Assorted links

by on March 20, 2013 at 12:39 pm in Uncategorized | Permalink

1. How are statistics and technology and analytics changing basketball?

2. U.S. grants first license for 3-D printed guns.

3. Sweden has night nurseries.

4. My Google+ hangout, with The Economist, on American competitiveness.  You can see my Antoine voodoo flag hanging in the background.

5. Judge Douglas Ginsburg to return to GMU faculty.

6. A short history of Cypriot prosperity.

Paquette March 20, 2013 at 12:54 pm

We have the same in the socialist Province of Quebec.
Kids sleep at night nursery & attend day centre by day while the parent sleeps.

Why bother having children?

Finch March 20, 2013 at 1:11 pm

Do I understand correctly that the parent still just gets roughly 40 hours of service a week, it can just be shifted around in time?

Paquette March 20, 2013 at 2:05 pm

They need 40 hours of night service while they work, and 40 hours of day service while they rest.

RR March 20, 2013 at 1:24 pm

6.Is a pun intended ? Cypriot prosperity only has a “short” history ??

JWatts March 20, 2013 at 1:57 pm

“A short history of Cyrpus prosperity”.

I interpret that to mean that the article is short (one page), not that the prosperity has a short history.

8 March 20, 2013 at 1:54 pm

If people did #3 with dogs, I bet there’d be outrage.

Nikki March 20, 2013 at 2:07 pm

Are there no hotels for pets where you are?

8 March 20, 2013 at 2:15 pm

I have heard people say, “why did you get a dog if you’re never around?” Give the dog to someone who wants one.

Ray Lopez March 20, 2013 at 2:14 pm

@#6 – US stock market today shrugging off Cyprus crisis. Either it is wrong or TC is wrong–I am betting with TC and liquidated some of my holdings today. We had a good run since 2009 and I’m finally taking profits (I would have taken profits earlier, but I was locked out of my account–long story–but ironically that made me more money since consistent with the Odean thesis I was prevented from selling early and thus made more money holding stocks I would have sold).

Would you take investment advice from a tenured professor who is a chess master and speed reader? Time will tell whether I did good to “listen” to TC! :-) Of course great minds think alike and I was bearish anyway–mood affiliation?

Rahul March 20, 2013 at 2:29 pm

Re: “2. U.S. grants first license for 3-D printed guns.”

Licenses and blueprints are great but what material is he planning to print it out from? Will the barrels withstand the heat and the stresses of the firing?

JWatts March 20, 2013 at 3:29 pm

The clip was the 3-D printed fabricated part.

michael March 20, 2013 at 4:08 pm

actually the lower receiver is the controversial part. That is the only piece of an AR-15 that is serialized, and legally *is* “the gun”. You can buy all the other parts untracked and unlicensed — barrels, upper receiver, magazine, stock, etc.

this guy wants to be able to sell entire guns, including lower receivers, to pay for his blueprint-distributing and accessory-printing operation.

Sigivald March 21, 2013 at 7:17 pm

Exactly – he ain’t gonna be printing barrels*, but you don’t need a Type 7 FFL (and SOT stamp) to make barrels.

You do, to manufacture (or even just assemble for resale!) guns professionally.

(* I bet you could do a plastic barrel body with a metal liner, and get decent reliability, especially in something like .22LR – and there’s a lot of utility in and demand for .22LR rifles. It’s been done with carbon fiber over steel for .223, I know…)

farmer March 20, 2013 at 10:00 pm

so far, 3d printed guns seem to have a hgih volitility. But the lowest end of reliability is destruction after 6 shots. This sounds bad if, say, you are in the US and can buy a metal one, but probably sounds pretty good if you are in, say, Damascus

Nikki March 20, 2013 at 2:37 pm

#3: A quick Google search shows that 24/7 childcare is available in other countries as well, including the UK and the US, except it’s not funded by the government.

anon March 20, 2013 at 2:40 pm

4. My Google+ hangout, with The Economist, on American competitiveness.

Hmm, Brits telling Americans what we need to face up to.

And is it just me or has The Economist become more statist in the last year or two?

BTW – Great beard TC. Need some new glasses. Get Yanna to help.

JWatts March 20, 2013 at 3:32 pm

“And is it just me or has The Economist become more statist in the last year or two?”

+1

Jamie_NYC March 20, 2013 at 10:26 pm

+1, but I would say over the last few years. I cancelled my subscription three years ago.

Charlie March 20, 2013 at 3:24 pm

The quote from the nurse “We do pay high taxes but we get something back and I think that’s a great system” embodies necessary perspective to have successful government institutions. There has to be credibility that “the people” get something back from the taxes paid.

That, and “we” vs. “us and them”.

Anon. March 20, 2013 at 7:02 pm

But the nurse will barely be paying any tax. Of course she likes it when the incidence of the tax is on others, and she receives far more than what she pays.

Anon. March 20, 2013 at 7:28 pm

#4 Turned it off in disgust when the guy asked why big companies don’t invest in “clean energy” while they pay bonuses.

Michael Cain March 20, 2013 at 7:42 pm

#1: The most interesting point in the whole thing, I thought, is down towards the bottom, where it basically says that you can exploit the refs’ unwillingness to call the defensive 3-second violation.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: