5 – So this study concludes the following:

a) Most Tinder matches never amount to anything.
b) “The primary individual difference predictor of achieving casual sex using Tinder is unrestricted sociosexual attitudes” – in other words, if you’re loose you’ll get laid more often than have a longer-term relationship.

Not exactly mind-blowing results.

My thoughts exactly. But I am also puzzled by Tyler’s link title. Not efficient compared to what. There was no control group. “Merely 20% of the Tinder users in the sample have had one-night stands following Tinder use.” Well, how many would have had one-night stands in the absence of Tinder?

Respond

Tinder was once a hookup app. Now it is mostly a dating app, just like all of the others. Why the change? Is it because it is attracting a different kind of woman, or is it because the “secret is out” and it now hurts a woman’s status in the eyes of her friends if she uses this app to hook up?

Tinder is a hook-up for the top 10-20% of the guys most of the time, and 80% of the women whenever they feel like hooking up. For the rest of the guys, it’s just a kill your self-esteem app.

Respond
Respond
Respond

1. If the protests bring the regime down, President Trump should get the Nobel Peace Prize.

Wouldn’t we need to wait for the aftermath to see if anything like peace was the result? Are you nuts?

Serious question for which I am sure there are some good answers: Why should I want the Iranian regime to fall?

Because human rights are good.

Respond

“Why should I want the Iranian regime to fall?”

Are you an American?

Then:

Embassy Hostage taking
Khobar Towers
1998 Kenya and Tanzania embassy bombings
USS Cole
IEDs in Iraq

Again, is the aftermath one that gets anybody there? Does that matter? Why doesn’t it? Do you think there’s a straight line from here to bunnies and rainbows?

By that logic, we also shouldn’t have hoped that the Berlin Wall fell. Who knew what would emerge in the aftermath? In fact, why shouldn’t we hope that democracy in the West falls? After all, who knows what chaos might emerge in the future if voters choose the wrong leaders? Better to go with a totalitarian regime where we *know* the result will be widespread misery. Why risk being disappointed by not realizing a potential for better?

Respond
Respond

The hostage crisis was forty years ago. How long are we going to hold that grudge? We’re best buds with Vietnam these days which killed a lot more Americans and gave us a much worse defeat than Iran.

Respond
Respond

Having the largest state sponsor of terrorism not getting nukes is good.

Respond
Respond
Respond
Respond

5. We learned this morning that tech isn’t producing much in the way of scientific progress now we learn that tech can’t even produce a one-night stand. Tech, what’s it good for.

Tech can only lead the horse to water…

Respond
Respond

1. Cowen already blogged on the motivation for protests that seem to be happening everywhere. I suspect the motivation is primarily economic, from Spain to Chile to Hong Kong to Iraq to Iran to India (today), and I suspect that economic inequality plays a big part, whether the result of market forces or corruption.

Economics does not seem like the primary motivation in Hong Kong. I’ve been following the protest closely all year.

It i everywhere sovereign debt and the pressure it imposes. Especialy Hong Kong which is a financial capital and being dragged into the mian land debt service problems. I* include in the debt category, the long time land owners in Hong Kong who precede the main nland government. Lebanon is debt, debt, debt; the government is broke. The Iranian oil price increase has the underlying cause, making sovereign debt and obligations sustainable. Debt, corruption associated with government obligations and it all ultimately presses down on the consumer, many of whom never in their life voted for any of that stuff.

World wide debt repudiation, all at once. How about that!

Respond
Respond

This could be the biggest ‘story’ since the fall of the Soviet Union. And, again academia and the media are missing it.

It’s not economics in Hong Kong and likely other motives play in the other countries.

Iranian gasoline prices are too high because of the international sanctions versus the repressive, terrorist-supporting regime. French ‘yellow vests’ protests may be sparked by excessive gas/necessities prices because of [among many factors] the welfare state, open immigration, the elites’ buy-in to the climate hoax. Same for Chile, et al.

But, let’s decide that it is only economics. Who has been interfering/intervening in markets for the past hundred-plus years? The elites.

This may be a global, populist revolt against failed [take your pick] do-gooders doing damage, elites, the new nobility, rulers, technocrats, troublemakers.

‘Iranian gasoline prices are too high’

No, Iranian gas prices are far too low, even today. An Iranian used to pay around 65 cents a gallon, and now the price has doubled – to $1.30.

Respond

I’m sure America’s crack intelligence agencies are all over this.

Just like they predicted the fall of The Soviet Union, The Berlin Wall, 9/11 and The Concentration Camps in the PRC.

… wait …. what?

Too busy trying to overturn an election here in the States instead of following what is going on in all those S-hole countries.

Someone help me!

I can’t decide which agency has the longer list of failures: The CIA or The Fed.

They not only missed the decline and fall of the USSR, the unimaginative, perpetually-wrong media and intelligence and state department elites opposed every US action that hastened it.

Respond
Respond
Respond
Respond

#3. David Foster Wallace’s final, unfinished novel, The Pale King, goes into quite a bit of detail about how IRS optimizes enforcement of tax laws, if you can believe it. Plus he’s a great writer.

Respond

Primarily economic? A few pesos? That’s absurd. Nihilism does not have economic concerns.

Respond

#5. Not surprising. Nobody really understands or can predict who is going to be attracted to who. The online dating apps all assume that people with similar interests and answers to questions will “match”. But in real life people often find they are attracted to people who are different than themselves, and it’s hard to predict or articulate who you are going to be attracted to. There’s an ineffable “chemistry” to human interaction that the dating apps fail to account for. I’m not sure there is even a science of human sexual attraction that would be able to predict which people are going to be attract to eachother. If there is, I don’t think the dating apps are using it.

Actually, studies consistently find that the happiest couples with the longest-duration relationships have a lot in common. My suspicion is that people who end up in this kind of relationship aren’t people who tend to use Tinder to find their soul mates.

Apropos of nothing, I used to be impressed by how many of my good friend’s Tinder dates resulted in one-night stands. Then one day I got a look at some of these ladies’ profiles and realized he simply wasn’t setting the bar very high. He’s married now, and not to someone he met on Tinder.

I tried the online dating apps for a while, but I found that the people I met that way never turned out to be what I’d imagined. Or they were totally exactly what I imagined and thus boring. Whether I actually met someone I was interest in was essentially just as random as real life, and involved a lot more work than just hanging out with friends.
Just go to parties and do things you like, IMO. You’re just as likely to meet someone that way and it’s more fun than having a series of awkward first dates.

Agreed. Always better to simply expand your circle of IRL friends than to rely on apps and internet dating.

It’s not always easy to expand your circle of friends. Sure, if you’re at university in a big city it probably is, but a lot of single people are the wrong side of thirty and live in small towns in anti-social countries like Denmark or Finland where people are averse to making new friends.

Here’s a tip: Rather than complaining about what’s hard and what’s easy, you just take simple steps to make your life better. No one piece of advice can solve every imaginable problem, but if yourespond to advicewith a laundry list of reasons why it’ll never work for poor, pitiful you, then you will simply never be happy.

Maybe you live in a small town and already know everyone. Maybe the few people you don’t know are Danish jerks who don’t want to be friends. All this makes you is the exception that proves the rule.

Firstly, I wasn’t talking about myself so cool your jets, nobody was claiming to be poor or pitiful.
I was responding to the comment advocating expanding ones circle of friends instead of using Tinder. For a substantial group of people Tinder is the far better option of the two. Of course, they’re not mutually exclusive, but I thought it was worth pointing out that not everyone is twenty years old living in a city.

Respond
Respond

There are online apps that help with making friends like meetup.com.

I’ve found that meetup groups are actually better for meeting potential mates because your meeting in an informal atmosphere without any expectations or trappings of courtship. That way you can get to know people who are interested in the same stuff and decide if you are interested in them as a potential partner, before you actually have a date. i.e. your first date doesn’t have to be blind. Meetup is a great way to have “friends” to do stuff with even if you don’t have any actual friends.

Respond
Respond
Respond
Respond
Respond

You make the mistake in assume it’s Tinder’s goal to match you. It’s not. It’s Tinder’s goal to maximize user engagement. Matches are a side effect.

The algorithms in the app are designed to generate a ‘trickle’ of matches, to occasionally dangle the totally-out-of-your-league profile in front of you in order to make you want to continue using the app. Alternatively, you can pay them money to see your potential matches in a separate queue, but they *still* can control the rate at which you get matches, and what type of people you might be matched with.

They control both who sees your profile and whose profiles you see, and they know enough about people’s behavior to predict whether or not they’re likely to swipe right. Almost nothing about the apps are really that random or uncertain — just what the app is optimizing for (user engagement) isn’t totally in line with what the user is seeking (matches).

Good point. If you wind up in a long-term relationship you’re going to stop using the app. It actually works in their favor that the dating apps produce “matches” that sound interesting to you, but don’t actually work out in the long run.

Respond
Respond
Respond

#1. Iran only has two refineries… I believe the second came online earlier this year… capable of producing gasoline. Up until now the majority of their gas has actually been imported. Add in subsidised consumption by the regime and there is not a lot of wiggle room on price or availability at the consumer level.

ironically this is an issue for most OPEC members.

That might explain the persistence of beliefs that the Americans are there to “steal their oil”. The average person isn’t going to necessarily understand that raw crude has to be refined to make gasoline and it’s not the lack of availability of oil that is restricting the supply of gas.

That probably plays into it for sure.

I was actually watching for an “unscheduled outage” at the main Iranian refinery that produces gasoline after the Saudi attacks. This has looked like an easy way to inflict pain on Tehran for a few years now.

Respond
Respond
Respond

5. This lowers my confidence in you as a reliable filter for social science. Read the abstract for tone and content. What’s the control?

Respond

3. Natasha Sarin and Larry Summers tax reform plan.

I take this personally.

Respond

5. My own personal view,as a mid 30’s male is that it is all a function of how much work you want to put into it.

I’ve been single for the past year. I’ve gone on at least 40 tinder and bumble dates since then. I’ve had sex or a major hook up on the first date at least 6 times. I’ve then had sex with subsequent dates on the 2nd or 3rd date at least another 6 times.

Of the 40 or so dates that I went on, I purposely cut out of the first date early out of lack of interest at least 10 times. Another ten chicks I was physically attracted to but was too busy with other dates to withstand pursuing sex.

I’d say of the 40 plus dates, only two of the women did not want to go back out with me or pursue sex with me.

In short, I’m 6’ tall, have good looks and make good money. I’m absolutely the worst kind of person for women to meet on those apps because I’m basically in an equilibrium where long term commitment forces me to give up sex with other really good looking women.

If your an attractive male with height(so freaking important to women) and status you can basically chase sex as much as you want with strong results.

At some point I know my time on the wheel will have to come to an end because let’s face it, it’s expensive, there’s too much alcohol involved, and it’s ultimately not fulfilling in the long run.

What city do you live in? That can make a difference too.

Respond
Respond

#2: Potentially fun but the website seems to lack documentation and a quick google search didn’t turn up any relevant hits, so I don’t know what the aims and domain of the data are.

It invites the user to type a title or “id” (whatever id that may be); my choice might very well be the plurality choice of economists: “The Problem of Social Cost”. But I got no hits when I typed that in.

Based on the sample sitting on the website, it may include citations only from … biology, or biomedicine, or neuroscience?

So I don’t know what or who this website is for. Not for economists evidently.

Also, how does it differ from using the Science Citation Index, or Google Scholar, or the other tools that are around these days? From the title, it restricts its hits to review articles and meta-analysis papers. Which I guess is something, but is not the type of literature search that I do or envision myself doing.

Respond

#4: Perhaps this is predictable: Portland, OR has a store that sells typewriters.
https://acetypewriter.com/

And a store that sells only lightbulbs, Sunlan Lighting.

Respond

#3) What would have to be true for increased enforcement to make sense as a means for raising revenue? If the tax gap is fairly predictable, as Summers and Sarin say it is, then political actors (voters, Congress, lobbying groups, etc.) have already set tax rates in expectation of the gap and, thus, the purpose of enforcement would be to lower tax rates to maintain revenue neutrality. Raising revenue would result in higher (collected) taxes than politically intentioned/authorized. Also, if tax rate increases are not offset by increases in the tax gap, then why not just to that, which is free, instead of paying for increased enforcement? If tax rate increases are likely to be offset by increasing the tax gap, then why do progressives keep trying to increase rates and keep opposing cuts in rates? So, it seems like the world in which we wouldn’t pair increased enforcement with tax cuts is one in which tax rate changes are *not* contentious politically and people are perpetually surprised that the tax gap persists and is not zero on average.

Finally, if political actors are continually surprised that the tax gap is positive, then that suggests we need to cut spending from current levels because budgets are based on unreasonably high revenue expectations.

Respond
Respond

 

Read More