cicadafungus.bsky.social
https://twitter.com/RogueWPA
305 posts
475 followers
94 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I checked Google Maps. There's a traffic light at that cross walk and the speed limit is 30mph. One side of the street is a large public park yet someone was driving fast enough, presumably running the red, to send a man 75 feet. It's infuriating but mostly sad.
comment in response to
post
Can anyone honestly be surprised that the electorate dragged the Democratic party into the bathroom and gave it a swirlie?
comment in response to
post
Some of the other speakers, most notably Lukanioff, had data on who is doing the censorship over time. One of the speakers, forget who, noted that some of the fights are libs vs leftists, not left vs right.
comment in response to
post
Palestinian advocacy is a tricky issue. It has been a longstanding issue with academic freedom problems and there has been a big spike, in last year and change, but much of the spike was legitimate time/place/manner violations.
comment in response to
post
Of course. But not much that changes the basic (Hayek 1945) intuition that neither you, nor I nor the government of CA has any idea who has a spare bedroom that she might decide to rent if the price is right. But certainly many want to hear they must interfere with adjustment.
comment in response to
post
The elasticity is always higher than we think. People will come up with all sorts of solutions if the price is right--we do not know which ones. If you fix it, they will stay out. These first order adjustments are enormous by comparison with the kind of mechanisms in the paper.
comment in response to
post
I don't think he'd mind me saying after the talk, we had a pleasant email conversation about under what circumstances restricted field dynamics will be so strong as to serve as scope conditions for the positive part of his argument. Smart, thoughtful, and temperate guy.
comment in response to
post
* groupthink means there's a lot of low hanging fruit out there.
* Hacks will like you when you say things that fit their ideology and the same people will attack you when you say things they dislike. Maintain your integrity.
* He, Burgess,himself is untenured, so what's your excuse?
comment in response to
post
* Threats to academic freedom take different forms from left and right. Both suck, but at present, left censoriousness/group groupthink is the bigger issue
* This means right wing heterodoxy is undersupplied, and its value should rise in long-run
* Citations are right-skewed so risk aversion is dumb
comment in response to
post
Here is the TLDR:
* Some academics (NTTs, people on the market, those going up for tenure with marginal records) face material career risks but those who do not still tend to worry about vague reputational risks. These people need to grow a spine.
comment in response to
post
It wasn't remotely "autoethnography" although he did have some personal examples of how hacks will praise you when they like your findings and attack your character when they don't. He combined bibliometrics, survey data, incident data, and econ theory. It was a sensible talk.
comment in response to
post
It's a screenshot from the HxA conference at USC this weekend. I was there and Burgess gave a good talk, the upshot of which was *not* "your enemies must be destroyed" but "you should show a little backbone"
comment in response to
post
I was at the talk. Burgess noted that he is an assistant professor. IIRC, he suggested three groups actually are vulnerable: NTT, on the market, and up for tenure but with a marginal record.
It was a thoughtful talk that basically argued the chilling effect is mostly irrational.
comment in response to
post
See also the street grid resembling a basketball court between Venice and Washington and Inglewood and Mclaughlin
comment in response to
post
Naked and rationally maximizing
comment in response to
post
You can just mute Lorenz
comment in response to
post
And yes, it feels good to use the past tense.
comment in response to
post
We have all had overly optimistic "i have recently begun a new project which i expect to submit by my next review period" lines in our self-reviews
comment in response to
post
I agree that relative to the market, a democratic process would be less likely to have redundant lines between A and B but add it would be more likely to have lines to C and D which are too low volume to justify service. Neither is equivalent to a hypothetical omniscient benevolent dictator.
comment in response to
post
What in your experience of democracy leads you to believe that democratic institutions focus on "fewer but better" and, for instance, tell Amtrak to close unprofitable locations? Historically, canals supported by state legislatures had a lot of gratuitous spur lines.
comment in response to
post
Burrata kneydlach would be treyf
comment in response to
post
So my suggestion is to not treat the data as "how voters decide" but "how voters talk about their votes" with the implicit subtext of "what reasons feel legitimate" and then validate that with vignette experiments testing how audiences judge different rationales.
comment in response to
post
To the contrary, it's
comment in response to
post
I am highly skeptical that voters swung towards Trump (who had Kid Rock perform at the convention) because they felt condescended to by too many celebrity appearances at Harris rallies rather than all the survey evidence that it was a) inflation & b) voters don't trust Dems on immigration, etc.