TOW #28: "Super-Freakonomics" Part 1

              In Super-Freakonomics, economists Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner explore the logic and science of various phenomena. In the first half, such phenomena included climate change, natural human hate, and prostitution. This book is a sequel to the incredibly popular Freakonomics, which is considered a must-read for economists and math-fanatics alike. One example of their analysis involves examining the ethics of prostitution. The authors compare free, legal sex to a socialist concept, and prostitutes who turn sex into an industry are being capitalist American patriots. Of course, the fact that prostitution is a black market also ha a major effect on the business.

              It is important to be critical when reading, even when you’re reading something from authors as successful as Levitt and Dubner. As experienced and knowledgeable as they are, they can make mistakes. In the section dedicated to climate change, they commit some significant logical fallacies. The chapter is presented as a response to Al Gore, a famous political advocate for change to combat global warming. The authors present scientists who disagree with Gore’s claims and play it as a rebuttal from science against Al Gore. However, a truly scientific point of view would have mentioned how scientists overwhelmingly agree that Gore is correct in his fears. The authors are committing a confirmation bias logical fallacy by only examining evidence that supports the view the authors clearly had prior to their research.

              After reading the climate-change chapter, it is difficult to accept what the authors say. Climate change (for some odd reason) is a political issue, and perhaps the authors were biased for political reasons. However, in the previous book, the authors made an argument for legal abortion, which would come from the opposite side of the political spectrum. Perhaps, instead, the authors are motivated to have an “everything you know is wrong” attitude in order to seem like enlightened spreaders of truth over inferior mortals (the audience), in which case, they are not to be trusted.

TOW #27: "Taxes will go up. Here’s why."

              This article was posted by The Washington Post. Although this outlet has faced criticism from conservatives regarding its reliability, this article is an editorial and demonstrates only the author’s thoughts. The author, in this case, is Robert J. Samuelson. He has been a reporter since the 1960s. In this particular article, he addresses the issue of taxation in America. As the title indicates, Samuelson believes that taxes are bound to go up. He states that, despite Trump’s tax reform promises, and a growing conservative reaction from Americans, we are on course to need money in the government, and taxes will be raised.

              The author begins the article with a very direct statement. He says, “Let’s be clear: America is an undertaxed society.” This establishes the principle behind his thesis. Taxes will go up because, above all, they are too low. Later, he adds to why we “need” more tax with why we should “want” more tax. He talks about tax relief and says, “tax relief would go to low- and middle-income households with children — a deserving group.” It is hard to justify denying impoverished children the money they need to survive, and so the natural desire to help others would incline us to use more tax money.

              Ultimately, the question of taxation is going to be a polarizing one. It pits the wealthy against the poor. The wealthy argue that handouts will remove the work ethic of the poor and discourage them from working. However, the same argument could be made that tax cuts for the wealthy reduce their work ethic because it would allow them to make more money off less work. It really comes down to decency. No society should be able to sleep at night knowing that so many didn’t eat dinner. However, it is up to those not eating to prove they are worth feeding.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/taxes-will-go-up-heres-why/2017/04/30/830294d6-2c45-11e7-b605-33413c691853_story.html?utm_term=.d390ea1f838b

TOW #26: Why aren't people listening to scientists?

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-dusautoy-march-for-science-20170423-story.html

              This article is written appropriately after the march for science. This was a time for people to voice their concerns about the general decrease in respect for science in America, particularly by the latest presidential administration. The article was written by Marcos du Sautoy of the Los Angeles Times. This is a very well-respected organization. The article discusses several instances in which the public, at least part of it, has dismissed the word of scientists. Perhaps the most profound example of this is the anti-vax movement that has led to an increase in measles cases. This movement not only went against the word of the scientific community but also against what should be common sense.

              The rhetoric of this article is affective because it is able to acknowledge this legitimacy of the anti-science side, which may not appear to have any credibility at first. One example of this is when the article states “sometimes science goes against intuition.” This may seem obvious, but to someone with very little intellectual ability, it is a reason to discredit science. A more understandable rationale that the article provides is the idea that scientists may act in self-interest. For instance, they may publish false information in order to bring attention to themselves. This suspicion has led to countless conspiracy theories.

              Ultimately, the article is preaching to the choir. The people in this country who choose to ignore the word of people who research professionally are too ignorant and miserable to be affected by an article criticizing them. This article is simply yet more reason for the educated to feel superior to groups such as anti-vaxxers. The only place where this article may have any effect is in the Trump administration, a target of the march for science. The people in there may be willing to listen, and we better hope they are.

IRB Intro #4

The time to select the last IRB of the year has come, and I have chosen Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner's Super Freakonomics". My first IRB, the one that I read in the first marking period, was Freakonomics. I figured I would be able to see improvement in myself by comparing my analysis of two similar books from the beginning and ends of the year. Like the first Freakonomics, Super Freakonomics discusses the statistical ideas of unusual phenomena.

TOW #25: "Where Humans to Go Extinct, Should the Species Be Revived?"

              This article was written by Laura Geggel, a senior writer for LiveScience.org. The article summarizes a recent debate between some of the country’s top scientists. The debate was moderated by renowned astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. The debate was over the subject of “de-extinction.” Specifically, should humans be brought back after they have gone extinct. The article discusses certain scenarios such as an alien civilization coming to Earth and reviving humans. However, in this scenario, the scientists, somewhat unanimously, opt for no de-extinction as humans would likely be kept in zoo-like habitats.

              The article itself is a string of anecdotes from the debate. It synthesizes soundbites and quotes into a concise yet continuous summary of the dialogue from the debate. It switches between pro de-extinction and anti-de-extinction perspectives and opinions from the participating scientists. It groups the opinions and quotes into ethical concerns and lawful concerns. Such an example is “Yes, we do, said panelist George Church, a professor at Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who is working on reviving bits and pieces of the woolly mammoth. But then again, Church, a geneticist, molecular engineer and chemist, has often opined that the science of de-extinction is already here or within reach, and should be pursued.”

              Perhaps the biggest flaw in the article was its failure to address what, to me, was the first question to enter my mind, “How can we revive ourselves if we are all dead?” The article does mention a few plausible scenarios (such as the alien revival I mentioned earlier) but it seems that the soundbites and quotes are addressing other situations. An explanation was needed but never provided. Otherwise, the organization of the essay was perfect. It balanced the perspectives given and grouped them into different concerns. Hopefully we will never have to come to de-extinction but it’s nice to know we have a good understanding if we do.

TOW 24: "Liar's Poker" Part 2

              In the second half of Michael Lewis’s “Liar’s Poker,” he explores the struggles and downfall of Salomon brothers, the banking firm Lewis had worked at. In my last TOW, I had complained about the discontinued anecdote of the Liar’s Poker game played between Merriweather and Gutfreund. While I was let down in expecting it at the end, Lewis’s story is forgivable due to its extremely satisfying conclusion. Lewis perfectly builds up a detestable image of his superiors (and indeed everyone on Wall Street) and has them put in their place by the 1987 Wall Street crash.

              Before Lewis gives the antagonists the smack down, he articulates his position on Wall Street very well. He credits his mentors through an antithesis. He credits his current mentor, Dash, as being “across his desk.” He credits his original mentor, Alexander, as the one “across the ocean.” He also quotes his peers’ metaphors about him. They describe Lewis with sexual innuendos in order to indicate that his stock-trading abilities are desirable to a sexual extent, and some of his body parts are accordingly desirable. Ultimately, Lewis successfully makes himself out to be likeable person in a sea of nightmares.

              Lewis’s ability to put himself in this position makes the ending extremely satisfying. In the stock market crash of the winter of 1987, nearly everyone he works with is fired. Except, of course, for Lewis himself. It is great to see that, no matter how rich and powerful people like Gutfreund are, they are no match for the economy of a country. Finally, Lewis goes on to quit his job. His reason is that one’s salary should reflect how much they give to society. As a bond-trader, Lewis failed to see any contribution that justified how much money he was making. Lewis rescues his character and shows that money is not everything.

TOW 23: WikiLeaks does Americans no favors

              This editorial was written by Reading Eagle News Agency about the impact of WikiLeaks on America. It seems that the article was written in response to recent fears about the CIA spying on American citizens in their homes. These fears exploded recently when videos of people asking their home devices such as Google Home or Amazon Alexa if they were connected to the CIA, and the devices responded by shutting off. Since then, Americans have feared for their privacy. The writers discuss this fear of privacy and how WikiLeaks, to some extent, holds the answer.

              The writer begins by stating that WikiLeaks has released over eight thousand documents and that not one hint the CIA is spying on American Citizens. Obviously, the writer implies that WikiLeaks not saying it means it isn’t happening. If the CIA were to be spying on American citizens, WikiLeaks would’ve said something about it. The author then argues that the CIA’s ability to spy on cell phones and computers is comforting. Knowing that the CIA can gather intelligence on potential dangers, even if the ability may be used on citizens, is favorable to the CIA lacking the ability altogether.

              This particular editorial is somewhat incoherent. Firstly, the fears of the CIA hacking and spying on citizens are somewhat unfounded as proven hastily by the author of this piece). However, there are rising fears of corporate espionage against customers that are much more legitimate. Recently, Samsung issued a warning to its customers to not discuss personal matters near their Smart TV. Clearly, the microphone in the TV is permanently on, and Samsung records its customers in order to gain information. Google and Facebook are notorious for selling their customers privacies for their own profit. It would be simply too easy for these companies to be corrupted and for the last of our privacy to be sold for money.

http://www.readingeagle.com/news/article/editorial-wikileaks-does-americans-no-favors

TOW 22: Why we should not know our own passwords

              This editorial was written for phys.org by Megan Squire, an experienced software engineer. The article, being centered around software conflict, is perfectly in Squire’s field of knowledge. Squire is a professor of computing sciences at Elon University and she obtained her Ph. D from Nova Southeastern University. Her article discusses the rising issue of privacy vs security. Many customs agents are demanding more and more access to both immigrants’ and travelers’ devices. Understandably, travelers are trying to devise ways to circumvent this invasion of privacy. Squire talks about the various methods of doing so and why the travelers have the right to practice it.

              Starting in 2009, US customs have been given permission to search electronic devices carried by citizens. This includes the right to demand citizens’ passwords. One idea that Squire and many other software developers (including the team at Google) came up with was referred to as the “I’d love to comply, but I can’t” solution. The idea was that a user’s password is something they know subconsciously, but is actually unable to share with someone else. Squire compares this to a musician who has perfected their muscle memory. They can play the song, but can’t tell someone the order of the notes they play. This security feature is extended by locking out the user if it detects irregular patterns in the user’s habits (this means someone other than the user could not use it without being locked out).

              Squire’s general argument, although never directly stated, is strongly implied: the customs searches are immoral and should be fought. She recognizes that the fight against them is borderline illegal, and addresses the real-world situations in the last paragraph. She reminds the reader that lying to the agent is the worst thing they could do. If you ever feel that your privacy is threatened, comply to the agent before seeking a digital civil liberties group. 

https://phys.org/news/2017-03-passwords.html

TOW 21: Here's one way of fighting terrorism that the U.S. may be rethinking under Trump

This article was written by Abby Sewell. Sewell was a journalist in Molalla and in Barstow before attending Northwestern University. She worked at The L.A. Times for six years. In this particular article, she describes possible changes to the US’s ant-terrorism techniques that could come about under the Trump administration. It seems that Sewell approves of the current tactics and fears that the possible changes will create negative consequences. She seems to fear that the new tactics will be less effective, and perhaps even more costly, then Obama’s tactics. She argues this through statistics and anecdotes.

Sewell begins the article with an anecdote from Lebanon. She describes a park opening. Families gathered around a public area with inflatable slides and lines of kids waiting their turn. The park is funded by the United States. The ideology behind this is that people only join terrorist organizations when their lives have gone so south that it is the only viable option for them. The purpose of the park was to establish a sense of joy in the residents of Lebanon. Perhaps a secondary purpose was to make them like the United States, in order to stop them fighting it when they grow older. This is in stark contrast to propositions put forth by the Trump administration, which favors a straightforward military approach to the issue.

The article is effective, but could be more so. The anecdote does a good job establishing a pathos argument. It makes the reader appreciate what the Obama administration’s tactics have done for the people of Lebanon. It becomes even more effective when put alongside the statistic of how little is spent on these development programs. Where I think she missed her mark was in her failure to express how Obama’s tactics stopped terrorism at its source, whereas Trump’s tactics merely offer resistance.

http://www.latimes.com/world/global-development/la-fg-development-aid-terrorism-20170305-story.html

TOW #20: "Liar's Poker" Part 1

              Michael Lewis’s Liar’s Poker is an account of Lewis’s own experiences as a bond trader on Wall Street. In the first half of the book, he covers many chapters of his life including his college years at Princeton, his search for a job, and his time as a trainee. Lewis explores the colorful yet consistent characters of Wall Street workers that give the title of “bond-trader” the accurate reputation it has acclaimed.

              It becomes apparent early on that Lewis has mixed feelings about his time on Wall Street. It seems that his purpose in writing the book was to emphasize the negative sides of the occupation. This is evident in his reasoning for not pursuing economics in college. On pg 30, he says “people were pursuing economics for all the wrong reasons.” One reason, clearly, was the desire to get rich. Lewis acknowledges this. He knows that a book about why making millions can be miserable may seem unconvincing when written by a man who has made millions himself. At points, he echoes what were his, and probably many economists’ motives today, to join the trading game. On pg 33 he puts in italics “I want to be an investment banker, Lehman Brothers is the best, I want to be rich.” He also acknowledges the obvious argument against his idea (being rich is better than being poor because you can buy more things). When he is telling the story of a “Liars’ Poker” game between the haughty traders Gutfriend and Merriweather, Gutfriend contemplates a wager of $10 million. At this point, Lewis interjects himself to state “It WAS good to be rich.”

              Lewis is certainly thorough enough to give the reader an idea of what Wall Street is like. He also does a fine job of acknowledging the primordial bias that anything that makes (a ton of) money is the best option. However, the story is somewhat unsatisfying in the way it is written. The liars’ poker game, for instance, never took place in the writing. Surely it will later in the book, but Lewis’s tendency to jump around makes the book irritating to read at times.

TOW #19: The Press Conference (visual)

              This political cartoon was created by Clay Bennett of Chattanooga, Tennessee for the Times Free Press. It is one of Bennett’s hundreds of political cartoons. This particular one was published on February 17^th. This was the day after Trump gave his first press conference as president of the United States. The cartoon depicts the press conference, but Trump himself is lying on a couch in front of the microphone as if he were speaking to a therapist. Meanwhile, the audience is furiously taking notes. This cartoon is commenting on Trump’s behavior at the conference and stating it was similar to the behavior of someone who should see a therapist.

              The metaphor of Trump as a therapist’s patient is the result of a few interactions he had at the press conference with the audience. One of the most notable ones was when Trump responded to a question by stating that his victory in the presidential race was the biggest since Ronald Reagan’s. An audience member was quick to reference Obama’s victory, which was by a much larger margin than Trump’s. Trump, who has seldom been confronted about his inaccurate statements, then doubles down by stating that it was the biggest republican victory since Ronald Reagan. The audience member refutes this as well by referencing George H. W. Bush’s victory, which was also larger than Trump’s. Trump then responds by saying that someone told him his was the biggest and that is why he thought it was the biggest. This pattern of denial and dishonesty is somewhat reminiscent of a psychopath and is why Bennett felt the need to depict Trump in a therapist’s couch.

              If the intention of the author had been to make Trump seem psychotic, then it was unsuccessful. It does not add to the context in which it was created. If, however, the author intended to simply mock Trump, he had more success in doing so. The cartoon helps to immortalize a moment of madness from an event that put it on display.

TOW 18: We Need To Build More Startups Like Tesla (argument #1)

              This article was written by Babur Habib, CEO of Portfolio School and contributor to Forbes.com. The article discusses the success of Tesla and similar companies and why they are favorable over other successful companies. Previously, the manufacturer would get their product to the customer through a network of middlemen. Now though, companies are taking over the whole route by themselves. Tesla, for instance, builds cars in their own factories (that they built), using batteries that they built, and sells them through their own company dealerships to customers. Habib argues that this model is superior to the old one because it allows customers more personalization in their experience. Tesla offers more customizability than any other car manufacturer, for example. Habib calls these companies “full-stack” companies.

              While there are definitely advantages to full-stack companies, such as the customer personalization that Habib talked about, they also carry certain downsides with them. Firstly, the reduction of middlemen decreases job opportunity. The factory companies and dealerships that were paid by Mercedes and BMW, were not paid by Tesla. Of course, those workers could get a job at Tesla, but this is another problem in itself. Many of the workers have no place at Tesla. Other companies that Habib identifies as full-stack are Uber (who takes jobs away from taxi-drivers) and Airbnb (who puts hotels out of business). The idea that full-stack companies are objectively good comes from a very narrow perspective, the perspective of the direct consumer. This is a little bit like saying piracy is good because you can get movies and TV shows for cheaper. Yes, it is good for the person clicking “play” but in the broader picture, it does much more damage. Full-stack companies have found a way to further exploit an ever-more desperate lower class. They are good, but only when you are giving them your money.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/baburhabib/2017/02/06/we-need-to-build-more-startups-like-tesla/#10b9bf1a19a1

IRB Intro #3

Over the course of marking period three, I will be reading "Liar's Poker" by Michael Lewis. This semi-autobiography describes the life of a high-frequency trader on Wall Street. Lewis himself was a trader in the late 1980s and he tells his story through this highly-acclaimed book. I find the idea of high-frequency trading interesting and I reading a first-hand account of the experience sounds very intriguing. 

TOW 17: Why we should free violent criminals

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/02/05/why-should-free-violent-criminals/HK8zo5OMtsMjhhQuXySuDM/story.html

This article was written by David Scharfenberg for The Boston Globe. Scharfenberg is a graduate of Brown University and was responsible for covering events such as the 2013 Boston mayor race and the 2014 governor-race. This particular article highlights the flaws in the American prison system. The Author argues that many of the problems come from the treatment of violent offenders, and he proposes new changes to the system. The Author makes it clear in the beginning that a quarter of the world's prisoners are in America (only 5% of the world’s population) and that prison populations are higher now than in 1970, despite crime rates being much lower.

One way the author argues his claim is with facts. Firstly, he dismisses the idea that the overpopulation of prisons is due to the war on drugs. He presents a statistic that shows only 20% of prisoners being drug offenders. He even says “Free them all tomorrow, and the United States would still have the largest prison population in the world.” Perhaps the best statistic he uses for arguing his point is the fact that prosecutors were twice as likely to seek jail time for the offender in 2008 than in the 1990s. However, the author uses more than just data, he uses anecdotes. He tells the story of Christopher, who stole 30 computers, and his prosecutor who let him off the hook. Christopher went on to earn a college degree and when he saw his prosecutor at an event he hugged him and said, “you changed my life.” This story demonstrates the need for opportunities for redemption for prisoners.

The author’s argument is very effective. Not only does he identify the problem and the source, but he explains how it can, and should, be solved. One cannot argue neither the data nor the instances of redeemed prisoners that Scharfenberg references. He shows that it is time for America to let the condemned redeem themselves.

TOW 16: "Maus" by Art Siegelman, Part 2.

              In the second half of Art Spiegelman’s “Maus,” he continues to tell the story of his father, Vladek, and his holocaust experience through visual texts and rhetoric. The events included in this section include Vladek’s release from a Nazi PoW camp, his attempts to hide himself and his family from the Nazi Gestapo, and his attempted escape to Hungary. The fact that this novel is derived from first-person accounts, as well as visual texts, makes for a reading experience much more powerful than it would otherwise achieve.

              Like many WW2 novels, this novel is aimed at bearing witness to the atrocities of the war, specifically, those committed against civilians. The graphics and visuals make it evident that this novel is targeted at a younger generation, a generation that may not have experienced the fear or hysteria that Spiegelman’s father had. Very few holocaust survivors remain, but Spiegelman’s interpretation of his father’s story is able to carry on the message.

              In addition to the ongoing extended metaphor of the Jews as mice and the Nazis as pigs and cats, Spiegelman implements visual representations in the second half. One example occurs on pg. 125. After Vladek’s neighborhood is emptied by the Nazi’s (they took all the Jews to concentration camps while Vladek and a few others successfully hid in secret places), the cartoons depict the roads in the shape of a swastika. This symbolizes how the Nazi’s did not only rob the Jews of their physical possessions and, in some cases, their lives, but they also transformed their identity and the way people think. This is also evident in the way the children chant “Heil Hitler.” Overall, the rhetoric is extremely powerful. Very few novels depict the genocide with the level of empathy that “Maus” does. It goes beyond being an eyewitness account, it puts the reader in the Jew’s place.

TOW 15: "Explosive Speed" Nike Advertisement (Visual Text)

              This advertisement features Neymar, one of the popular soccer players in the world, wearing the (then) new Nike Mercurial Vapor 8s. While explosions come from his footsteps, the slogan “explosive speed” is written beside him. The creators of this advertisement were the most shoe brand in the world, Nike.

              The audience intended for this advertisement is clearly soccer players. Who else would buy soccer cleats? The potential customers are supposed to look at the explosions coming from Neymar’s feet and think “Those cleats will make me run faster!” and look at Neymar himself and think “I want to be like him, so I should buy the cleats he wears.” This ad was launched at the same time as Nike released the Mercurial Vapor 8s. At the time, these were their latest soccer cleats. In order to attract the attention of customers, Nike employed rhetorical devices like hyperbole and ethos. The phrase “explosive speed” written on the side of the advertisement, along with the explosions under Neymar’s feet, are used to indicate that the wearer will be able to accelerate faster hen wearing these particular cleats. Explosions can expand at rates of up to 10,000 meters per second, much faster than a human could ever imagine running, and so this is a hyperbole. Nike also employs the ethos of Neymar. They try to imply that if Neymar uses these cleats and he is one of the best players in the world, then we should use them too.

              Nike’s add, while striking and admirable, is not very effective. Most of the audience knows that the only reason Neymar is wearing Vapor 8s is because Nike paid him too, and that does not make them any more appealing. Also, the “explosive speed” slogan is somewhat meaningless. The advertisement provides nothing to indicate that the cleats will actually make an athlete run faster. This advertisement is, like most of Nike’s, a way for them to flex their financial muscle.

TOW #14: Bernie Sanders and the Defeated Democrats (Visual Text)

         

               

               This cartoon features a trio of defeated donkeys (democrats) pondering how it would have been possible for them to win the election when their opponent, Donald Trump, was so good at connecting himself to the working class. While they conclude that nothing could be done, a worn and tattered poster of Bernie Sanders eyes them from a building behind them. The artist behind this cartoon is David Horsey, a graduate of the University of Washington and a two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize.

               Shortly after Hillary Clinton seized the Democratic Party’s nomination, it was revealed that the DNC intentionally rigged its primaries in her favor, and against Bernie Sanders. When Clinton lost the general election to Donald Trump, many pointed fingers at the DNC for nominating an “unelectable” candidate. Horsey’s cartoon expresses an idea that Sanders, who had shown fantastic skill at uniting himself with the people, would have fared better against Donald Trump than Clinton. Horsey uses this cartoon as an attack towards the DNC. In their effort to keep the nomination away from Bernie Sanders, they only hurt themselves.

              The artist uses dramatic irony in this cartoon to portray how obvious the DNC’s wrongdoings were. The donkeys, representing democrats, are wishing that Clinton had qualities that were specific to Sanders. If they knew that Sanders was watching them from the poster behind them, they wouldn’t be complaining. I think this cartoon is effective for a few reasons. Firstly, Clinton lost to Trump, this means the DNC’s evil paid off to nothing. Also, the leak showing that the DNC rigged its primaries hurt their nominee. Few people want to vote for someone who they felt was “cheating” in their campaign. Lastly, the cartoon emphasizes how Bernie’s advantages mirrored those of Trump, and how the DNC ignored the general anti-government feelings swelling in American voters.