Quote for the week 20th to 26th of May '07

People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they never use.

Søren Kierkegaard

Quote of the previous week.

Song of the day/ Movie scene of the week 20th to 26th of May '07: "The Trial", from "Pink Floyd The Wall"

This is a classic, hence I can (I will!) keep it short, without any intros, but just giving the necessary links. The song I propose for today (nothing is a coincidence :-)), "The Trial", is one of my favourites from Pink Floyd's "The Wall", which is one of my favourite albums from Pink Floyd (wikientry), which at its turn is really in the top of my favourite music bands of all times, as I already confessed.

This post is, at the same time, also about the superb film version of "The Wall" (see also its IMDb entry) and "The Trial" scene constitutes the perfect scene for this week.

To put music and motion picture together, here's the youtube clip of "The Trial." A masterpiece, really. Here's the essence (err... sentence):

Since, my friend, you have revealed your deepest fear,

I sentence you to be exposed before your peers!

Tear down the wall!

Watch also the movie scene of the previous week.

PS. You can watch most of "Pink Floyd The Wall" parts on YouTube (scan among the clips there).

The importance of cooperation in the production of knowledge... or of anything valuable, for that matter

Here's a link to an older post I wrote on the importance of team building (particularized for Romania) and I paraphrased Graham Bell in the end of it, just as I had done here (in Romanian).

A very interesting recent report in Science, "The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge" (subscription needed to view the full PDF), by three researchers from Northwestern University, makes the point above very clear for the specific area concerning production of scientific knowledge (in any discipline).

We have used 19.9 million papers over 5 decades and 2.1 million patents to demonstrate that teams increasingly dominate solo authors in the production of knowledge. Research is increasingly done in teams across virtually all fields. Teams typically produce more highly cited research than individuals do, and this advantage is increasing over time. Teams now also produce the exceptionally high impact research, even where that distinction was once the domain of solo authors. These results are detailed for the sciences and engineering, social sciences, arts and humanities, and patents, suggesting that the process of knowledge creation has fundamentally changed.

Stephen Dubner, on Freakonomics, touches on the same idea when explaining YouTube's success (though this is also about carefully selecting your team mates, previous succesful projects being priority sets...).

Doi patetici pe Hotnews. Aceiasi doi.

Cei doi de pe blogurile Hotnews (doar doi...) pe care ii laudasem cu alte ocazii (a., respectiv b)... Se pare intr-adevar ca au fost doar straluciri de moment... ceea ce nu e- stati linistiti- nimic neobisnuit pe la miorite, gregare ad infinitum, in orice, oriunde, oricum. In ultimele interventii personajele respective apar, ipso facto, in intreaga lor splendoare (naturala, presupun): semidocti, populisti, lozincarzi, patetici (au fost 'mnealor in degringolada de ceva vreme, deci incep sa ma indoiesc profund ca e vorba doar de labilitate- caveat lector, asta nu ar fi oricum o scuza; dar am crezut ca totusi nu se vor arunca chiar asa...in gol): vezi Doc, vezi Mihai Morar. Ma rog, circumstante atenuante pentru ca nu sunt si bugetivori, deci, material, peu importe. Inofensivitatea directa e suplinita insa de prostia agasanta (la urma urmei), care se propaga in ritm delirant in roblosfera. Mai ilar e sa realizezi cat de multi sunt cei care se raliaza paroxistic ineptiilor, prin comentariile la posturile cu pricina... Niste epave. LOL. Nu stiu de cate asemenea exemple de obscurantism e nevoie pentru a-i trezi si pe practicantii oblomovismului. Pateticii misuna doar pentru ca majoritatea celorlalti sufera de pasivitate cronica.

Pseudo-science at its best: "International Journal for Creation Research"

Check it up for yourselves. One of the most entertaining parts is the remark from their "Technical Review Process, Overview and Procedures".

"Remark:
The Editor-in-Chief should not be afraid to reject a Paper if it does not properly satisfy the above criteria nor is in the best interests of ICR as judged by its Biblical stand and goals as outlined in its Tenets. The Editors play a very important initial role in preserving a high level of quality in the IJCR, as well as protecting ICR from unnecessary controversy and review of clearly inappropriate papers." [my emphasis in bold]

LOL!

PS. This determined me to start a new blog category: "pathetic".

Final rankings of the MTel Chess Tournament

I blogged about this chess tournament from Sofia a while ago. Then it was just at the beginning and Dieter Nisipeanu was not doing bad at all. Unfortunately Nisipeanu lost to Adams in round 3 and my prediction for him winning the tournament was really conditional on a win there :-).

The final results of the tournament are here, but there is for now a mistake on the official site; Sasikiran should be the one before last among them, not the second as displayed now (the order remains the same in the rest), probably the Bulgarians were too enthusiastic about Veselin Topalov's win and ignored the rest of the hierarchy :-). I am sure they'll correct tomorrow (I definitely trust more Susan Polgar's ranking displayed on her blog, and it also corroborates my computation for the final standing; see also the interesting comments she made on the last round). Although he did not do overall as good as was expected of him, Topalov did very well towards the end of the tournament, finishing ranked first! In particular, remark that Topalov won in both games he played against Sasikiran, who really did a blunder in the last game against Topalov, until when he had been the leader of the tournament... The 4 players ranked below Topalov all have obtained 5 points, but given the rules of the game for tie-breaks, Nisipeanu is ranked 3rd among them and so 4th in the tournament... He could have done much better, but well, although he won to Topalov in the first game, he lost to him in the second and although he won to Adams in the second, he lost to the English GM in the first...

Update: In fact I was wrong (and most other people were wrong :-), including Susan Polgar above and these folks from hotnews.ro (in Romanian)- who usually don't know what they write about, taking over without verification from other sources, not to mention that their interpretation is pathetic: "Nisipeanu finishes in the group from the second place", instead of mentioning he was in the end 5th among 6 players...) and the organizers of the Mtel tournament were right. Given the rules from the tournament in Sofia, the second criteria is the number of wins. So indeed Sasikiran is number 2, with 3 wins, as Topalov (and Nisipeanu is 5th).

Movie scene for week 13 to 19th of May '07: Al Pacino's 'pro integrity' speech from "Scent of a Woman"

I already selected, a while ago, one other scene of this amazing movie, as part of my "movie scene of the week" blog-category. I therefore will not write anything else about the movie as a whole, but directly propose to you this flawless performance of Al Pacino, aka Colonel Frank Slade, as movie scene of this ending week. Why this scene, why this speech, why exactly now? Well, because I feel that precisely now it's high time we returned to the concept of 'integrity' and to what that precisely entails. It's high time we discussed about courage. About true leadership. About being yourself and taking decisions on your own. About the limit to the compromises one should make, about avoiding an "amputated soul"... About being responsible. About "choosing the path made of principle... that leads to character"... The speech here is better than anything else I know of in pleading for all these.

Thanks to script-o-rama.com, I could find the whole script of the movie (most likely a lot of effort, certainly a great idea, my deepest appreciation!), hence I am also able to display below the most memorable parts of the dialogue from the scene linked above, between Mr. Trask, Charlie Simms and Frank Slade. Whoo-ah!!!

[...]

Frank Slade: Mr. Simms doesn't want it. He doesn't need to be labeled..."still worthy of being a Baird man." What the hell is that? What is your motto here? "Boys, inform on your classmates, save your hide; anything short of that, we're gonna burn you at the stake" ? Well, gentlemen, when the shit hits the fan, some guys run... and some guys stay. Here's Charlie facin' the fire, and there's George... hidin' in big daddy's pocket. And what are you doin' ? You're gonna reward George... and destroy Charlie.

Mr. Trask: Are you finished, Mr. Slade ?

Frank Slade: No, I'm just gettin' warmed up! I don't know who went to this place. William Howard Taft, William Jennings Bryant... William Tell, whoever. Their spirit is dead, if they ever had one. It's gone! You're buildin' a rat ship here, a vessel for seagoin' snitches. And if you think you're preparin' these minnows... for manhood, you better think again, because I say you are killin' the very spirit... this institution proclaims it instills! What a sham! What kind of a show you guys puttin' on here today? I mean, the only class in this act is sittin' next to me. And I'm here to tell you... this boy's soul is intact. It's non-negotiable! You know how I know? Someone here, and I'm not gonna say who, offered to buy it. Only Charlie here wasn't sellin'...

Mr. Trask: Sir, you're out of order!

Frank Slade: Out of order... I show you out of order! You don't know what out of order is, Mr. Trask. I'd show you, but I'm too old, I'm too tired, too fuckin' blind. If I were the man I was five years ago, I'd take... a flamethrower to this place! Out of order! Who the hell you think you're talkin' to ? I've been around, you know? There was a time I could see! And I have seen! Boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off. But there is nothin' like the sight... of an amputated spirit. There is no prosthetic for that. You think you're merely sendin' this splendid foot soldier... back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs, but I say you are... executin' his soul! And why? Because he's not "a Baird man"... Baird men... You hurt this boy, you're gonna be Baird bums, the lot of you. And... Harry, Jimmy, Trent, wherever you are out there, fuck you too !

Mr. Trask: Stand down, Mr. Slade !

Frank Slade: I'm not finished! As I came in here, I heard those words: "cradle of leadership." Well, when the bough breaks, the cradle will fall, and it has fallen here. It has fallen! Makers of men, creators of leaders... be careful what kind of leaders you're producin' here. I don't know if Charlie's silence here today... is right or wrong; I'm not a judge or jury. But I can tell you this: he won't sell anybody out... to buy his future! And that, my friends, is called integrity! That's called courage! Now that's the stuff leaders should be made of! Now I have come to the crossroads in my life. I always knew what the right path was. Without exception, I knew... but I never took it. You know why? It was too damn hard. Now here's Charlie. He's come to the crossroads. He has chosen a path. It's the right path. It's a path made of principle... that leads to character. Let him continue on his journey. You hold this boy's future in your hands, Committee! It's a valuable future, believe me! Don't destroy it! Protect it! Embrace it! It's gonna make you proud one day, I promise you.

[...]

Watch the movie scene of the previous week.

Quote for week 13th to 19th of May '07

Take our politicians: they're a bunch of yo-yos. The presidency is now a cross between a popularity contest and a high school debate, with an encyclopedia of cliches the first prize.

Saul Bellow

Read quote of the week before.

Politica fara tromf si... parerile fara suport

Tare ma tem ca Sorin Matei iarasi se leaga de lucruri unde nu are in mod necesar toate competentele. Articolul acesta din Adevarul (cu preview si pe pagini.com) are si parti bune (da, un eventual Basescu reloaded ar trebui, in sfarsit, sa-si in serios rolul de Presedinte si sa inceteze sa fie un bufon...desi incep sa ma indoiesc ca are abilitatea necesara si deci ca ar fi doar o chestiune de vointa), chit ca ar putea prezenta o analiza mai obiectiva si pasaje care il plaseaza in seria articolelor deloc impartiale ar putea fi eliminate... Dar, sa ajungem si la marea dilema: sa fie desfiintata Curtea Constitutionala? Si pe ce baza? Trias politica in SUA, prin sistemul lor original de checks and balances, functioneaza complet diferit, iar in acel context nu e neaparat nevoie de o institutie separata pentru evaluarea neconstitutionalitatii anumitor propuneri legislative: in practica, curtile de apel americane au rolul de a implementa judicial review-ul constitutional (evaluarea constitutionalitatii legii respective) in SUA, Curtea Suprema avand intaietate doar in cazuri foarte particulare sau preluand cazul dupa epuizarea tuturor posibilitarilor la nivel de curti de apel. Dar de cand si pana cand avem noi un sistem asemanator cu cel al Statelor Unite si cine s-ar gandi sa implementeze asta in Romania, at all (deocamdata nu vreau sa cred ca Sorin doreste pur si simplu sa importe orice i se pare 'catchy' institutional arrangement in SUA, fara sa se gandeasca ca mare parte din aceste lucruri nu sunt importabile...cel putin nu in viitorul apropiat)? In majoritatea Europei (de Est si de Vest, de Sud si de Nord...) Curtea Constitutionala are un rol foarte bine definit - exceptia notorie fiind Marea Britanie (atentie insa, distinctia din cazul de fata nu e aceeasi cu distinctia dintre "common law systems" si "civil law systems", desi sunt anumite intersectii etc, nu mai intru in detalii) unde redundanta unei asemenea instante e evidenta, dat fiind ca Marea Britanie functioneaza sub principiul suveranitatii parlamentare, deci neavand asa-numita institutie a 'legii supreme'- caveat lector insa, fiind tara membra a Uniunii Europene, de facto legile UK sunt totusi supuse unui control 'constitutional' prin intermediul curtilor Uniunii Europene.

De ce "un caine fara dinti"? Poate Sorin sa nu stie (dar ne-informarea a priori incepe sa nu ma mai mire...), dar Curtea Constitutionala e investita cu o serie de atributii extrem de necesare si faptul ca nu le-a exercitat pana acum nu are cum sa fie un motiv pentru desfiintarea ei. Dimpotriva, eu as intari rolul curtii existente (deci, atentie, o curte constitutionala care sa se ocupe exclusiv de protejarea cadrului constitutional), astfel incat sa nu aiba neaparat nevoie de "cooperarea" cu alte entitati politice in decizii cruciale, deci m-as indeparta de modelul Frantei aici (model pe care Romania l-a urmarit indeaproape de cand lumea, inclusiv prin copierea succesiva a Constitutiilor franceze...) Intr-adevar un simplu aviz avand caracter consultativ al Curtii Constitutionale nu e suficient (chiar si in Franta, din cate stiu, curtea, sau mai bine zis, consiliul constitutional francez, poate decide doar inainte de ratificarea legii, dar am impresia ca nu e vorba doar de un aviz consultativ...). Dar ar trebui sa ne inspiram din cadrul institutional din Germania- si din alte state cu institutii asemanatoare ale Europei continentale; in particular, Curtea Constitutionala Federala din Germania e investita cu puteri serioase in a decide constitutionalitatea oricarui act legislativ in baza Grundgesetz (inter alia, aceasta instutie functioneaza complet separat de restul aparatului judiciar german...), dar atentie, are si creditul necesar unei asemenea pozitii. Eu zic ca ea ar trebui sa fie exemplu pentru Curtea Constitutionala din Romania. Oricum ar fi, insa, sa continui in spiritul analogiei lui Sorin, ceea ce ne dorim la urma urmei e un caine de rasa, disciplinat si inteligent; prefer asta atat celui "fara dinti", dar si celui 'cu dinti', insa incontrolabil si imprevizibil :-).

A propos, pentru ca intuiesc unde ar bate eventualele prime comentarii, ideea de a desfiinta prezenta Curte Constitutionala din Romania si a institui in locul ei o singura curte suprema, "cu puteri reale" nu prea tine, exemplul Curtii Supreme din SUA nefiind deloc elocvent (nu cunosc suficiente detalii despre functionarea Inaltei Curti de Casatie si Justitie din perioada antebelica, dar e clar ca in prezent ai ajunge la situatia americana unde review-ul constitutional ar fi delegat instantelor inferioare- strategic e evident de ce acest lucru e necesar), ba chiar functionand drept contra-exemplu, if anything. Din nou (si ad infinitum, daca e necesar :-)): Curtea Suprema din SUA nu poate 'prelua' direct vreo lege pentru evaluarea constitutionalitatii acesteia pana in momentul in care instantele inferioare din context, "curtile de apel" aici nu s-au pronuntat, dar pe langa asta, si esential aici, chiar si atunci cand ar ajunge cazul vis-a-vis constitutionalitate la ultima instanta- sau daca Supreme Court-ul ar avea 'original jurisdiction' de la bun inceput- tot e nevoie de cooperarea Congresului si a Casei Prezidentiale (desi asta nu e toata istoria: o discutie mai tehnica ar distinge intre deciziile de "unconstitutional law" si respectiv "non-enforceable law", pe care unele instante de review constitutional le pratica). All in all, cred ca Sorin se invarte in jurul cozii si de fapt ce propune el aici e sau utopic sau ineficient.

Anwyays, pentru ca nu am mai mult timp, dau un link catre o scurta nota (in engleza) pe marginea relevantei Curtii Constitutionale in Europa de Est pe care am scris-o cu mult timp in urma, in '99, pentru un curs de drept (Legal Theory) la Utrecht (evidemment, unele pasaje de acolo sunt prezentate intr-un format mult mai naiv decat as face-o acum, iar abilitatile mele in folosirea limbii engleze in contexte mai academice erau inca foarte limitate...). Gasesc ca multe lucruri de acolo sunt extrem de relevante si acum (desi evident din '99 s-au si schimbat unele). Si poate mai afla unii si altii si despre instante in care Curtea Constitutionala si-a folosit puterile si de ce asta a contat si va conta si nu e cazul sa o luam razna complet cu parerile, analizele, sugestiile...

Bill and Kofi in Aarhus

...and of course I'll be there on Monday to check out what they've got to say! By the way: you see above the very first picture on this blog :-).

If you didn't know what manualists are...

There's no way I'm gonna call this "music", but it can go in my "fun" blog-category. Playing songs with your hands... Here's Michael Blowhard with the story. And a bunch of extra "manualist clips" from YouTube. Take for instance James Brown's "I feel good"- this guy certainly looks like having fun :-). You decide whether these people face a creativity crisis (though it's gotta be a chronic one given that it goes on for almost 4 decades!) or it's more than that :-).

Update: This one is by far my favourite (though this version is somewhat better; from all points of view: ah, women with personality! :-))!

Does self-citation pay?

I am not completely convinced by the methodology employed (particularly by the way causality is ultimately dealt with) in this article from Scientometrics, but this is certainly a very interesting question (download PDF) and it is also true that not many have so far looked at the incentives to self-cite oneself. Here's the gist of it:

We report the results of a macro study of more than half a million citations to articles by Norwegian scientists that appeared in the Science Citation Index. We show that the more one cites oneself the more one is cited by other scholars. Controlling for numerous sources of variation in cumulative citations from others, our models suggest that each additional self-citation increases the number of citations from others by about one after one year, and by about three after five years. Moreover, there is no significant penalty for the most frequent self-citers – the effect of self-citation remains positive even for very high rates of self-citation.

So, if you believe this, start citing yourselves! Keep however in mind that you need to have published something 'citable', to start with :-).

The link to the article is via Tyler Cowen, on Marginal Revolution . Check out also the comments to that post; some of them raise very interesting issues: I tend to agree for instance with the fact that citing oneself is a way (a trial) to 'revive' (discussion around) older personal articles, much like bringing to attention older blog posts by now and then referring back to them in newer ones :-).

Topul universitatilor din Romania pe 2007. Si despre specializarea UBB in religie (sau mai degraba, in JSRI)

Ad Astra a publicat ierarhia universitatilor din Romania in 2007 (bazata pe articolele indexate ISI in 2006). Razvan Florian da o serie de detalii, inclusiv link-uri catre preluari mass media, aici. Doar foarte rapid cateva observatii si ma rezum la cele critice pentru ca meritul Ad Astra e altfel incontestabil :-)

• am mai criticat ( pe scurt) obsesia noastra cu ranking-ul "Shanghai" si cu alta ocazie, dar din nou argumentul pro (deocamdata dominant...) este ca e mai bine decat nimic si e o intreprindere binevenita in Romania, un punct de start
• mult mai informativ decat clasamentul general despre care toata presa a sarit sa scrie (obsesia romanului...) e clasamentul pe domenii (si, in mod normal- dar ah, normalitate de Romania- ar trebui sa avem chiar mai multe detalii, deci subdomenii si subsubdomenii etc). Inter alia, aici se observa si care domenii sunt cele mai productive si care nu sunt productive deloc (in particular, uitandu-ma la economie observ enormul numar de... 3 publicatii; no further comments).
• legat de punctul anterior, observ o curiozitate, religia este singura dintre 'umanioare' (de fapt, mai mult, dintre socio-umanioare, doar 'economie plus afaceri' apare cu 22) unde avem un numar de articole, la nivel national, care se poate scrie cu doua cifre (21). Dar si mai interesant este faptul ca 12 dintre ele- dominatie categorica! - sunt cele publicate de cercetatori de la Universitatea Babes Bolyai (UBB) din Cluj; urmaresc link-ul sa vad mai bine despre ce e vorba. Ei bine, gasim toate publicatiile respective in acelasi jurnal, Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies (JSRI), unde, guess what, editorul si o gramada de membri ai board-ului editorial si suportul tehnic etc. apartin Universitatii Babes Bolyai. Bineinteles asta nu vrea (nu trebuie) sa spuna (deocamdata) nimic, e doar o curiozitate... S-ar putea ca autorii sa fie chiar foarte buni si peer review-ul sa fie facut profesionist (desi evident jurnalul e nou in ISI- faptul ca revista e indexata de ISI e un lucru foarte bun, desigur, dar greul abia de acolo incepe/ ar trebui sa inceapa, eterogenitatea publicatiilor din ISI e, dupa cum bine stim, imensa- si deci cu un Impact Factor destul de mic - a propos, observ, surprinzator, ca la 'religie' nici nu apare nimic la coloana factor "impact factor insumat"- etc), dar s-ar putea sa fie si altceva. Si desi nu ar fi neaparat vorba de un fenomen singular ( s-a intamplat si se intampla din cand in cand si prin alte parti...), daca asta (si altele similare: nu am avut timp sa investighez mai in detaliu) ar putea explica cel mai bine pozitia a 2-a a UBB in clasamentul general si 'detronarea Universitatii din Bucuresti' (care pare sa fie subiectul preferat de mass media) toata treaba e exact caca maca - si lumea ar face bine sa revina cu picioarele pe pamant cat mai devreme. UBB e inca departe de performanta (iar faptul ca si asa e intre primele din Romania, e si mai trist...).

Romanian politics: "dizzying heights of absurdity"

An interesting article in The Times about the ongoing political scandal in Romania. I agree with the part of "dizzying heights of absurdity". The rest is not impartial.

How to determine the height of a skyscraper with a barometer

The best joke in weeks. I've heard parts of it before, but never the whole thing. Enjoy (you might want to study Physics- if you did not do that or are not doing that already- after this :-)):

This concerns a question in a physics degree exam at the University of Copenhagen: "Describe how to determine the height of a skyscraper with a barometer."

One student replied: "You tie a long piece of string to the neck of the barometer, then lower the barometer from the roof of the skyscraper to the ground. The length of the string plus the length of the barometer will equal the height of the building."

This highly original answer so incensed the examiner that the student was failed immediately. He appealed on the grounds that his answer was indisputably correct, and the university appointed an independent arbiter to decide the case. The arbiter judged that the answer was indeed correct, but did not display any noticeable knowledge of physics. To resolve the problem it was decided to call the student in and allow him six minutes in which to provide a verbal answer which showed at least a minimal familiarity with the basic principles of physics.

For five minutes the student sat in silence, forehead creased in thought. The arbiter reminded him that time was running out, to which the student replied that he had several extremely relevant answers, but couldn't make up his mind which to use. On being advised to hurry up the student replied as follows:

"Firstly, you could take the barometer up to the roof of the skyscraper, drop it over the edge, and measure the time it takes to reach the ground. The height of the building can then be worked out from the formula H = 0.5g x t squared. But bad luck on the barometer.

"Or if the sun is shining you could measure the height of the barometer, then set it on end and measure the length of its shadow. Then you measure the length of the skyscraper's shadow, and thereafter it is simple matter of proportional arithmetic to work out the height of the skyscraper.

"But if you wanted to be highly scientific about it, you could tie a short piece of string to the barometer and swing it like a pendulum, first at ground level and then on the roof of the skyscraper. The height is worked out by the difference in the gravitational restoring force T = 2 pi sq root(l / g).

"Or if the skyscraper has an outside emergency staircase, it would be easier to walk up it and mark off the height of the skyscraper in barometer lengths, then add them up.

"If you merely wanted to be boring and orthodox about it, of course, you could use the barometer to measure the air pressure on the roof of the skyscraper and on the ground, and convert the difference in millibars into feet to give the height of the building. But since we are constantly being exhorted to exercise independence of mind and apply scientific methods, undoubtedly the best way would be to knock on the janitor's door and say to him 'If you would like a nice new barometer, I will give you this one if you tell me the height of this skyscraper'."

The student was Niels Bohr, the only Dane to win the Nobel prize for Physics.

Got the story from here.

Prediction Markets: when in Romania?

I cannot but agree with the main idea of the recent statement on the prediction markets (you can download the PDF free of charge via SSRN, once you make an account with them), signed by a bunch of top economists, including 4 Nobelists. Of course the request is fitted for the legal framework of the USA, but such a thing would not be unwelcome in any other country. Take Romania, for instance (I would be very much interested to know what is the legal framework relevant for this context, in there). I already suggested "Basescu Impeachment" contracts traded on such a market :-). An equally interesting one would be "Becali Prime Minister in the next decade": would you put your money on that? :-). These markets tend to be extremely good predictors of future outcomes, much more so than any polls. Here's the main idea of the prediction markets, very well emphasized within the statement linked above:

Prediction markets go by a number of different names, including information markets and event markets. An example will help clarify what we mean by a prediction market. Suppose a contract pays $1 only if candidate "X" wins the presidential election in 2008, and the market price of an X contract is currently 53 cents. That means the market "believes" X has a 53% chance of winning the election. This is a simple example of a binary outcome prediction market that was pioneered by professors at the University of Iowa in the late 1980s.

Prediction markets have already been used in a variety of contexts with remarkable success. For example, prices of economic derivatives predict economic variables better than professional economists; prices in Iowa political markets are typically more accurate than the polls in forecasting elections; and prediction markets at Hewlett-Packard Labs beat official forecasts of printer sales most of the time.

Prediction markets reflect an old thought that underlies the price system: Information is widely dispersed in society, and it is highly desirable to find a mechanism to collect and aggregate that information. These markets work for several reasons: First, almost anyone can participate. Second, people think hard when they have to back up their predictions with money; buy the right presidential contract and you win, buy the wrong one and you lose. Third, the profit motive encourages people to look for better information.

Econlinks for 13-05-'07

• an excellent (wide-audience targeted) article on the upside of income inequality, by Gary Becker and Kevin Murphy. Greg Mankiw also writes about it (and singles out exactly the fragment I wanted to single out).

• a clear KO administered by Steven Levitt to some 'journalist' who tried to criticise him and made a mess of himself, rather... That was nice (don't upset Levitt if you're not a pro and particularly don't do it if you have no clue what you're talking about...), but I think Levitt is wasting his time with answering such nonsense in such detail, and he'd rather give some reactions to the interesting part of the criticisms raised, for instance, by Rubinstein (Rust and Heckman are other heavyweights that criticised Levitt in the past). I summarized a bit of all that on this blog, a while ago.

• one very interesting piece of Paul Rubin in the Washington Post, on the link between evolution and (some) people's wrong opinions on immigration and trade. I cannot agree more with one of his conclusions: "A deeper understanding of economics is like reading- it must be taught". Via Greg Mankiw (though I can't really see this as 'Darwin versus Smith'...).

• an older entry of Bernard Salanié (who's recently decided to take a break from blogging: I hope it won't be for very long...) on Maths prodigy Terence Tao (you can read a short description of Tao's work- and of the other recent Fields medal laureates- that got him the recent Fields medal, in the March number of the Notices of the American Mathematical Society; in the same number there is also an interview with him and with the other two Fields medalists who did not decline the honour, like Perelman) . The bottom line is that you should take the Terence Tao Test (TTT) as well- and don't forget that he had solved it perfectly before he was 8 years old :-).

Movie scene of the week 6th to 12th of May '07: Awe-stricken Salieri facing Mozart's genius, in "Amadeus"

Milos Forman's "Amadeus" is for now my absolute favourite (really and really my number 1!) movie of all times (I presented a while ago on this blog my current top 25). The 8 Oscars (and other 3 Academy Awards nominations) , plus numerous other prizes at various film festivals all around the world, that this movie won, are really just the least amount of recognition it deserves. One of my favourite scenes from this masterpiece (and one that in several ways matches this past week...) is the fragment depicting Salieri's (involuntary) reaction of astonishment when faced with perfection, with "absolute beauty", with the divine nature of Mozart's new works (the 'core' part I aim for here starts after approx. 3'30'' in the YouTube clip linked above). A brilliant, simply brilliant acting here by F. Murray Abraham, as Antonio Salieri (certainly deserving the Oscar for his performance throughout all of "Amadeus")! Here's the part of the script rendering Salieri's feeling of pure awe:

Astounding?! It was actually... it was beyond belief. These were first and only... drafts of music. But they showed no corrections of any kind. Not one! He'd simply written down music... already finished... in his head. Page after page of it. As if he were just taking dictation. And music... finished as no music is ever finished. Displace one note... and there would be diminishment. Displace one phrase, and the structure would fall. It was clear to me... that sound I had heard in the Archbishop 's palace... had been no accident. Here, again, was the very voice of God! I was staring through the cage... of those meticulous ink strokes... at an absolute beauty...

But let's get to the music from the core of the scene (and YouTube really helps in here- I just love it!). The music from the scores that Salieri is reading with such marvel is, in chronological order, fragment from: Concerto for flute and harp in C major, K 299 (2nd Movement, Andantino) - listen to all the 2nd mvm. here; Symphony No 29 in A major, K 201 (1st Movement, Allegro Moderato)- listen to all the 1st mvm. here; Concerto for two pianos, No 10, in E flat, K 365 (3rd Movement)- listen to all the 3rd mvm. here, in an awesome performance by Keith Jarrett and Chick Corea!!!; Symphony Concertante, K 364 (1st Movement)- listen to the first part of the 1st mvm. here; and Great Mass in C minor: Kyrie, K 427- listen to this astounding piece here. There is also a 3-CD set that contains all Mozart's pieces (partly) played in the movie (and that I obviously have for quite a while now...).



The movie scene of the previous week.

Quote of the week 6th to 12th of May '07

Ceea ce mă nelinişteşte este usurinţa cu care anormalitatea capată în viaţa noastră o aparenţă de normalitate. Odată mai mult, îmi spun că important nu este ce face istoria din noi, important este ce facem noi cu ceea ce face istoria din noi.

Octavian Paler

Quote for the week before.

Books I've finished reading this week (And a PS on Chicago)

...with a one phrase short characterization for each of them. But before that, I certainly recommend these books to you, they really say a lot about (the style of) their famous American authors.

• Allen Ginsberg, "Death and Fame. Last Poems 1993-1997": absolutely great talent, very interesting views on life, in particular extreme liberal political views (which I share with the author to a great extent- by the way, very conservative readers might be shocked reading some of the poems in there, so be aware, you've been warned :-)), unfortunately not much understanding (and a waste of making nonsensical points to the contrary...) of what economics (economic policy) is or should be about (obviously there isn't much in my perspective to intersect with the poet's point of view when it comes down to that). But Ginsberg is Ginsberg, you can (do your best to) appreciate him even when he exaggerates. Keep the book out of the reach of antiglobalists, anti-multinationals, anti-free trade and "anti" folks in general, though :-).
• Kurt Vonnegut, "A Man Without a Country": probably THE autobiography of Vonnegut, a Vonnegut^2 one might say; the Los Angeles Times rightly finds it "as close as Vonnegut ever comes to a memoir"; some views expressed here are extremely pessimistic and/or extreme, period, but, after all, this is Vonnegut, you've gotta take the whole package :-). And if you're one of those worrywart misanthropes, probably you'll make this book your Bible...

PS. I bought these books above (and a bunch of others...) from Chicago: they do have amazing bookstores there (with a lot of price reductions :-)), which you should not ignore once you decide you need a break from walking up and down the Michigan Avenue or within the "Loop" in general, climbing the John Hancock Center and getting a splendid view over all of Chicago, admiring the Chicago skyline by means of taking the Chicago river boat tour (the one starting at the Navy Pier, of course; they seem to have very informed and very entertaining guides), visiting the Millenium Park (where you might just run into Dalai Lama, as I did), walking along the beach(es) of the Michigan Great Lake and from many other great things which unfortunately I did not have enough time for. For the very curious, I count as priorities for the next time- there's no question about a next and in fact, many next times!- visiting some of the world famous musea in Chicago, such as the Adler Planetarium, the Field Museum of Natural History, the Art Institute of Chicago, the Museum of Contemporary Art, the Shedd Aquarium etc..., listening to some live jazz & blues played in Chicago's most popular jazz locals, visiting more of Chicago outside the Loop (the Italian neighbourhood(s), Chinatown etc.) etc. ; I DO NOT count here visiting any of the, as I've recently found out, 17 (seventeen)- holy cow!- churches of the very numerous Romanian community (I heard Romanian spoken several times when simply walking on the Michigan Avenue): I'd very much like to see other things the Romanians in Chicago would be known for and their community centered around, beyond the omnipresent, very much in excess, churches).

Nisipeanu has got a great chance

Probably everybody who follows chess competitions knows this already, but anyways, I will still remind you that Dieter Nisipeanu is doing very well at the ongoing "M-Tel Masters" International Super Chess Tournament, from Sofia. And this while most other participants have far better ELO rankings than him, so far. The results so far are here (with the link to the game Nisipeanu won to Topalov here- I assume all bets were for Topalov in this one :-)). Well, I think Topalov got a bit impatient (in particular I really don't understand why he moves the pawn to b5 at move 40, allowing Nisipeanu to check Qe1), while Nisipeanu was perfectly calm and that usually helps...a lot. Very good! You can also watch an interview with Nisipeanu, after the first round, or view other clips from the tournament.

PS. Conditional on a win tomorrow to Adams, I predict Nisipeanu will win the tournament :-).

Chapeau bas, inca o data! Cred ca e chapeau^4

Desi a facut si oaresicare prostii inextricabile (pe care prefer- let me rephrase: am un strong preference - sa nu le discut) care la un moment dat m-au determinat sa ma intreb daca plusurile sale nu au fost decat variatii de la o medie dominant-mediocra, sunt fericit sa descopar ca Darius Groza e categoric pe calea cea buna (alternativ, in cel mai rau caz, "dezvoltarea" sa poate fi descrisa printr-o miscare browniana cu un drift pozitiv :-)). Si reusita lui de care voi vorbi mai jos e indeniabila si- caveat lector- mult deasupra unei simple lapalisade (tehnica in care, la urma urmei, nu e atat de rau sa te poti specializa; dezavantajul e ca devine dificil a ajunge sa-ti creezi si un avantaj comparativ, competitia in domeniu fiind acerba...).

Ziceam si cu alta ocazie ca, grosso modo, am mare incredere in noile generatii, in procesul lor de maturizare si, in particular, in alegerea lor de a rupe orice legatura cu spiritul gregar, cu infantilismul, cu atractia spre nonvaloare, cu defetismul, cu letargia... (din pacate, generale) ale generatiilor anterioare (chit ca lipseste inca- sau e prea putin prezent- acel element crucial pe care l-am numit si voi continua sa-l numesc, intr-un catchall term, exposure). Be yourselves and think for yourselves (and express yourselves- don't impress yourselves, but that's a second step already...). In alta ordine de idei, m-as bucura ca Darius sa nu fie singur si ca altii sa nu aiba neaparat nevoie de experiente (si mai ales, intalniri de gradul 0) traite live, pentru a distinge nuantele in Romania (postul si clipul- THE highlight!- de pe JEG vorbesc de la sine). Care sunt riscurile? Ai deveni impopular pentru moment? Indezirabil, poate? Delicii pe plai mioritic... Ad majora, tinere!

Din trecut: Chapeau, Chapeau^2 si Chapeau^3.

Fun with Rogoff and Wolfowitz. And hedging against a (Presidential) change, in general

Amid all the scandal around the World Bank boss, Paul Wolfowitz and his (required/demanded/expected, by most) would or would not-be resignation, here's a very recent leaked memo from him to his staff (Ken Rogoff has been rather careless and leaked it to the press :-)). One of the best parts is the following: "Some of you may also wonder whether World Bank staff, directors, or presidents are permitted to buy “George W. Bush Impeachment” contracts, which are also presently listed on TradeSports.com. Tricky question, but the bottom line is that your employment generally precludes political activity of this type. You will be relieved to know, however, that I have already instructed the Bank legal staff to allow exceptions to the insider trading rules for anyone who can demonstrate a truly compelling need to hedge against a change at the White House."

So, if you can demonstrate a truly compelling need to hedge against a change, you've got the green light (even if you're not a World Bank employee...). I assume it also works for far less known- second class, really- actors like Romania and its (currently suspended) President, though, curiously, nobody thought of listing "Basescu Impeachment" contracts on the Intrade.com (by comparison, Russia's 2008 elections are already in!).

I found out about the "memo leak" from Greg Mankiw.

Movie scene for the week 29th of April to 5th of May '07: The Dance Contest Scene from "Pulp Fiction"

This is the movie scene that best characterizes this (past) week. Dominant (and irresistible) Mia Wallace + ' good for everything' Vincent Vega + maestro Chuck Berry in the background with "You can never tell". The result is one of my favourite scenes from Tarantino's undisputed masterpiece, which is certainly among my top movies of all times.

Movie scene for the previous week.

Quote for week 29th of April- 5th of May '07

O chansons foregoing

You were a seven days' wonder.

When you came out in the magazines

You created considerable stir in Chicago,

And now you are stale and worn out,

You're a very depleted fashion,

A hoop-skirt, a calash,

An homely, transient antiquity.

Only emotion remains.

Your emotions?

Are those of a maitre-de-cafe.

Ezra Pound, Epilogue

Quote of the previous week.

Studenter-Sangforeningen la Cluj: 7 mai, orele 18, Academia de Muzica "Gheorghe Dima"

Hans Christian imi face cunoscut urmatorul anunt despre turneul transilvan al Corului Universitatii din Copenhaga. Deci, mai ales pentru clujenii mei: daca as fi la Cluj pe 7 mai (din pacate, pentru contextul de aici, eu voi fi la Chicago...), as face tot posibilul sa prind cantecele studentesti/academice scandinave din program. Intrarea (la Academia de Muzica "Gheorghe Dima", la ora 18) e libera si membrii Studenter-Sangforeningen abia asteapta sa stea de vorba cu studenti (si nu doar studenti!) clujeni. Daca mentionati si ca il stiti pe Sebi Buhai, sunt sigur ca Hans Christian (care cunoaste limba romana foarte bine; marturie sta postul lui de blog de mai sus) va va da si mai multe detalii despre Scandinavia (Danemarca, in particular) si despre mesajul cantecelor respective :-). Astept cu nerabdare sa aud impresii ex post, atat din partea audientei cat si din partea membrilor corului!

Pentru cei care veti fi la Sibiu sau Tg. Mures in perioada 6-11 mai, ii puteti asculta si acolo: vedeti programul exact in postul lui Hans Christian.

PS. Astept cu nerabdare un eveniment asemanator la Copenhaga sau Aarhus (sa ne sincronizam, cumva...eu probabil le-am pierdut pe cele anterioare). Cu spiritul creativ al lui Theodor Paleologu si dedicatia lui Hans Christian cred ca nu ar fi foarte greu sa se organizeze asa ceva, chiar si fara prea multe pregatiri in prealabil :-).

Scurt despre "Romanii de care nu stiu romanii"

Sorin Matei scrie un articol interesant in Adevarul (si il anunta si pe Pagini.com). Din pacate, altfel initiativa fiind binevenita, sunt unele probleme destul de mari cu 'metodologia' aplicata (sau mai bine zis, inexistenta...). As enumera rapid doar cateva:

• Sorin repeta greseala lui Tatulici & co (si a altora...) in ceea ce priveste "ierarhia marilor romani": le amesteca pe toate si pe toti, mere cu portocale, indiferent de domeniu, competente etc. Nu exista "al mai mare roman", nu exista "cel mai bun", in general, pentru ca nu poti sa ii compari decat in domeniile in care s-au remarcat. Nu ma indoiesc ca Sorin stie toate astea, dar dupa mine isi exprima gresit ideile in articol (ar trebui spus "articole", la plural; nu e prima data, pentru ca a mai vorbit el de 'romanii de care nu stiu romanii' si in trecut, link-urile nu imi sunt acum la indemana, dar mai mult ca sigur ca se mentioneaza despre asta tot pe Pagini.com). Si e pacat de initiativa. Oricum, sper sa nu o ia drept o critica dura, ci mai mult ca una constructiva.
• Corelat cu observatia anterioara, Sorin are in minte niste ranking-uri "dupa ureche", vorbind cu diversi si diverse. Intr-adevar pot sa confirm ca unele nume de pe lista sunt arhicunoscute in disciplina in care activeaza (si chiar dincolo de aceasta: unii de aici au contributii multidisciplinare, cu aplicatii pe care le pot folosi, de exemplu, si in economie) si chiar stiu ceva despre "realizarile" lor, dar cand scrii despre asa ceva e nevoie sa argumentezi, e nevoie sa dedici mai mult spatiu persoanei selectate, sa amintesti macar interesele, subdomeniul in care a excelat, lucrarile cele mai apreciate, cele premiate; e nevoie sa fii informat. Cu tot respectul, ma indoiesc ca Sorin este la fel de competent (ah, citeste informat) in toate domeniile respective :-). Eu nu as putea fi.
• Nu e deloc clar care sunt criteriile folosite pentru a defini cine e "roman" si cine nu e. Nu stiu daca Sorin l-a intrebat personal pe Barabasi cum se defineste, dar ma indoiesc profund ca omul s-ar declara "roman". "Maghiar din Transilvania", poate (de fapt de curand l-am amintit, aici, legat insa de Transilvania, nu de Romania- in cazul de fata, disjuncte; a propos de link-ul anterior, in stilul acesta am sa citesc in curand un nou articol in care Robert Barro ar fi propus la 'mari romani de care nu stiu romanii' :-)). Problema transpare de altfel chiar din randurile lui Sorin, cand il 'discuta' pe Codrescu versus Manea: deci faptul ca te-ai 'format' in alta parte te pune pe un loc 'secundar', chiar daca (in cazul de fata) tu te consideri roman, scrii despre Romania, esti implicat in diverse activitati legate de Romania etc.- dar faptul ca esti nascut in Transilvania, period, te face 'mare roman'? Ar trebui mult mai multa precizie aici. Sau macar coerenta. Altfel (cei mai) multi vor citi textul in felul acesta: 'lasati-i balta pe interbelici cu orice pret si uite si niste nume de la mine sa le retineti in locul lor si ICR-ul sa faca bine sa le dea diplome imediat!' Si revin la ideea asta la ultimul punct.
• Eu m-as tine departe de a arunca la gunoi toata perioada interbelica, "obsesia" cu perioada respectiva totusi se bazeaza pe ceva si unii dintre oamenii respectivi (si altii, care nu sunt amintiti aici) au fost chiar foarte apreciati intre elitele mondiale activand in domeniul in care aveau avantaj comparativ (e complet altceva- si nu despre asta vorbim aici- ca se incearca 'stergerea tuturor pacatelor' acestor mari scriitori , faptul ca nu ne asumam inca istoria, despre care, de altfel, tot Sorin Matei scria excelent). Faptul ca se ignora absolut orice altceva, in afara de aceste nume din aceasta perioada, da, asta e problematic, dilematic. Foarte. Dar e vorba si de asimetrie informationala si de faptul ca lumea evident stie mai multe despre cei din trecut, confirmati de posteritate, decat despre cei buni din prezent. De asta ideea in sine a lui Sorin e binevenita, hai sa informam lumea despre cei mai buni dintre cei buni din prezent, si din trecutul apropiat, si poate chiar despre cei buni din trecutul indepartat, despre care nu se stiu foarte multe... Dar, daca chiar asta urmaresc, atunci incep prin a ma consulta cu experti (da, presupune un efort, dar asta arata ca nu e vorba doar de o joaca si de a scrie in dorul lelii) in fiecare domeniu, ii las sa vina cu doua- trei- zece nume si argumentatie detaliata pentru fiecare propunere, si abia dupa asta le pun pe foaie si doar pe domeniile respective; nu exista o ierarhie generala, nu poti sa-i amesteci pe Tataru cu Vraciu si cu Robinson, o aberatie mai mare nici nu cred ca se putea concepe! Deci, overall, o initiativa buna, implementata prost... Si ma tem ca lumea nu va mai crede deloc in initiative de genul asta daca toate ies asa. Si e pacat, Sorine, pacat, pentru ca e nevoie de asa ceva. Dar onest, dincolo de lupte de gherila cu ICR-ul si altii (ICR si, in particular, conducere a sa- despre care eu am o parere destul de proasta- si cred ca asta se stie deja din alte articole ale mele pe blog sau in alta parte- dar parere independenta de motivele lui Sorin).