A few subtleties i think was missed in tech founders' accents post by Paul Graham and antirez. http://anandjeyahar.com/2013/09/04/accents-and-its-effect-in-the-techfounderstartup-world/ . I am rather emotionally close/involved to the subject, so would be happy to know the gaps and biases in my reasoning any of you point out.
Regards, Anand
I can't even get past the introduction:
You are the reason Paul Graham made that comment.
Delusions of Gender -- I watched a video of the author speaking about her book, and it was interesting, but the same information could be told much quicker than in one hour. So here are some points I remembered:
Selection bias: if you make a study and you don't find a difference between male and female brain, you don't write a bestseller. Also, comparing the male and female results is the first obvious idea of any researcher, so given p = 0.05, one research in twenty would publish something about the differences between men and women, even if there was none. So if you want some meaningful results, you need to do the meta-analysis of the published studies -- and they often look just like they would if the difference wouldn't really exist: larger samples have smaller differences, and almost half of them shows the difference in the opposite direction.
Some differences are exaggerated and misinterpreted. For example, there is a picture of a brain showing that in these little areas women had more signal than men (or vice versa) when solving a maze. First, many popular authors will interpret it as "women only used these parts, and men only used those parts", while in reality it m...
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith: The Dictator's Handbook
Much liked this book, which is a sort-of modern version of Machiavelli's The Prince. Don't get fooled by its silly title, this book is the general-audience version of Bueno De Mesquita et al's selectorate theory, which describes any kind of power structure in terms of which groups leaders need to please (or can ignore!) in order to stay in power. It's a rather cynical theory, with leaders having staying-in-power as more or less their only goal, and they give a great many example; leaders in democracies and authocracies are more-or-less equivalent, it's only that the former needed to please many more people and thus are induced to play a bit nicer.
Of course, political science is a bit shaky, but the writers do have statistics and analysis (but one needs the more scholarly version of the theory for that) to back it up. Also, esp. Bueno De Mesquita is known for making quite accurate predictions of future events, more so than others. This gives some confidence, esp. against the common theme of theories that can predict anything.
With selectorate theory in hand, the book explains how we could look at e.g. foreign aid, international politics, to make it beneficial to leaders (democratic or not) to be better to their subjects, improve governance, freedoms etc. So, in the end, the cold, hard-nosed cynicism does point to some ways to make the world a better place...
Recommended. I'll be going to watch world events through these lenses, and see how wel it works.
This is the monthly thread for posting media of various types that you've found that you enjoy. Post what you're reading, listening to, watching, and your opinion of it. Post recommendations to blogs. Post whatever media you feel like discussing! To see previous recommendations, check out the older threads.
Rules: