« Worst Argument Ever? | Main | Will Hollywood displace Bollywood? »
Assorted links
1. Contrary to popular wisdom, Oscar winners do not live longer; hint: "Write a computer simulation showing why "breaking your hip increases your life expectancy", based on the simplest probability model you can come up with."
2. How race and welfare became connected in the American mind
3. Many thanks, none of you sold me down the river
4. How I would change the rules of the NBA
5. Freakonomics is now a New York Times blog
Posted by Tyler Cowen on August 8, 2007 at 03:31 PM in Web/Tech | Permalink
Comments
Freakonomics goes to the Times - any bets on how long before MR goes to the WashPost?
Posted by: passing through at Aug 8, 2007 4:19:48 PM
Money money money money....MONEY!
Posted by: Riemannian at Aug 8, 2007 4:43:31 PM
tyler,
Do you think officiating could be improved through the use of more technology, such as electronic eyes to determine if a player was out of bounds?
Posted by: Ted Craig at Aug 8, 2007 4:45:06 PM
I am a basketball fanatic. I was good enough to play at a good high school and had an offer to play at a very small college.
To improve the NBA:
I would eliminate the 3 point shot. A good drive to the basket is more graceful and skillful than a long shot. It seems unfair to me that a guy like Dwain Wade makes a great drive to basket and gets just 2 points while some stiff can stand outside the 3 point line and throw one up and get 3 points.
I would limit substitution like in soccer. I think would lighten the players and add grace to the game.
I would make the court longer and wider increasing the distance between the baskets by about 10 feet. Again I think that this would add grace to the game.
I would always give the fouled team the ball back after a foul and foul shot. I hate it that it can help a team to foul.
Posted by: Floccina at Aug 8, 2007 5:14:05 PM
Am I alone in not understanding how "drive to the net" = "athletic" where "shooting the trey" = "unathletic"?
I think it takes a lot more skill to shoot a ball from 3-point range while defenders' hands and limbs are thrown in your face than to hold the ball and run at top speed (since, let's be real - EVERYONE travels these days) in order to slam it down the rim.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want to see a game of just passing around the arc and watching a hail of 3-pointers. But a game without strong incentives to shoot would be unwatchable for me. The fouling alone makes it almost unwatchable.
Posted by: fustercluck at Aug 8, 2007 6:04:54 PM
Again with the “prison population rises despite fall of crime” nonsense?
Cowen links to a guy who thinks the association between race and welfare and of race with crime in the public mind EXPLANS “why there are so many people in US prisons, and why so many of these people are black”.
Let me give you a more parsimonious explanation: The association between race and welfare and race and crime is due to this little thing called reality.
By the time of welfare reform 14% of African Americans families where getting at least the majority of their income from the most important welfare program (AFDC), compared to 2,6% of non-Hispanic whites.
You think a 530% percentage difference might have something to do with “the association between race and welfare”? Or should the public lower themselves to the level of liberals and ignore ideologically inconvenient facts?
More from this “excellent” article:
“ imprisonment rates have continued to rise while crime rates have fallen because we have become progressively more punitive: not because crime has continued to explode (it hasn’t), not because we made a smart policy choice, but because we have made a collective decision to increase the rate of punishment.”
If our ideeology doesn't work, let’s just deconstruct reality. The disparities in incarceration rates are not due to “mental associations” of the public, they are due to disparities in criminal behavior. The crime misery index indicates opening up prisons due to the post-modern ramblings of leftist is not especially likely to reduce social problems.
By the way, the claim that “to a degree virtually unmatched in any other, [in America] those bearing the brunt of order enforcement belong in vastly disproportionate numbers to historically marginalized racial groups” is wrong. For example The British journal of criminology had an issue in 1997 dedicated to the subject in various countries. .
• In England and Wales Blacks were in the latest comparison 1,8% of the population and 12% of prison inmates.
• In western Australia aboriginals are 23,7 TIMES more likely to be imprisoned as adults. This is almost 3 times the white-black ratio in the US.
• Liberal utopia Canada has a population of 3% American Indians, that made up 17% of the prison population. I suppose there is no evil “association” between welfare and race in Canada. Than there should be no disparities according to our dear Professor in Brown Economics department? Let me quote the passage about Ontario:
“analyses reveal a prison admission rate of 705 per 100,000 residents for whites, compared to 3,686 for blacks. The rate for Aboriginals is 1,993 per 100,000.”
The ratio of 5-1 is not far from the US and England ratios of 7-1.
Similar results are presented about continental Europe, such as Germany, Sweden, and France (the French don’t break down the data by ethnicity. Maybe that will make reality go away?). The Dutch figures are particularly break taking, with 85%(!) of street robberies being described by the victim as “non-white”.
I don’t expect leftist Economic professors in Brown University to know or care about facts, but the “disproportionally” between punishment and ethnicity are not unique to the US. Minorities with social problems commit crime and are incarcerated in a lot of western countries, the main difference is that the US has a much much higher share of it’s total population that belong to low-achieving groups
Posted by: Shirkuh at Aug 8, 2007 9:14:35 PM
Shirkuh seems strange but true the blacks do better in Mississippi than anywhere else in the world.
Posted by: Floccina at Aug 9, 2007 10:03:58 AM
Cause if you break your hip you don't get hit by a car (you're all laid up in bed).
Posted by: liberty at Aug 9, 2007 11:16:54 AM
Misssissippi is a really poor state. I would figure there would be better places for them, like Georgia.
Posted by: TGGP at Aug 9, 2007 1:42:48 PM
Am I alone in not understanding how "drive to the net" = "athletic" where "shooting the trey" = "unathletic"?
Shooting a basketball is a skill, a la making an accurate pool shot, sinking a long putt or flipping an omelet without using a spatula. It doesn't require the basic aspects of athleticism as defined by the Olympic motto: "faster", "higher", "stronger" so much as patience and practice. That's not to denigrate being an accurate shooter, or an excellent pool player or even a flamboyant cook, merely to point out that these are not athletic activities.
Furthermore players who rely on long distance shooting skills are not usually capable of dominating a game, relying on the more athletic players to draw the defense and then taking the shot off the pass. In fact the most valuable players in the NBA are the post players who while not generally the fastest players on the court, can establish and hold post position to allow an entry pass, which is more effective than a dribble drive in moving the ball close to the basket, and then finishing the play at the basket. Which makes Michael Jordan's achievements all the more remarkable, because he dominated the game from the shooting guard position rather than the traditional center or power forward. But Jordan was an anomaly, a little tall for a shooting guard of his era, he was actually the most dominant offensive post player on his team and had Scottie Pippen to feed him the ball.
At any rate watching a team decimate an opponent with post entry passes is boring to the casual fan (cf. the TV ratings of San Antonio, the Stockon-Malone Jazz, or championship Rockets teams), as opposed to watching a player who can advance the ball to the hoop purely through individual effort.
Posted by: Ssezi at Aug 9, 2007 4:19:10 PM
The current foul arrangements are ugly but assist to create close finishes which are exciting.
It is best to keep them.
Limitting substution is a great idea. Defence seems to tire faster than attack (at least in rugby union/league). If so scoring would increase at the business end making the conclusion of a game even more exciting.
Pete
Posted by: yougman at Aug 10, 2007 12:53:31 AM
Shooting a basketball is a skill, a la making an accurate pool shot, sinking a long putt or flipping an omelet without using a spatula. It doesn't require the basic aspects of athleticism as defined by the Olympic motto: "faster", "higher", "stronger" so much as patience and practice. That's not to denigrate being an accurate shooter, or an excellent pool player or even a flamboyant cook, merely to point out that these are not athletic activities.
That logic probably wouldn't play well with Olypmic biathletes who well understand the importance and difficulty of shooting with precision after having exerted oneself physically (e.g. skiing cross-country or running up and down a court as basketball is not only an offensive game).
I'm much more interested in late game heroics where a 3 is drilled at the buzzer than I am in watching a drive to the net.
Posted by: fustercluck at Aug 11, 2007 9:43:15 PM
Hi Best wishes。Allow me to offer my heartiest wishes.xicao loves-流水线娱乐博客常年提供高、中、低压锅炉钢管、流体钢管、结构钢管、化肥专用钢管、石油裂化钢管、地质钢管、液压支柱钢管及合金钢管-无缝管-无缝钢管等论文发表资讯/刊物信息，协助客户制定论文发表方案
Posted by: xicao at Nov 13, 2007 8:34:51 PM
Posted by: 鑽石 at Apr 2, 2008 9:38:25 PM
