Marbury

nsfw

I would like to apologise in advance for the image that is just about to pop into your head. This is from an NYT piece on the White House personal trainer, Cornell McCllelan:

“Cornell knew better what was going on in the White House than most people who worked in the White House,” said Lawrence H. Summers, who recently left as one of Mr. Obama’s top economic advisers. “Who’s up, who’s down, which way things are moving. Everybody talked to Cornell.”

Some of the best gossip involved Mr. Summers himself. One day, he forgot his exercise gear and began working out — shirtless — on the treadmill. A frantic e-mail quickly made its way to the West Wing: did someone — anyone — have a shirt Mr. Summers could borrow? Mr. Strautmanis, whose office is nearby, ran one over, but the incident quickly became White House lore.

Now I'm going to get loads of hits from the millions of people searching Google for 'Larry Summers, shirtless'.

chef-broth ratios

A murmuration of starlings.

The Economist reports on a fascinating study of crowd behaviour in animals, otherwise known as swarming: the way in which groups of animals manage to order themselves in ways that further their survival as a group, even when most or all of them have only an extremely partial view of what's going on. As individuals, ants are pretty stupid, but as a group they find paths to food and build sophisticated structures (although see here for what happens when ants go bad).

Are there leaders in such groups?  A professor at Princeton has been modelling the behaviour of shoals of fish, and has found that to a certain extent, yes there are. But the the leadership tasks are passed around with great efficiency and - crucially - there are only a few leaders at any one time:

He posited that how they swim will depend on each individual’s competing tendencies to stick close to the others (and thus move in the same direction as them) while not actually getting too close to any particular other fish. It turns out that by fiddling with these tendencies, a virtual shoal can be made to swirl spontaneously in a circle, just like some real species do.

That is a start. But real shoals do not exist to swim in circles. Their purpose is to help their members eat and avoid being eaten. At any one time, however, only some individuals know about—and can thus react to—food and threats. Dr Couzin therefore wanted to find out how such temporary leaders influence the behaviour of the rest. At any one time, however, only some individuals know about—and can thus react to—food and threats. Dr Couzin therefore wanted to find out how such temporary leaders influence the behaviour of the rest.

He discovered that leadership is extremely efficient. The larger a shoal is, the smaller is the proportion of it that needs to know what is actually going on for it to feed and avoid predation effectively. Indeed, having too many leaders with conflicting opinions results in confusion. At least, that is true in the model. He is now testing it in reality.

The next step is to model the behaviour of humans in crowds. Then, presumably, Congress.

Link to Economist article.

the anti-Pad

Over at Slate there's an interesting debate (generated by this article) about whether the iPad is a glorious lifechanging invention, or an overpriced functionless toy. Me, I'm still agnostic. I think it probably is overhyped and overpriced, and frustrating in its limitations, particularly when it comes to manipulating or creating content of any kind. But hmm it's so shiny and cute and nice to touch.

Anyway, I liked this response from a Slate reader:

I just don't need any more distracting toys anymore. In fact, what I need is the exact opposite. I need to be working, and when I'm at work, I need to feel busy and actually BE busy. When I'm not, I need to be outside, getting some fresh air, meeting with real people and having real conversations that are more demanding, or interacting meaningfully with my still young children. I need to cook and eat real dinners, at a table like in my kitchen or dining room, watch a little TV again without tuning out with my laptop and half paying attention and forgetting what I was even watching. If I go out to a restaurant, I don't want to check scores compulsively like a smoker waiting for that next cigarette break, and if I'm at a movie, I don't want to FB how good/bad it is WHILE I'm in the theater. Sheesh, what I really need to do is unplug and live a little (ok, a lot) more in the nondigital world. 

What I need is an antiPad.

Oh and here's Charlie Brooker on Macs and 'that syncing feeling':

Plug your old Apple iPhone into your new Apple Macbook for the first time, and because the two machines haven't been formally introduced, iTunes will babble about "syncing" one with the other. It claims it simply MUST delete everything from the old phone before putting any new stuff on it. Why? It won't tell you. It'll just cheerfully ask if you want to proceed, like an upbeat robot butler that can't understand why you're crying...

...They won't even give you a power lead long enough to use your phone while it's on charge, so if it rings you have to crawl around on your hands and knees, like a dog.

should americans worry about what chen knows?

PHOTOILLUSTRATION; JUSTIN GUARIGLIA/EIGHTFISH; Foreign Policy.

1961 saw the U.S publication of a book by Arthur S. Trace Jr. called What Ivan Knows That Johnny Doesn't. It argued that American schoolchildren were falling behind their Soviet counterparts and unless the country's education system was overhauled, American would be overtaken.

Today, similar fears are expressed about America falling behind China - fears that are bound up, of course, with anxieties about America's decline as a global power. It's certainly true that China and other Asian countries are catching up on some measures surpassing the US. But as Ben Wildavsky argues in this excellent article for Foreign Policy, there is as little need to panic now as there was in 1961.

It doesn't matter, says Wildavsky, if America is falling behind in relative terms. That's inevitable, given how far ahead they were in the first place. America's students have always been somewhere near the middle of the global (industrialised) pack anyway; it's a myth that America 'used to lead the world' in educational standards. What matters is that the education of America's children isn't declining or stagnating in absolute terms - and so far that's not happening.

Similarly, although the share of international students attending America's universities has fallen, this is mainly a function of increased global mobility generally: there are just more students choosing to study in a country other than their own. 

The FP piece chimes with James Fallows's lengthy but very readable investigation of the bigger question of whether America is in decline or not, from last year. Fallows - who lived in China for years - concluded that rumours of the end of America's economic and military dominance were exaggerated. It retains big advantages over China, India and other emerging powers, the most important of which is its openness as a society, and therefore its ability to attract and assimilate talented people from around the world. This was one of the most striking paragraphs from his piece:

Each fall, Shanghai’s Jiao Tong University produces a ranking of the world’s universities based mainly on scientific-research papers. All such rankings are imprecise, but the pattern is clear. Of the top 20 on the latest list, 17 are American, the exceptions being Cambridge (No. 4), Oxford (No. 10), and the University of Tokyo (No. 20). Of the top 100 in the world, zero are Chinese.

Of course, there are significant problems with America's education system that need to be solved. But we can put aside the idea that it's in a race with China. Education, as Wildavsky points out, is not a zero-sum game in which every winner creates a loser. Neither is global economics. The more brilliant people China educates, the more innovations it produces, the more wealth is generated for everyone in the global economy, including Americans.

Link to Foreign Policy article.

Link to Fallows.

the nocturnal urinal

An elegant solution to an unpleasant problem:

In the UK, a beer-based drinking culture generates a lot of peeing in public areas. This solution, now installed in various British locales, is a urinal that rises out of the ground at night but then disappears in early morning.

Never seen one myself. But maybe I don't get out enough. This is from a rather excellent slideshow (yes, another one) about toilets.

yes he (thinks he) can

This is the logo for Jon Huntsman's unlikely presidential campaign. At least, it's the logo for his fundraising vehicle, or Political Action Committee (PAC). The website doesn't actually name him - in advertising terms, it's a teaser. The logo's 'H' stands for 'Horizon' (and 'Hope'?) though it will no doubt stand for his surname before too long.

The site is a quite extraordinary production, actually. Tastefully designed, high-minded, poetic, it prepares the ground for Huntsman to run as an anti-politician, who floats above the grubby hurly-burly. Politicians are 'unusual animals' who are often 'driven by ego alone' and make too many easy promises. 'Maybe someday...' there will be a different kind of leader, one who is fluent in Mandarin and looks a bit like Niles Crane. OK I made the last bit up.

Does this hopey-changey rhetoric remind you of anything?

I mean, if you were responsible for creating this site and you were told to 'do me an Obama '08', this is pretty much what you'd come up with, isn't it?

Looks like Huntsman wants to run as an Obama who is also an anti-Obama: a transformational figure of the centre-right. Huckabee looks unlikely to run and Thune has counted himself out. Palin may figure but will be a sideshow. If Huntsman's only serious competitors are Romney and Pawlenty - neither of whom inspire, and both of whom are very conventional politicians - then this isn't a bad strategy.

spot the dictator

Or the Elvis fan. This is from a brilliantly curated and annotated slide show of Gadaffi's most remarkable outfits, over at Vanity Fair.

issues w/various countries

A vintage Rumsfeld memo, released in concert with his book (via The Atlantic).

why you don't go to the gym enough

Quite a lot of psychology studies these days revolve around a fundamental question: in what ways do our present and future selves conflict, or get each other wrong? Here's a fairly trivial but interesting example that most people will recognise.

You know you ought to go for that run or swim. But when you think about actually getting on the treadmill or diving into the pool, your heart sinks. But then you somehow summon up the will to go through with it - and guess what, you enjoy it; at least, when you leave the gym you're glad you went. Other times, of course, the heartsinking feeling is enough to put you off going. In the latter case, your present self, with its rather gloomy - and unreliable - view of the future, has won out over your future self. Psychologists call this 'forecasting myopia'. Here's a recent study of its effects, and of some mitigating strategies:

Participants significantly underestimated how much they would enjoy exercising; this affective forecasting bias emerged consistently for group and individual exercise, and moderate and challenging workouts spanning a wide range of forms, from yoga and Pilates to aerobic exercise and weight training. We argue that this bias stems largely from forecasting myopia, whereby people place disproportionate weight on the beginning of a workout, which is typically unpleasant. We demonstrate that forecasting myopia can be harnessed or overcome, thereby increasing expected enjoyment of exercise. Finally, Study 4 provides evidence for a mediational model, in which improving people's expected enjoyment of exercise leads to increased intention to exercise. Conclusion: People underestimate how much they enjoy exercise because of a myopic focus on the unpleasant beginning of exercise, but this tendency can be harnessed or overcome, potentially increasing intention to exercise.

I haven't read the paper (it's behind a paywall). I'd be interested in the tactics they identified as useful ways to get around this tendency. Just being aware that this is how our minds tend to work is actually a good start, I would have thought.

gadhafi's long war

The Wall Street Journal has a great overview of events in Libya (h/t The Browser). It contains a recap of recent history which ought to remind us that Gadhafi (I'm going with the WSJ spelling today) probably doesn't see things anything like the same way we see them.

We see the tide of history sweeping across the region, and ask why on earth the dictator and his supporters don't realise the inevitability of their demise. But to Gadhafi, this is one in a succession of brutal battles in which he has so far come out on top:

The current unrest traces its roots back to an uprising by student Islamists in the 1990s that Col. Gadhafi viciously suppressed. He deployed the army's feared second brigade, commanded by one of his sons, Khamis, against the students. Many who weren't killed in the mayhem were thrown in jail, many of them in Tripoli's Abu Salim Prison.

About a year later, in 1996, prisoners at Abu Salim, many of whom were from Benghazi, launched an uprising. A regime bombardment left 1,200 prisoners dead, according to Human Rights Watch. The "Abu Salim massacre" has since been a rallying cry for activists and opposition in Libya and a thorn in the regime's side.

Gadhafi has been at war with his people for decades. He won't be calling quits any time soon.

the man who isn't there

William Hague has been on TV a lot recently. He's always fluent and in command of his brief. But whenever I watch him I get the uncanny sense that I'm watching somebody in a movie playing the part of a politician, rather than being a politician. For a man in the midst of the most exciting global events for decades, he seems oddly unengaged, as if going through well-practiced motions by rote.

What is it with Hague? He has all the talents: intellect, nous, confidence, speaking skills. But it's never been clear to me, in either of his major political incarnations (leadership and post-leadership) that there is much behind the gestures, political or physical. There's something oddly insubstantial about him. I don't have a strong sense of his political soul - of why he's in politics, other than to be a politician. He's often talked about as a torch-bearer of the right in Cameron's cabinet. But I suspect that the right are projecting on to a blank screen. 

The Spectator's James Forsyth, broadly supportive of this government, has written a very interesting piece on its distinct lack of a real foreign policy, and in particular the void at the top of the Foreign Office:

William Hague should be ideally equipped to develop (a strategic foreign policy). He has a formidable intellect and an extensive knowledge of the world. But since his return to frontline politics in 2005, he has not been the figure he once was. He is proof that a politician without ambition is one devoid of energy or drive.

Hague’s colleagues speculate that he wanted to be shadow foreign secretary rather than shadow chancellor because that allowed him the time to concentrate on his outside interests. In government, he has continued to disappoint his admirers. Even loyalists inside No. 10 wonder why Hague has made no impact at the Foreign Office. Tory MPs have been left wondering why the fight has gone out of him. One Cabinet member says that it is as if someone has ‘drained the battery fluid’ from the energetic Eurosceptic they once rallied around.

In the bars of Westminster, they say he was traumatised by his time as Tory leader. Another rumour is that Hague’s faith in his own judgment has been shaken by Iraq, a war he supported with almost unparalleled vigour from the back benches. Others just think that he’s fallen out of love with politics... 

Ever since that speech to conference as a teenager, Hague's life has been politics. Now that he's in one of the great offices of state, he seems to be wondering, a la David Byrne, 'What am I doing here?'

UPDATE: It's slightly unseemly, is it not, for the Foreign Secretary to repeat some rumour he's read on the internet about Gaddafi fleeing to Venezuela - only to be proved wrong almost immediately?

 

the gorby show

This is so weird:

Will he be singing songs? Maybe a bossanova cover of the Style Council's 'Walls Comes Tumbling Down'? Or delivering some stand-up riffs? ('Then Ronnie says to me, 'Are you pleased to see me or is that a Pershing in your pocket?')

mitt takes a hit

From the New York Post:

Likely Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been out on the pre-campaign trail this month saying he is the man to get Americans back to work, despite a spotty jobs record while on Wall Street.

However, the former private equity firm chief's fortune -- which has funded his political ambitions from the Massachusetts statehouse to his unsuccessful run for the White House in 2008 -- was made on the backs of companies that ultimately collapsed, putting thousands of ordinary Americans out on the street.

This is a meaty story based on research into the activities of the venture capital company founded by Romney, Bain Capital:

* Bain in 1988 put $5 million down to buy Stage Stores, and in the mid-'90s took it public, collecting $100 million from stock offerings. Stage filed for bankruptcy in 2000.

* Bain in 1992 bought American Pad & Paper (AMPAD), investing $5 million, and collected $100 million from dividends. The business filed for bankruptcy in 2000.

* Bain in 1993 invested $60 million when buying GS Industries, and received $65 million from dividends. GS filed for bankruptcy in 2001.

* Bain in 1997 invested $46 million when buying Details, and made $93 million from stock offerings. The company filed for bankruptcy in 2003.

Not a good look. Whatever happens now, Romney's business backstory - which he has put at the heart of his political identity - will be as much a liability as it is a strength.

Strange that no-one did the digging on this last time around. That the story comes from the Murdoch-owned Post is an ominous sign in itself for Romney.

some corner of a foreign field

I love the visual device employed here; the juddering car and the splayed legs.

The sign is from 'a remote location' in Clear Water Bay in Hong Kong. It was brought to my attention by one of Language Log's erudite posters, who is new to the whole concept of 'dogging' and understandably bemused by it. Of course, if he'd read Sarah Lyall's excellent dispatch on this very subject, he would recognise dogging as a British cultural innovation - one which we're now, apparently, exporting.

I'm assuming the remote location is a cemetery, or that it's near one, because the sign (says LL) reads:

In front of the ancestors' graves,
Do not wildly steal pleasure;
Ghosts and spirits together witness,
The evil consequences will be born by yourself.

I suspect, however, that for the perpetrators, being watched - even (especially?) by ghosts and spirits - is very much part of the deal.

Via Language Log.

defence cuts won't solve america's deficit

You sometimes hear it said that if America could get to grips with its bloated defence budget, it could solve its looming debt crisis. But as this chart from Paul Krugman shows, defence spending as a proportion of total federal spending has actually been in long-term decline. Getting out of Afghanistan and injecting some prudence into the military-industrial-political complex/spending machine are certainly necessary. But they'll only address a part of a much bigger issue.

The real problem, of course, is how to find a politically palatable way to cut entitlement spending (Medicare and Medicaid etc). I would say they should ask David Cameron but it's not at all clear that he's found a way of cutting benefits and remaining electorally viable.

Link to Krugman.