Tuesday assorted links

by on July 11, 2017 at 12:31 pm in Uncategorized | Permalink

1 Thiago Ribeiro July 11, 2017 at 12:42 pm

2 – America has come to it.

2 EverExtruder July 11, 2017 at 1:11 pm

With the exception of the two that cook (Chinese restauranteur and baker), I fail to see any of these people that “create” anything. I see a bunch of NTY auto-“hipped” millenials fantastic at doing endlessly iterative takes on something that has come before them. And oh yeah….the models, cause it’s NY.

How appropriate this shows up beneath #1 “…higher rent for a prefab social life”. These “creatives” are prefab too.

3 David Brooks July 11, 2017 at 3:41 pm

Hey what did you cucks think about my column today?

4 carlospln July 12, 2017 at 2:14 am

What’s capicollo?

An Italian tampon?

5 Rob July 11, 2017 at 12:43 pm

#1 trdl: People pay more to reduce uncertainty

6 Moelicious July 11, 2017 at 12:48 pm

6. I would prefer a Rashida Jones ETF but it’s still cool

7 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ July 11, 2017 at 12:59 pm

5. I am surprised that music ranks so low. The responses of the professors to the arrival of Honey Swanson was clearly genetically driven.

8 GoneWithTheWind July 11, 2017 at 3:22 pm

It looked to me like a list of college programs that need to be eliminated to bring back learning and seriousness to college.

9 Floccina July 11, 2017 at 1:00 pm

#1 I did some work for mobile home park in FL in the 1980’s. The guy I did the work for sold the homes, he said that you would have multi-millionaire living next to people living on just Social Security because they like the social aspects for the park.

10 John Thacker July 12, 2017 at 6:50 am

Yeah, but mobile home parks (even the one right by downtown Fairfax, VA) are very cheap, cheaper than alternatives unlike this dorm.

11 Ray Lopez July 11, 2017 at 1:05 pm

#3 – revolving doors for financial regulators: all the study seems to say is firms with financial irregularities ‘clean up their act’ and hire former government regulators, and the stock market appreciates this risk reduction effort. Fines are not any smaller for firms with ex-bureaucrats, which makes intuitive sense, as the USA is not yet the Third World.

12 Ted Craig July 11, 2017 at 3:06 pm

“Fines are not any smaller for firms with ex-bureaucrats, which makes intuitive sense, as the USA is not yet the Third World.”

Of course, it is possible they would have been even higher.

13 Ted Craig July 11, 2017 at 3:06 pm

Or maybe not “of course.” Possibly, would be better.

14 Nick_L July 11, 2017 at 5:04 pm

Isn’t it the other way around? Bureaucrats create increasingly complex legislation, thus creating compliance risk for firms. Bureaucrats then retire on generous state pensions, and then go to work for firms, helping the firms to safely interpret the complex regulations that the bureaucrats themselves created.

15 Lanigram July 12, 2017 at 10:59 am

Nick nailed it!

16 Ben Schwartz July 11, 2017 at 1:06 pm

2. “She creates sculptures out of bread and posts photos of them on Instagram, @leche_smith. “It’s a way to encourage the viewing of bread as a medium to be appreciated,” she said. Part of Ms. Smith’s process is also observing her creations as they grow stale and decompose, creating no waste.”

Art really is in the eye of the beholder…

17 MOFO July 11, 2017 at 1:20 pm

Art is what you can get away with.

18 Some Guy July 11, 2017 at 1:12 pm

#5 needs to bar graph for ‘Biology’ in the middle to show how far above/below the other fields from it.

19 Ben July 11, 2017 at 1:53 pm

Biologists as a group are going to be much more aware of the influence of genetics than the people in gender or ethnic studies. I say “awareness” because the evidence in favor of robust influence of genetics on behavior is rather decisive.


While I don’t dismiss the role of the environment, genetics have a very robust impact on temperament and even on behaviors which seem…silly, like preference for colors, where one meets their spouse, choice of hobbies etc.

But then it seems obvious when you consider human behavior and sexual selection. Having persuasive ability or a six pack is likely something that’s going to get passed on to the next generation, enjoying World of Warcraft is not.

20 Lanigram July 12, 2017 at 11:02 am

World of Warcrap was invented so the rest of us could phuck!

21 Thor July 11, 2017 at 1:26 pm



Let them do whatever they want. On their own dime.

22 Thor July 11, 2017 at 1:26 pm

Sorry, that’s #2. The pretentious New Yorkers.

23 Thanatos Savehn July 11, 2017 at 1:35 pm

#2 The Fox Racing shirt is a clue.

#5 The charitable explanation is that the ethnic studies people understood, in light of the ENCODE findings, that the genetic determinism question was fatally imprecise. The more likely explanation is that the more progressive you are (believe humans are readily malleable and you’re just the person to malle- them) the further you have to retreat from objectivity (recall that it’s been a good while since the Anthros decided that the scientific method was at odds with their goals and so they tossed it overboard) to avoid cognitive dissonance.

24 dearieme July 11, 2017 at 1:48 pm

Academic fields sorted by their endorsement of genetic causes of human behaviour: to deny such causes is to draw a huge distinction between man and all other animals. I can see why that might appeal to anti-Darwin bible-bashers, but why would it appeal to anyone else?

25 slash1001 July 11, 2017 at 1:52 pm

#2 – I reflexively hate all of these people. More than any persuasive MR blog post or trenchant libertarian or alt-right comment, this article makes me rethink my Acela-corridor progressive-oriented elitism. There has to be a lesson in there somewhere.

26 The Engineer July 11, 2017 at 1:56 pm

The lesson: If you are a real person, don’t let these trust funders warp your view of what is real and what is achievable. If you are not a trust funder, you are not going to graduate from Bard, live in Manhattan, or be a “videographer”.

27 Hazel Meade July 11, 2017 at 4:47 pm

If only we all had friends at the NY Times, eh?

28 Jacob July 11, 2017 at 2:01 pm

#2 – don’t be pessimistic for America, be pessimistic for the Times style section.

29 Ethan July 11, 2017 at 10:47 pm


30 Josh July 11, 2017 at 2:12 pm

1. Doesn’t this violate fair Housing?

31 Jack July 11, 2017 at 2:46 pm

Re 2, strikes me as an appalling collection of the self involved rather than “fine individuals,” whatever that might mean.

32 Josh July 11, 2017 at 2:59 pm

1 – This is already happening in DC and elsewhere. In DC, you have WeLive Crystal City (with a sister property in NY), in NY you have Common. The difference here I guess is the location and the historic nature of the building.

33 Falstaff July 11, 2017 at 3:40 pm

2 – Are we intended to take the Straussian interpretation of the NYT’s omphaloskeptic coverage of these ‘creatives’ that elite cuture in the West is nearing a dead end, and that you endorse Trump’s full-throated defense of the West in his Warsaw speech?

34 NYer July 11, 2017 at 4:28 pm

#2 – These are the types of people that the NYT *wants* to be important. Remember, if you’re doing something useful, “you didn’t build that.”

35 JosieB July 11, 2017 at 5:01 pm

Self-styled edgy young people. There’s some benefit to being curious about the world around you even when you are busy promoting yourself. These people may not have got that memo yet.

Robert Mapplethorpe and Patti Smith managed to pull off the young-talent-to-serious-artist transformations, but that was a long time ago. Doubt they would have cared to be anointed by the New York Times so early in their careers.

36 Mike W July 11, 2017 at 4:37 pm

5. From the paper’s abstract: “Knowing the current actual landscape of belief should help scholars avoid sterile debates and ease the way toward fruitful collaborations with neighboring disciplines.”

Yeah right, Sayre’s Law notwithstanding.

37 Hazel Meade July 11, 2017 at 4:44 pm

#1. This will work for a while and then break down when creepy single men start outnumbering the females 2-to-1.

38 JWatts July 11, 2017 at 7:15 pm

It’s basically just an upscale version of an Extended Stay Hotel.

39 mkt42 July 11, 2017 at 11:46 pm

Yes, that was my reaction. How much does an extended stay hotel cost in DC? The article says that this place is cheaper than a regular hotel; it’s presumably more expensive than an extended stay hotel but in return the customers/guests benefit from the social aspect; seems like a logical market innovation to me.

40 A B July 11, 2017 at 5:38 pm

A much better article that will also make Tyler happy:


41 Hazel Meade July 11, 2017 at 6:23 pm

#1 Also, a better name for this would be “Aspeer” 😉

42 kb July 11, 2017 at 9:51 pm

2. To be fair, this could have been written in 2007, 1997, or 1987 and wouldn’t have sounded out of place. A commenter above hit the nail on the head about the value of knowing a writer at the NYT.

43 mkt42 July 11, 2017 at 11:56 pm

5: I can’t figure out what the dark vs light shading of the bars in the graph is supposed to signify. Annoyingly, the figure in the article lacks a legend and a quick read of the article did not turn up an explanation. The dark bars have larger numbers of observations than the light bars do in general — but Pol Sci and “Women & Gender” both have 12 observations, and one of them is dark and one is light, so WTH? Maybe the Pol Sci respondents were more uniform and thus the standard error of their estimates is smaller, placing them with the other dark/large-sample-sized fields? Or do the shadings indicate something else entirely??

44 Lanigram July 12, 2017 at 1:02 pm

#2 – I am sure glad these people have NYC to go to! Wierd!

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: