Category: Education

How should you talk to ChatGPT? A User’s Guide

That is the topic of my Bloomberg column, it will make ChatGPT work better for you.  Here is one bit:

Ask ChatGPT “What is Marxism?” for example, and you will get a passable answer, probably no better than what you would get by using Wikipedia or Google. Instead, make the question more specific: “Which were the important developments in French Marxism in the second half of the 19th century?” ChatGPT will do much better — and it’s also the kind of question it’s hard to use Google and Wikipedia to answer.

ChatGPT will do better yet if you ask it sequential questions along an evolving line of inquiry. Ask it about the specific French Marxists it cites, what they did, and how they differed from their German counterparts. Keep on going.

ChatGPT does especially well at “compare and contrast.” In essence, ChatGPT needs you to point it in the right direction. A finely honed question gives it more fixed points of reference. You need to set the mood and tone and intellectual level of your question, depending on the kind of answer you want. It’s not unlike trying to steer the conversation at a dinner party. Or, to use another analogy, think of working with ChatGPT as like training a dog.

Another way to hone ChatGPT’s capabilities is to ask it for responses in the voice of a third person. Ask, “What are the costs of inflation?” and you might get answers that aren’t wrong exactly, but neither are they impressive. Instead, try this: “What are the costs of inflation? Please answer using the ideas of Milton Friedman.”

By mentioning Friedman, you have pointed it to a more intelligent corner of the ideas universe. If Friedman isn’t the right guide for you, choose another economist (don’t forget yours truly!). Better yet, ask it to compare and contrast the views of two economists.

There are further tips at the link.  Which are the tips that you know?

My Conversation with Glenn Loury

Moving throughout, here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is part of the summary:

Economist and public intellectual Glenn Loury joined Tyler to discuss the soundtrack of Glenn’s life, Glenn’s early career in theoretical economics, his favorite Thomas Schelling story, the best place to raise a family in the US, the seeming worsening mental health issues among undergraduates, what he learned about himself while writing his memoir, what his right-wing fans most misunderstand about race, the key difference he has with John McWhorter, his evolving relationship with Christianity, the lasting influence of his late wife, his favorite novels and movies, how well he thinks he will face death, and more.

Here is one excerpt:

COWEN: What’s your favorite Thomas Schelling story?

LOURY: [laughs] This is a story about me as much as it is about Tom Schelling. The year is 1984. I’ve been at Harvard for two years. I’m appointed a professor of economics and of Afro-American studies, and I’m having a crisis of confidence, thinking I’m never going to write another paper worth reading again.

Tom is a friend. He helped to recruit me because he was on the committee that Henry Rosovsky, the famous and powerful dean of the college of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard, who hired me — the committee that Rosovsky put together to try to find someone who could fill the position that I was hired into: professor of economics and of Afro-American Studies. They said Afro-American in those years.

Tom was my connection. He’s the guy who called me up when I was sitting at Michigan in Ann Arbor in early ’82, and said, “Do you think you might be interested in a job out here?” He had helped to recruit me.

So, I had this crisis of confidence. “Am I ever going to write another paper? I’m never going to write another paper.” I’m saying this to Tom, and he’s sitting, sober, listening, nodding, and suddenly starts laughing, and he can’t stop, and the laughing becomes uncontrollable. I am completely flummoxed by this. What the hell is he laughing at? What’s so funny? I just told him something I wouldn’t even tell my wife, which is, I was afraid I was a failure, that it was an imposter syndrome situation, that I could never measure up.

Everybody in the faculty meeting at Harvard’s economics department in 1982 was famous. Everybody. I was six years out of graduate school, and I didn’t know if I could fit in. He’s laughing, and I couldn’t get it. After a while, he regains his composure, and he says, “You think you’re the only one? This place is full of neurotics hiding behind their secretaries and their 10-foot oak doors, fearing the dreaded question, ‘What have you done for me lately?’ Why don’t you just put your head down and do your work? Believe me, everything will be okay.” That was Tom Schelling.

COWEN: He was great. I still miss him.

And the final question:

COWEN: Very last question. Do you think you will do a good job facing death?

Interesting and revealing throughout.

The educational culture that is New Jersey

For four days, a 29-year-old woman pretended to be a student at a New Jersey public high school. She attended classes, spent time in the guidance office and collected phone numbers from teenagers who helped her find her way through the maze of hallways, according to students and a school official.

She continued to text former classmates days after the ruse was discovered last week, students said.

The woman, identified by the police as Hyejeong Shin, was arrested Tuesday and charged with providing documents that falsified her age to officials at New Brunswick Public Schools, a district with nearly 10,000 students in central New Jersey.

The incident, first reported by New Brunswick Today, has raised concerns about the safety protocols in place to verify student identities — and the woman’s reason for sneaking into a school that enrolls children as young as 15 in the first place.

Aubrey A. Johnson, the school superintendent, told board members Tuesday night that the district would be evaluating “how to better look for fake documentation and other things,” according to a video of the meeting shared on Twitter. Neither school nor police officials offered any information about a possible motive for her behavior.

Here is the full story, via tekl.

My excellent Conversation with Paul Salopek

Here is the transcript and audio, here is the summary:

Paul Salopek is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and National Geographic fellow who, at the age of 50, set out on foot to retrace the steps of the first human migrations out of Africa. The project, dubbed the “Out of Eden Walk,” began in Ethiopia in 2012 and will eventually take him to Tierra Del Fuego, a distance of some 24,000 miles.

Calling in just as he was about to arrive in Xi’an, he and Tyler discussed his very localized supply chain, why women make for better walking partners, the key to crossing deserts, the most difficult terrain to traverse, what he does for exercise, his information prep for each new region, how he’s kept the project funded, why India is such a good for walkers, which cuisines he’s found most and least palatable, what he learned working the crime beat in Roswell, New Mexico, how this project challenges conventional journalism, his thoughts on the changing understanding of early human migration, and more.

Here is one excerpt:

COWEN: What’s true is true. How is it that you crossed the desert? You’ve been through some of the Gulf States, I think.

SALOPEK: Yes, I’ve been through several deserts. The first was the Afar Desert in north Ethiopia, one of the hottest deserts in the world, and then the Hejaz in western Saudi Arabia, and then some big deserts in Central Asia, the Kyzyl Kum in Uzbekistan.

You cross deserts with a great attentiveness. You seem to want to speed up to get through them as quickly as possible, but often, they require slowing down, and that seems counterintuitive. You have to walk when the temperatures are congenial to your survival. Sometimes that means walking at night as opposed to the day. It means maybe not covering the distances that you would in more moderate climates.

Deserts are like a prickly friend. You approach them with care, but if you invest the time, they’re pretty inspiring and remarkable. There are reasons why old hermits go out into the deserts to seek visions. I was born in a desert. I was born in the Mojave Desert of Southern California, so I’m partial to them, maybe even by birth.

COWEN: Do you find deserts to be the most difficult terrain to cross?

SALOPEK: No, I find alpine mountains to be far trickier. Deserts can be fickle. Deserts can kill you if you’re not careful. Of course, water is the most limiting factor for survival.

But alpine mountain weather is so unpredictable, and a very sunny afternoon can turn into a very stormy late afternoon in a very quick time period. Threats like rock falls, like avalanches, blizzards — those, for me, are far more difficult to navigate than deserts. Also, I guess having been born in the subtropics, I don’t weather the cold as well, so there’s that bias thrown in.

COWEN: What do you do for exercise?

Recommended, interesting throughout.

Gender and tone in recorded economics presentations

You’re going to see a lot more research papers like this one:

This paper develops a replicable and scalable method for analyzing tone in economics seminars to study the relationship between speaker gender, age, and tone in both static and dynamic settings. We train a deep convolutional neural network on public audio data from the computer science literature to impute labels for gender, age, and multiple tones, like happy, neutral, angry, and fearful. We apply our trained algorithm to a topically representative sample of presentations from the 2022 NBER Summer Institute. Overall, our results highlight systematic differences in presentation dynamics by gender, field, and format. We find that female economists are more likely to speak in a positive tone and are less likely to be spoken to in a positive tone, even by other women. We find that male economists are significantly more likely to sound angry or stern compared to female economists. Despite finding that female and male presenters receive a similar number of interruptions and questions, we find slightly longer interruptions for female presenters. Our trained algorithm can be applied to other economics presentation recordings for continued analysis of seminar dynamics.

Some people might just stop going to recorded conferences, of course.  That paper is by Amy Handlan and Haoyu Sheng, via the excellent Kevin Lewis.

Will Chinese LLMs be much worse?

Presumably these are being built right now.  But which texts will they be trained upon?  Let’s say you can keep out any talk of T. Square.  What about broader Chinese history?  Do you allow English-language sources?  Japanese-language accounts of the war with Japan?  Do you allow economics blogs in English?  JStor?  Discussions of John Stuart Mill on free speech?

Just how good is the Chinese-language, censorship-passed body of training data?  Does China end up with a much worse set of LLMs?  Or do they in essence anglicize most of what they learn and in time know?

Pre-LLM news censorship was an easier problem, because you could let the stock sit in a library somewhere, mostly neglected, while regulating the flow.  But when the new flow is so directly derived from the stock, statistically speaking that is?  What then?

Much hangs in the balance here.  What was it that Paul Samuelson said about writing a nation’s textbooks?

Unexpected Inflation and the Redistribution of Wealth

We have a great new MRU video giving students some practice with unexpected inflation and the redistribution of wealth. As always, we like to teach a bit of history with our economics so you might also gets some perspective on William Jennings Bryan and the cross of gold. This video is part of a new Money & Inflation Unit Plan which has lots of excellent resources including lessons plans, interactive games and more on money and inflation for teachers of economics. All free, as always.

Of course, if you do teach principles of economics all of this wonderful material pairs beautifully with the best principles of economics textbook, Modern Principles.

Why I think graduate programs should keep macro in the first-year sequence

I have heard that MIT is pushing macro out of their required first-year sequence, noting I am not sure what the ex post regime will look like.  But in general I am macro-sympathetic, for the following reasons:

1. Many economics graduate students are from emerging (or retrogressing) economies, and macro issues are truly important for them.

2. Many graduate students are from “developed” economies (with apologies to Peter Thiel), and macro issues are truly important for them.  In America we had a major financial crisis in 2008-2009 and rampant inflation more recently.  It is hardly the case that all the problems have been solved.

3. Macro is the main vehicle for teaching people about economic growth, which is probably the most important topic in economics.

4. The Fed has a very good economics staff, and probably that tradition will be harder to continue if macro is taken out of first-year sequences.

5. You might argue that standards in macro are looser, by the nature of the field.  I would suggest it is easier to advance a new idea in macro, perhaps for the same reason?  Along related lines, macro still has more singly-authored papers, a sign that the field requires less conformity of ideas.

6. If you write down a short list of the candidates of “Greatest Economist ever,” did they not all do macro?  Doesn’t that tell us something?

That all said, I would make macro sequences “more practical,” more about economic growth, more about economic history, and less about dynamic programming than is often currently the case.

My excellent Conversation with Katherine Rundell

One of my favorite CWTs, here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is part of the summary:

She joined Tyler to discuss how she became obsessed with John Donne, the power of memorizing poetry, the political implications of suicide in the 17th century, the new evidence of Donne’s faith, the contagious intensity of thought in 17th century British life, the effect of the plague on national consciousness, the brutality of boys’ schooling, the thrills and dangers of rooftop walking, why children should be more mischievous, why she’d like to lower the voting age to 16, her favorite UK bookshop, the wonderful weirdness of Diana Wynne Jones, why she has at least one joke about Belgium in every book, what T.S. Eliot missed about John Donne, what it’s like to eat tarantula, the Kafka book she gives to toddlers, why The Book of Common Prayer is underrated, and more.

Here is one excerpt:

COWEN: Now, you have two books, Rooftoppers and Skysteppers, about rooftop walking. Some might call them children’s books. I’m not sure that’s exactly the right description, but what is the greatest danger with rooftop walking?

RUNDELL: Oh, it’s falling off.

COWEN: What leads you to fall off? If you’re rooftop walking, if you were to fall off, what would be the proximate cause of that event?

RUNDELL: Philippe Petit, who is, of course, one of the great roof walkers of the world and the man who strung the wire between the Twin Towers in 1977, talks about vertigo as a beast that has to be tamed piece by piece, that can never be overcome all at once.

Vertigo, he says, is not the fear that you will fall. It is the fear that you will jump. That, of course, is the thing that, when you are roof walking, you are taming. You are trying to unmoor your sense of danger and of not being able to trust yourself not to jump from your sense of beauty and the vision of a city that you get up high.

I roof-walk for very practical reasons: to see views that would otherwise be not really available to me in an increasingly privatized City of London.

And:

COWEN: For you, what is most interesting in Donne’s sermons?

RUNDELL: The thing I find most interesting would be the radical honesty that he has — that you will find in so few other sermons of the time — about the difficulty of finding God. He is a man who writes often with certainty about the idea of reaching the infinite, the divine. But he also writes this famous passage where he says, “I summon God and my angels, and when God and the angels are there, I neglect them for . . .” I forget what it is. “The sound of a carriage, a straw under my knee, a thought, a chimera, and nothing and everything.”

That sense that, even though he had a brain that could control incredibly rigorous poetry, he did not have a brain that would control itself in prayer. He offered that to his congregation as a vulnerability and a piece of honesty that so few sermoners of the time — who thought of themselves more as a regulatory ideal that should never admit vulnerability — would offer.

Definitely recommended.  And Katherine’s recent book Super-Infinite: The Transformations of John Donne was perhaps my favorite book of last year.

My ChinaTalk podcast with Jordan Schneider

Here is the transcript, here is the podcast.  Excerpt:

Jordan Schneider: You mentioned growing up reading classic novels and scholarship. What do you think will be relevant and not relevant about that sort of stuff in our new AI world?

Tyler Cowen: I suspect the classic texts will re-emerge in value. Reading Plato, Kant, or Adam Smith gives you a sense of a vision and big-picture thinking that the ais won’t be able to give us for some while — maybe never. [If] simply scanning the internet for facts, the AI might give you a very good digest — which you’ll consume in less time — and you’ll then seek out the thing the AI can’t give you at all.

That will, again, be radically original big-picture thinking.

Recommended, interesting throughout.  We also talk about education, therapy, China, the person I envy most, the demand for pets, working for the Aztec empire, my own secret book project, and much more.

The Extreme Shortage of High IQ Workers

At first glance it seems peculiar that semiconductors, a key item of national strategic interest, should be produced in only a few places in the world, most notably Taiwan, using devices produced only in Eindhoven in the Netherlands by one firm, ASML. Isn’t the United States big enough to be able to support all of these technologies domestically? Yes and no.

Semiconductor manufacturing is the most difficult and complicated manufacturing process ever attempted by human beings. A literal spec of dust can ruin an entire production run. How many people can run such a factory? Let’s look at the United States. The labor force is approximately 164 million people which sounds like a lot but half of the people in the labor force have IQs below 100. More specifically, although not everyone in semiconductor manufacturing requires a PhD, pretty much everyone has to be of above average intelligence and many will need to be in the top echelons of IQ.

In the entire US workforce there are approximately 3.7 million workers (2.3%) with an IQ greater than two standard deviations above the mean. (Mean 100, sd, 15, Normal dist.) Two standard deviations above the mean is pretty good but we are talking professor, physician, attorney level. At the very top of semiconductor manufacturing you are going to need workers with IQs at or higher than 1 in a 1000 people and there are only 164 thousand of these workers in the United States.

164 thousand very high-IQ workers are enough to run the entire semiconductor industry but you also want some of these workers doing fundamental research in mathematics, physics and computer science, running businesses, guiding the military and so forth. Moreover, we aren’t running a command economy. Many high-IQ workers won’t be interested in any of these fields but will want to study philosophy, music or English literature. Some of them will also be lazy! I’ve also assumed that we can identify all 164 thousand of these high-IQ workers but discrimination, poverty, poor health, bad luck and other factors will mean that many of these workers end up in jobs far below their potential–the US might be able to place only say 100,000 high-IQ workers in high-IQ professions, if we are lucky.

It’s very difficult to run a high-IQ civilization of 330 million on just 100,000 high-IQ workers–the pyramid of ability extends only so far. To some extent, we can economize on high-IQ workers by giving lower-IQ workers smarter tools and drawing on non-human intelligence. But we also need to draw on high-IQ workers throughout the world–which explains why some of the linchpins of our civilization end up in places like Eindhoven or Taiwan–or we need many more Americans.

GPT and my own career trajectory

For any given output, I suspect fewer people will read my work.  You don’t have to think the GPTs can copy me, but at the very least lots of potential readers will be playing around with GPT in lieu of doing other things, including reading me.  After all, I already would prefer to “read GPT” than to read most of you.  I also can give it orders more easily.  At some point, GPT may substitute directly for some of my writings as well, but that conclusion is not required for what follows.

I expect I will invest more in personal talks, face to face, and also “charisma.”  Why not?

Well-known, established writers will be able to “ride it out” for long enough, if they so choose.  There are enough other older people who still care what they think, as named individuals, and that will not change until an entire generational turnover has taken place.

I expect the entire calculus here is very different for someone who is twenty years old, and I hope to write more on that soon.

Today, those who learn how to use GPT and related products will be significantly more productive.  They will lead integrated small teams to produce the next influential “big thing” in learning and also in media.  Most current contributors will miss that train almost entirely, just as so many people missed the importance of the internet for learning and also for media.  But we still don’t know how important this “next big thing” will be, for instance, compared to YouTube.

In the short run, using GPT for ideas and inspiration will be more important than using it for copy.  Like blogging, I am happy when people attack it, because that raises the moat surrounding it.

Overall the trajectory of change is very difficult to predict, as are the forthcoming technological developments themselves.

What is going wrong with American higher education?

Yes, yes all the Woke and PC stuff, but let us also look into the matter more deeply, as in my latest Bloomberg column.  There is a serious talent drain due to excess bureaucratization, among other issues:

Another problem is the ongoing  mental health crisis among America’s youth. This is not the fault of universities, to be clear, but a lot of unhappy students make for a less enjoyable college experience. The warm glow that so many baby boomers associate with their college years may not be reproduced by the current generation. They might instead look back on a quite troubled time, and in turn have less school loyalty.

I have also observed (as have many of my colleagues) that students seem to have more absences, excuses and missed assignments. No matter what the causes of those developments, they make it harder to run an effective university.

In fact, many of the smartest young people I know are deciding against a career in academia, even if that was their initial intent. They see too much bureaucracy and not enough time for the academic work itself. Students in the biosciences, at least the ones I talk to, seem to be an exception, perhaps because the opportunities to change the world are so obvious.

In my own field, economics, the prospect of having to do a “pre-doc” and then six years for a Ph.D. is driving away creative talent. On the research side, there is an obsession with finding the correct empirical techniques for causal inference. Initially a merited and beneficial development, this approach is becoming an intellectual straitjacket. There are too many papers focusing on a suitably narrow topic to make the causal inference defensible, rather than trying to answer broader, more useful but also more difficult questions.

…As committee obligations, paperwork and referee reports accumulate, the idea that academia allows you to be in charge of your own time seems ever more distant. Bureaucratization is eating away at the free time of professors. Much of the glamour of the job is gone, and my fear is that the system increasingly attracts conformists.

And don’t forget this disaggregation:

There are also big differences within universities. I have been a professor for more than three decades and speak often at other campuses. My impression is that presidents, provosts and deans are relatively sane, if only because they face real trade-offs as they draw up budgets, raise money and make payroll. University staff or student groups, on the other hand, often have no sense of the underlying constraints, and so advocate for ideas and practices that lead to some ridiculous stories. The actual decision makers are frequently not strong enough to push back, so they accept the demands as a way to survive or even advance.

Recommended.

*Rise*

Applications are now open for Rise! Rise is a global initiative that finds brilliant people who need opportunity and supports them for life as they work to serve others and build a better world. The program starts at ages 15–17 and offers Global Winners access to benefits including need-based scholarships, a fully-funded residential summit, mentorship, career development, potential funding, and more. Applications are open until January 25, 2023.