Freakonomics, horseshit and bullshit

If, like me, you are puzzled about why apparently sensible people are seduced by the glib half-truths peddled by Levitt and Dubner in Freakonomics and, now, Superfreakonomics then a quick read of Elizabeth Kolbert’s New Yorker review will serve as a useful antidote.

In their chapter on climate change, the two Chicago chancers make great play with Victorian predictions about how our major cities would be buried in horseshit. You know the stuff: New York had 150,000 horses in 1880, each of them producing 22 lbs of ordure a day; people predicted that by 1930 horseshit in the city would be three stories high. Same story for London, etc. etc. But technology, in the form of electric power and the internal combustion engine came to our rescue. So — they cheerily maintain - the same thing will happen with climate change.

Levitt and Dubner maintain, in their breezy knowall style, that the global warming threat has been exaggerated and that there is uncertainty about how exactly the earth will respond to rising levels of carbon dioxide. And, just as with horse manure, solutions are bound to present themselves. “Technological fixes are often far simpler, and therefore cheaper, than the doomsayers could have imagined”.

Although they clearly know little about technology, the two lads are keen advocates of it. Well, certain kinds of technology anyway. They have no time for boring old stuff like wind turbines, solar cells, biofuels which are are all, in their view, more trouble than they’re worth because they’re aimed at reducing CO2 emissions, which is “the wrong goal”. Cutting back is difficult and annoying. Who really wants to use less oil? What we really need, they think, is ways of “re-engineering” the planet.

Er, how, exactly? Well, how about a huge fleet of fibreglass ships equipped with machines that would increase cloud cover over the oceans? Or a vast network of tubes for sucking cold water from the depths of the ocean? (I am not making this up.) Best of all, they say, why not mimic the climactic effect of volcanic eruptions? All that is needed is a way of pumping vast quantities of sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere. This could be done by sending up an 18-mile-long hose. “For anyone who loves cheap and simple solutions, things don’t get much better”.

Eh? In her review, Elizabeth Kolbert refers to Raymond Pierrehumbert’s wonderful ‘open letter’ to Levitt that was published in the RealClimate blog. This says, in part:

By now there have been many detailed dissections of everything that is wrong with the treatment of climate in Superfreakonomics , but what has been lost amidst all that extensive discussion is how really simple it would have been to get this stuff right. The problem wasn’t necessarily that you talked to the wrong experts or talked to too few of them. The problem was that you failed to do the most elementary thinking needed to see if what they were saying (or what you thought they were saying) in fact made any sense. If you were stupid, it wouldn’t be so bad to have messed up such elementary reasoning, but I don’t by any means think you are stupid. That makes the failure to do the thinking all the more disappointing. I will take Nathan Myhrvold’s claim about solar cells, which you quoted prominently in your book, as an example.

Pierrehumbert then does a scarifying dissection of Myhrvold’s nutty arithmetic, which is interesting not just because it shows how a supposedly-clever ex-Microsoft guru can make a complete fool of himself, but also because it shows how Levitt — who, after all, makes the claim that his statistical ingenuity makes him more insightful than the rest of us — can’t do arithmetic either.

Pierrehumbert, like Levitt, holds a prestigious Chair in the University of Chicago, so connoisseurs of academic dialogue will enjoy this paragraph in the prefatory section of his ‘open letter’:

I am addressing this to you rather than your journalist-coauthor because one has become all too accustomed to tendentious screeds from media personalities (think Glenn Beck) with a reckless disregard for the truth. However, if it has come to pass that we can’t expect the William B. Ogden Distinguished Service Professor (and Clark Medalist to boot) at a top-rated department of a respected university to think clearly and honestly with numbers, we are indeed in a sad way.

Amen to that. There is really only one good term for describing much of the Levitt/Dubner oeuvre: bullshit. What’s amazing — and depressing — is how many people seem to fall for it (at least if the sales figures for their books are anything to go by). What they remind me of most is those pop psychologists who make a living from giving glib keynote presentations about optical illusions to business conferences.

I actually own a copy of the first book "Freakonomics" which got rave reviews about how insightful statistics could be. This proved to be...well bullshit - the whole premise of the book was for chapter titles to take two unconnected things and connect them in "unlikely" ways, then to prove (using stats) that they were connected. Unfortunately once you got behind the reasoning for the connection it becomes fairly obvious (eg "What do Schoolteachers and Sumo Wrestlers have in common" turns out that there's quite good evidence to show that they both cheat occasionally to get better results. Which is fairly obvious if you think about it).

A peek at the future of interactive storytelling?

11.09.09 | Permalink | View commentsComments

I was completely blown away by this video the first time through. Such a simple, low-tech, solution produces such an amazingly rich, engaging experience that’s just bursting with possibility for further creativity.

While it’s just a concept at this point, you can see how it can make a new kind of storytelling available to the masses in a way that wouldn’t have seemed possible not that long ago.

Credit goes to @nickbilton on this.

I have to agree - I'm totally blown away by such a simple effective idea. This could be creatively combined in so many ways. Multiple stories from one book, depending on which app you have. Use of accelerometer in sequences like the one at the end of the video. Location aware books. Ability to increase/decrease complexity of books. Speech recognition in books. Some sort of system (RFID?) to tell which page you're on. Maybe some sort of test on each page.

Thats just a quick list I've thought up while writing this post, I'm they'll be many more creative people out there who could think up even more/better ideas.

For a while now, I’ve been supporting the British Wireless for the Blind Fund; so it was a nice surprise to be invited to the launch of a new ‘product’ of theirs yesterday in Maidstone. The point of the British Wireless for the Blind Fund is that it provides radio sets to registered visually-impaired people in the UK. They’re supplied free of charge to those with a means-tested benefit; or are available to purchase by people who don’t qualify for a free set. As someone who’s been involved with radio for over twenty years, it’s always a pleasure to hear from people who are blind, and for whom radio gives them their best contact. This set is rather fine. It contains radio stations (local and international); podcasts; audio books, talking newspapers and even audio catalogues from bright retailers like M&S and Argos. (I had no idea such things existed). And the clever bit – you can control it completely using the ‘OK’ button and listening to the prompts (though there are a few more to speed the process up a little). The video above with John Mills, the Technology Manager of the Fund, shows the unit in operation – and you’ll note that it’s simpler than anything you’ll have seen before. This obviously replaces spoken-word cassettes (which are still used for distribution of talking newspapers), as well as opening up a much larger amount of audio for listeners. In case you wondered, the pre-programmed list of stations can be set on the listeners’ behalf (and changed just by picking up the phone and asking nicely). It can also be set to receive audio messages from others – perhaps if you’re part of a group. For the more technical: currently, the radio station list is programmed by the Dutch company behind the unit. It would help, immeasurably, if broadcasters produced XML files with details of the radio stations: particularly, XML files with information on how to pronounce the names of the radio stations. (”WINS 1010″ could be pronounced “double-yew eye enn ess one oh one oh” otherwise, which would be entirely wrong – the correct pronunciation is “Winns ten-ten”.) Hopefully the IMDA can assist. And, secondly, this unit would be also good if it recognised when stations were also available on local broadcast platforms rather than the internet, and thus switch to conserve bandwidth for the user and the broadcaster accordingly. The technology behind that, naturally, is already being worked on separately). It’s a very impressive unit: for a very deserving part of the population. If you’d like one, it’s available for purchase, but if you like the idea of making this available, free of charge, to those it would really benefit, it would be great if you, like me, could donate to the British Wireless for the Blind fund. You can do so via PayPal – and your money’s worth more if you are a UK taxpayer.

My granny is registered blind and listens to many audiobooks on tapes loaned from the library. The problem is that the tapes a bit fiddly (she also has arthritis) and the content a bit limited, so this would be excellent for her. The only problem being the lack of broadband in her house (she lives in the middle of Somerset). But its great to see the Blind getting some easy to use technology, and to participate more in online audio (internet radio streams and podcasts).

International Year of Astronomy 2009 Retro Poster Designs

---

I really love this sort of retro design, with simple geometric shapes. Very similar the Serenity poster set from QMx that I have.

In the comments at the bottom the designer says that he hopes to set up an online store before Christmas - I'd love to get one of these.

UPDATE: Sorry forgot to credit @brainpicker for these

Weekend fun RT @Rubber_Republic: Some viral video string theory for you. Replace "watch" in a YouTube URL with "warp.swf"

Thanks to Wired Pulse (@brainpicker) and @BBHLabs for finding this cool hack

Re-blogged from the Brits on Pole blog, with thanks to @f1fanatic_co_uk

With the news that Donington Park’s bid to stage the 2010 British Grand Prix has finally hit the rocks, and that Bernie Ecclestone doesn’t care if we get a race or not, we wouldn’t blame you for feeling frustrated, angry and frankly apathetic.

But this might be exactly the time when fans can bring a bit of pressure to bear and increase the chances of the race taking place.

We’ve put together a list of actions that you can take to show your support of the British Grand Prix in ways that might just make a difference. And they shouldn’t take you more than 15 minutes, and we guarantee you’ll feel much more positive once you’ve had your say. Leave a comment if you want, saying what you’ve done.

Social networking – and beyond

Nowadays, whenever anyone gets hot under the collar the first thing they reach for is Twitter, Facebook, a button for their blog or some similar social networking idea.

Now, we’re certainly not knocking the idea of adopting a Twibbon or friending a FaceBook page – and please forward the link to this page as widely as you can – but we also advise caution when it comes to relying on these methods.

We need to take a leaf out of the book of seasoned campaigners who are finding that, while mass online campaigns can help to express the public mood, they can just as easily be ignored by decision-makers. They don’t take much effort, but they don’t usually get many results either.

Over to you

The people who do this regularly have learned that social networking needs to be combined with good old-fashioned lobbying and ‘pavement politics’. We need to send an extremely carefully-targeted message to those people who can actually influence events.

We’ve chosen five methods of attempting this. Please consider which are most appropriate for you and take action. We need to make a noise and we hope we’ve done our bit with these suggestions – now it’s over to you to yell and stamp your feet a bit.

Five things you can do that might just make a difference

Demonstrate to Bernie that this race can still be successful

We know there’s absolutely zero point trying to get our views heard by Formula One Management. But there might be some mileage in demonstrating that the event can be profitable, even though three months’ worth of ticket-selling time has already been wasted. If you’re on tenterhooks waiting for tickets to become available, and aiming to be at the front of the queue to buy yours, turn your anticipation into something concrete with this Pledgebank pledge. We’re aiming get people who are planning or hoping to attend the race to show their support for it in a tangible way, so please consider signing up. This is purely a symbolic gesture – no-one will come round your house and demand to see your ticket – but it could add up to a powerful show of support.

Let Silverstone know that you want to buy a ticket

Whether you preferred Donington, Silverstone or even an outside bet like Brands Hatch, it really is time to accept that it’s probably the old Northamptonshire airfield or bust, at least for 2010. Now, we respect the circuit’s need to come to an arrangement with Formula One management that is in its long-term commercial interest. And we know that a lot of ticket-selling time has been lost. But equally, we think it’s worth proving the strength of demand for this event. So, if you want to buy a ticket, make that clear. Let Silverstone know that you’d like to attend the race here. Ask them to inform you immediately if tickets go on sale.

Lobby the Formula One Teams’ Association

One of the few organisations in F1 that has shown any awareness that fans even have views – although if we are honest it has tended to be because those views accorded with its needs at the time. Even so, McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh said recently: “A lot of changes that have occurred in Formula One over recent years haven’t really taken into account the wishes of fans and we haven’t brought those into the thought process. And hopefully in future we will see much more of that.” So we suggest letting FOTA know that you want the British Grand Prix to stay on the calendar. Find their contact details here.

Lobby your favourite team

Following on from FOTA, it is worth noting that the date of the Monaco Grand Prix has just been moved by a week – because that’s what the teams needed to happen. Help convince them to bring that power to bear on our behalf. You can find contact details for all the British-based teams here and many, such as Brawn GP, Red Bull and McLaren, also maintain a presence on Twitter, Facebook or other social media sites. Let them know that their fans want to see them race in Britain next July, and ask them to help make sure the event happens.

Contact your MP

It’s part of your MP’s job to represent your views to ministers. And they do take a great deal of notice of ‘background noise’ – what issues are currently of concern to their constituents. So we suggest using this website to let your MP know that the future of the British Grand Prix is important to you and to ask that he or she makes sure sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe is aware of that fact too. Keep it brief and polite. You might want to mention the importance of motorsport jobs to the British economy, the fact that the race is one of the country’s great sporting events, the development of important safety and eco-friendly technologies such as enhanced brake efficiency, run-flat tyres and KERS, or its potential to promote tourism and regional growth. Read this excellent post by Duncan ‘Doctor Vee’ Stephen for more ideas on presenting F1’s achievements positively to sceptics. Don’t fall prey to cynicism, this is undoubtedly worth doing – but we’ll say again, keep it brief and polite.

Tell your friends! Please pass the link to this page on to as many people as you can. Here’s a custom shortlink: http://bit.ly/8tuzJ

 

His excellent columns in the Guardian are always worth a look, but this one sums up my thoughts on the music industry. They should stop bullying people with ridiculous new laws and come up with new ideas (like Spotify for example). Also worth a listen is Stephen Fry's speech at the iTunes festival (available on iTunes) - again he sums up my thoughts pretty much exactly.

Overvalued, irksome, conceited, pudge-faced, balding, boring, awful celebrity art nob Damien Hirst has apparently become embroiled in a ludicrous feud with a 19-year-old graffiti artist called Cartrain. Hostilities erupted in 2008, when Cartrain created a sarcastic collage that included an image of Hirst's stupid bling-encrusted skull "artwork" (the one that reportedly sold for £50m at auction, although that figure is disputed by virtually anyone who still retains some degree of faith in humankind).

When Cartrain's humorous collages were put up for sale online, Hirst reportedly complained to the Design and Artists Copyright Society. The website selling Cartrain's works buckled under legal pressure and surrendered the collages, along with an apology.

Witless appropriation

Obviously, this involved some chutzpah on Hirst's part, when you consider how much of his own output involves the witless appropriation of pre-existing material. When he isn't wowing his hateful audience of inconsequential moneyed idiots with meaningless collections of dots or bisected animal corpses, he's producing a whopping great reproduction of Humbrol's £14.99 Young Scientist Anatomy Set and selling it to Charles Saatchi for £1m – which would be an absolutely hilarious scam on a richly deserving target (a pretentious former ad exec who made his fortune heartlessly flogging cigarettes and Thatcherism to the masses) if the money went to a deserving cause rather than a nauseating irritant.

Anyway, so far, so 2008. But the Hirst-Cartrain battle resumed in July this year, when the latter strolled into Tate Britain and allegedly removed a box of pencils from Hirst's art installation "Pharmacy". Cartrain then created a mock ransom note, demanding the return of his collages in exchange for the pencils. If the artworks weren't given back, then the pencils would be "sharpened".

All rather daft and annoying. But a few weeks ago, Cartrain was arrested by Scotland Yard's art and antiques squad and told that the pencils had been valued at £500,000. The officers also initially arrested Cartrain's father, on the grounds that he was "suspected of harbouring the pencils".

The arrest may not be Hirst's fault, but sod it: let's appropriate any resultant outrage and apply it to him anyway. Cartrain's almost certainly a self-promoting gump and a poor man's Banksy – but he's 19, for heaven's sake. He's allowed to be an almost impossible arse.

Besides, unless it turns out to have been one huge, hilarious in-jokey art world wheeze involving the pair of them, it was Hirst who started it, mum. It was his behaviour in the first instance – throwing a legal fit over Cartrain's collages – that caused the current mess. It was an absurd tantrum over intellectual property rights, the big guy versus the little guy – just like Lord Mandelson's stupid proposal to have people who illegally download music kicked off the internet; a scheme that's outraged Billy Bragg, the drummer from Blur, thingy from Radiohead and one of Pink Floyd so much that they posed for a photograph and issued a press release and everything. And they were right to do so.

Apart from the occasional hardcore miser, the kind who'd shoplift at Oxfam, the vast majority of people who illegally download music from the internet do so because they bloody love music. They're resorting to theft because they're either too skint to afford 79p per track (often because they're students), or because what they're looking for is too obscure to find by commercial means, or because it's been leaked and isn't officially available and they're just too damn excited to wait. In the main, these are dedicated fans: precisely the same audience who in days of yore would've filled C90 cassettes with songs taped off the radio. In its heyday, the Radio 1 Sunday evening Top 40 countdown constituted the biggest file-sharing portal in British history, with millions of users hooked up simultaneously, mercilessly downloading content to their tape decks.

The government and the music industry should cheerfully view these people as eager young addicts. Let them have their illicit free samples because once they're hooked, they'll cough up later: when they've got more money, when the tracks are easier to find via legitimate means, or when they go to see an act they only discovered via free illegal downloads play live (and pay £30 for a ticket, £30 for drinks, and £30 for a poster and T-shirt).

But no. They're going to identify and isolate these fans and try to ban them from the internet. Christ knows how that's going to work. Perhaps they'll employ a uniformed enforcer to run in and physically knock the mouse out of your hand every 10 minutes. Maybe an email arrives, curtly informing you you've been fired from Google. Now clear your cache and get out. I guess the powers that be could pressurise local service providers, but if they start cutting off broadband connections willy-nilly, neighbourhood Wi-Fi "theft" will skyrocket. And how do you stop people using iPhones and other mobile internet devices? Smash their fingers with rocks? Position snipers on rooftops?

As in the tale of Hirst and Cartrain, it's the big guy who comes off looking small. Instead of figuring out new and imaginative ways to fleece consumers, the industry is throwing a tantrum. Trying to fight human nature and progress is an undertaking as doomed as repeatedly kicking a river in the hope it'll change course, and as mean as arresting a 19-year-old chancer for swiping a tosspot's pencils.