Wiki-Cluj

Cum nu voi mai avea probabil timp deloc saptamana viitoare, un al treilea post pe astazi nu ar trebui sa fie considerat prea mult... De data asta despre Cluj...

Dan Anghel a avut acum cateva zile ideea excelenta de a aduna bloggerii clujeni (dupa modelul iesenilor, care ne-au luat-o se pare inainte- ei, nu-i bai, ardeleanu' e mai lent de felul lui, dar treaba o face pefect) pe ceea ce ar trebui sa devina - categoric!- un loc foarte vizitat in viitor, ie. blogul blogurilor clujene: Cluj BlogRoll. Pornind de aici e clar ca bloggerii respectivi- evident ne-excluzandu-ma!- ar trebui sa scrie now and then si despre Cluj- ca minima obligatie. Deci un prim entry despre Cluj in paragraful urmator.

Incep prin a introduce ceea ce cred eu (let me know if I am wrong!) ca este cea mai informativa descriere a Clujului online: Clujul pe Wikipedia, avand in plus toate sansele sa ramana (sau sa devina, daca mai sunt indoieli in privinta dominantei curente...) oricand cea mai informativa prezentare, fiind in continua transformare- o resursa dinamica. Am descoperit-o recent dand un browse intre "articolele fructuoase" Wikipedia, adica acele articole considerate excelente din punct de vedere al materialului informativ (in particular trebuie sa marturisesc ca inventia metodologiei wiki mi se pare o adevarata revolutie in ceea ce priveste comunicarea si mai ales, colectarea informatiei- si cred ca va avea un rol mult mai important din acest punct de vedere in viitor). Toti cei capabili- probabil cei mai calificati fiind nativii clujeni- sunt desigur invitati sa dezvolte mai departe aceasta colectie de informatii. Mie mi se pare deja un material excelent, cu destule avantaje comparative chiar fata de numeroasele monografii despre Cluj care mi-au cazut in mana pana acum. In plus are ca link un ghid turistic al Clujului in wikitravel - bunicel, cu toate ca ar mai fi destule de adaugat si un inceput de materiale multimedia despre Cluj in wikimedia commons- aici categoric mai este loc de multe altele, sunt doar cateva poze deocamdata.

Tot intre proiectele folosind tehnica wiki si cu potential in ceea ce priveste Clujul se numara si recenta idee a lui Sorin Matei (in colaborare cu Angela Dobrescu) in care orasele Romaniei ar fi prezentate din perspectiva locuitorilor lor. Si acest proiect mi se pare unul cu potential enorm. Deci clujeni, la treaba!

A clash of eras

This is something you cannot miss: an amazing act of courage by an Arab (Arab-American) scholar, a woman psychologist, who speaks up on the Al-Jazeera TV channel. I have never seen somebody so blunt and open about issues usually untackled. This is about questions the members of the Muslim religious group should ask themselves- and answer as well. The problem is that nobody does- at least not publicly- and this unfortunately includes also those- and I am sure they constitute the absolute majority- who do not support terrorist acts of any form carried out in the name of their religion. I entirely agree with the (main) standpoint- this is not about a clash of present-time religions or civilizations, but indeed it is about a clash of eras. On the one hand you have a side that evolved (in general, exceptions remain) incredibly-- despite paying huge costs that came along with this evolution-- from a similar fundamentalism that once materialized in the crussades, the Inquisition and the like; on the other hand you have the side that remained largely unchanged throughout the centuries...

The entire transcript of Wafa Sultan's speech in this video on an Arabic online tv (don't know for how long this link will be available) is available here. Excepts from it below:

The clash that we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations.
It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras.
It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century.
It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality.
It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship.
It is a clash between human rights on the one hand and the violation of these rights on the other hand.
It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts and those who treat them like human beings.
What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash but compete.

....

You are free to worship whomever you want, but the beliefs of other people are not your concern, whether they believe that the Messiah is God, son of Mary, or that Satan is God, son of Mary.
Let people have their beliefs.
The Jews have come from the tragedy (of the holocaust) and have forced the world to respect them; with their knowledge, not with their terror; with their work, not with their crying and yelling.
Humanity owes most of the science and discoveries of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish scientists.
15 million people, scattered throughout the world, united and won their rights through work and knowledge.
We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people.
Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy.
Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies.
This will not yield any results.
The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind before they demand that humankind respect them.

What's new

... or rather not entirely new- objectively speaking- but recent impressions from my part, so to say. This time about classical music, economic research and some new scientific highlights...

I ran into an excellent resource of classical music online that has, among other things, short informative biographies of many composers and- particularly- complete librettos for a few hundreds of the most famous world operas. See for instance the libretto for Leoncavallo's "I Pagliacci" (not randomly selected: if it all goes well, I would have seen I Pagliacci performed live in the famous Arena di Verona by the end of June). And since we talk about classical music, these are two of my favourite live classical music radios: ClassicFM UK, Radio 4 NL (they work most of the time!). Enjoy!

I reread a part of a very much cited interview with Jim Heckman (see also on this blog a short biographical note about the Nobel Laureate Heckman that I wrote a while ago for the Educational Supplement of the newspaper Gandul- in Romanian though) last year. This is about the "cute economics" literature that seems to be favoured by many economists nowadays, to the expense of the trully important research questions. I could not agree more with Heckman who turns against all these researchers- and I can say I even have personal reasons for that: one of these cute economics fans (and a world famous economist...) literally told me to change my PhD topic - since really nobody is interested in complex structural models & co - and tackle one of these cute economics topics that gets published immediately. It is true that I would have perhaps finished my PhD for quite some time now if I had followed his advice- nonetheless that would go against my principles (and therefore I am still stressing out with this thesis...). Anyways, this is the excerpt from Heckman's interview that every economist should digest:

In economics there's a trend now to come up with cute papers in an effort to be cited as many times as possible. All the incentives point that way, especially for young professors who seem risk-averse rather than risk-taking after they get tenure. In some quarters of our profession, the level of discussion has sunk to the level of a New Yorker article: coffee-table articles about “cute” topics, papers using “clever” instruments. The authors of these papers are usually unclear about the economic questions they address, the data used to support their conclusions and the econometrics used to justify their estimates. This is a sad development that I hope is a passing fad. Most of this work is without substance, but it makes a short-lived splash and it's easy to do. Many young economists are going for the cute and the clever at the expense of working on hard and important foundational problems.

There were two studies in Science last months that really caught my attention. One of them is a experimental sociological study investigating the secrets of success in the entertainment industry (an artificial "music market" in this case)- inter alia it could attempt to explain why some puerile and lacking any musical virtue songs such as "Dragostea din Tei" (aka "The MiYaHee" song for most foreigners) caught up so well all around the world- the initial inertia matters!- and another one is a psychological (field) study about the decisions made by consumers faced with different choices- this basically tells you- counter to common sense- not to think too much before buying a car or a house since you'll only have regrets (and headaches) and you'll be far less satisfied than when you choose these complex goods very fast, based on a minimum of features. From the monthly highlights of the AAAS:

Salganik, Dodds and Watts (2006) argue in the 10 Feb Science that there are no guarantees when it comes to knowing who or what the next big hit will be. In a study designed to understand the social underpinnings of success, the sociologists set up a Web site where people could listen to, rate, and download previously unknown songs by unknown musicians. Participants in one group were only given song titles and band names as their guide, while other groups received information about previous participants' choices (i.e., how many times songs were downloaded). The researchers found that popular songs were more popular (and unpopular songs less popular) in the groups where participants had access to other people's opinions; but which particular songs became very popular was nearly impossible to predict. Success was also only partly determined by quality: The best songs rarely did poorly, and the worst rarely did well, but any other result was possible.

We generally believe that taking time to think about a decision will result in a good choice. And the more complicated the decision, the more time many of us will spend agonizing over it. Now a Report in the 17 Feb 2006 Science suggests that thinking too much can sometimes get in the way of making the right decision. In a set of laboratory and "real-world" experiments, Dijksterhuis et al. [researchers from the University of Amsterdam] studied people making a range of consumer choices -- from simple ones like deciding what kitchen accessories to buy, to more complex ones like choosing a new car or furniture. They found that shoppers who spent time consciously thinking about simple items like oven mitts or shampoo were generally pleased with their purchases. But when faced with a more complicated choice like picking the best of 4 cars based on 12 attributes (with one car clearly better than the rest) conscious thinkers performed no better than chance, choosing the best car only 25% of the time. Even more surprising was that when researchers distracted the participants with puzzles before asking for their car choices, more than half ended up picking the best car. Counter to what we might think, the findings suggest that as choices become more complex, better decisions come from allowing one's unconscious to sift through the options.

Basescu: "Wellll, let's don't be pessimistic, when we have ALL conditions to be optimistic..."

Luiza Ilie scrie in cateva articole despre jurnalistii straini aparent veniti in Romania sa prezinte doar senzationalul, ceea ce e iesit din comun in sens negativ, ca imagini generalizate ale Romaniei, chiar atunci cand subiectul respectiv nu caracterizeaza decat o infima parte din populatie - sau e in mare de domeniul trecutului. Avand ea insasi experienta ca fixer (jurnalisti romani pe post de ghid si traducator pentru reporterii straini), Luiza Ilie aparent descrie exact ce este in mintea ziaristului strain venit in Romania. Pentru Luiza Ilie acesti jurnalisti manipuleaza prin fapte, fara vreo rea intentie, si astfel prezinta Romania de pe hartie, nu cea reala:

Din nou, nimic mai adevarat. Aceasta este Romania pe hartie. Dar articolul, oricat de mult ar respecta hartia, nu reda fidel realitatea. Acesta este poate cel mai trist aspect al jurnalismului -- manipularea prin fapte. Si fara scop rau. Pentru ca jurnalistii danezi, sau jurnalistii de la CNN, care au filmat prostitutia infantila, sau jurnalistii de la ABC, care au filmat in 2001 conditiile improprii din orfelinatele romanesti, ei toti nu urmareau sa faca rau. Ei urmareau pur si simplu un subiect tare. Ei au folosit fapte, nu fabulatii. Dar putem oare spune cu sinceritate ca faptele respective redau Romania?!... Poate cea de pe hartie. (mai multe detalii in articolele Luizei Ilie de pe anchete.ro: despre jurnalisti danezi si tiganii din Popesti-Leordeni, despre (aceiasi) jurnalisti danezi si copiii strazii)

Mai mai sa ma convinga, e foarte usor sa cazi in capcana asta (probabil infinit mai usor daca traiesti in Romania). Cred ca pana la urma Luiza Ilie insasi o face neintentionat- sa-i dau niste circumstante atenuante. Si pe alocuri dumneaei ar putea prezenta si niste lucruri valide, dar neglijabile relativ la majoritatea reporterilor straini si la subiectul din context per se, e.g. intr-adevar jurnalistul, ca specie, vrea sa prezinte lucruri iesite din comun, din asta traieste presa la urma urmei; intr-adevar unii dintre jurnalistii straini ar putea pur si simplu sa fie interesati DOAR de senzational si astfel sa ignore voit contextul mai amplu... In acelasi timp insa, faptele vorbesc. Cata vreme subiectul respectiv mai e de actualitate, oricat de neplacut ar fi, nu trebuie ignorat pe motiv ca nu mai e relevant pentru o majoritate- ba dimpotriva, atunci cand aceste inechitati intre o majoritate si diferite minoritati exista, atunci ar trebui insistat, descoperit, analizat. La noi exista insa tendinta de a minimaliza, de a neglija unele realitati care pentru straini sunt stridente, anormale- si pe drept cuvant. Cine sa scrie despre ele? Probabil Luiza Ilie nu le-ar mai considera relevante pentru dumneaei si pentru alte 20 de milioane de romani. Ce facem insa cu cele 10% de populatie ramase? Faptul ca nu vrem sa vedem sau sa discutam despre unele lucruri (pe motiv ca le-am auzit prea des si deci haideti sa schimbam subiectul sau ratiuni similare) nu inseamna ca ele nu exista.

Spuneam deci ca as fi fost aproape convins citind doar articolele jurnalistei noastre mai sus mentionate, insa din fericire am dat de un nou articol al Luizei Iliei pe hotnews.ro unde dumneaei se revolta- absolut nefondat de data aceasta-impotriva unui articol recent aparut in Washington Post in care intre altele se vorbeste despre taierea traditionala a porcului si aparenta incertitudine si chiar rezistenta la normele EU in domeniul acesta, norme care ar deveni lege si la noi o data cu aderarea Romaniei- preconizata in ianuarie la anul, despre diferenta persistenta dintre sat si oras la romani, despre discriminarea etniei roma s.a.m.d. Lasandu-va sa va faceti singuri o parere prin citirea criticii Luizei Ilie si a articolului original, as spune doar ca gasesc titlul articolului din cotidianul american extrem de OPTIMIST (am scris pesimist aici initial- a stat online cateva ore, merci celor care au sesizat nonconcordanta...). Eu l-as fi intitulat "Still in Darkness"- cel putin dupa ce am ascultat engleza de doi bani a domnului presedinte Basescu sau a domnului politolog Tanase sau- mai ales- elucubratiile primarului Gheorghe Tataru din Targu Frumos referitor la romi in general (primar care in primul rand vorbeste mult mai prost decat familia de etnie roma care se afla in litigiu cu administratia locala, Pandele) in videoclip-ul care poate fi accesat tot de pe pagina articolului.

Asadar: desi as putea si eu spune ca Luiza Ilie sau si mai bine, ca zambaretzul domn presedinte Basescu (in engleza-i colorata)- apropos, NOTA 10 pentru reporterul de la Washington Post pentru incheierea videoclip-ului cu replica lui Basescu- : Wellll, let's don't be pessimistic, when we have all conditions to be optimistic..."- eu din contra spun sa luam in serios toate criticile acestea si sa lasam prostia de a ne revolta impotriva jurnalistilor straini si de a incerca sa le inchidem gura, la o parte. Romania nu ar fi progresat defel daca nu i s-ar fi pretins implementarea unor anumite masuri inspre normalitate din afara- si inca nu e pregatita sa fie lasata de capul ei. Altfel s-ar putea sa nu mai avem in curand nici un motiv pentru a fi optimisti, cum ne cere domn presedinte...

Peter van Bergeijk to publicly "criticise" me (in Dutch)

Seemingly some Dutch economists in Holland - who don't necessarily know me- are suddenly very concerned about my spending too much time on the internet (TRUE- but nothing to do about this, I have to be in touch with what happens in the world) and particularly about my apparently doing everything (read: putting too much effort and energy to the expense of my research time) to promote my website in the top most visited pages within the category "economie-nederland" on webstats4u (WRONG- the fact that webstats4u does not have a mechanism to block your own visits is nothing to blame on me- I decided nonetheless not to use my webpage as browser homepage anylonger, just to satisfy these criticisms and to show that I could not care less if I were in the top of the most visited economics pages in the Netherlands or not...).

While thanking Prof. Bergeijk for his concern and advice (always welcome!- I want to believe that his concern is not simply related to the fact that his own blog is competing for a top place as most visited pages in the aforementioned category on webstats4u), I'd like to point out that he might have been too jumpy in his criticism... and superficial analysis is not something economists should often employ- while unfortunately enough, lots of them do. I trust Peter van Bergeijk is not part of this latter category, though this entry in his "enonomendagboek" can't be counted as support for that.

Ah, almost forgot: I think this ad-hoc critic doesn't like very much the pictures on my site either... well, what can I say... too bad Mr. Bergeijk, would be utopian from me to hope satisfying everybody...