Sorry I’ve been offline for so long. I’m back. For now, anyway.

Among other things I’ve been writing a little bit about what it was like for me being a teenager involved in left wing politics at the beginning of the 80’s. This is the first (and far the longest) of a series of reminiscences that were prompted by a casual conversation with one of my excellent graduate students. Feel free to ignore! I’ll also be posting them on a substack which, if you like, you can subscribe to (free, but god knows how you subscribe!).

Here goes:

We moved to Oxford in the wake of the 1979 general election. Dad had become Chief Education Officer in Oxfordshire a year earlier, but we’d waited to move till I finished my O’Levels and my sister finished primary school, to minimize disruption (because Oxford, itself, then still had a system of middle schools, my sister was more disrupted than I was, having to spend a year in a middle school before going to an ‘upper’ school.

I did the sixth form at Peers School, an inaptly named comprehensive which served two council estates (Blackbird Leys and Rose Hill; like Lord’s Cricket Ground it was named after a person, not a Peer or a Lord) plus some quite distant rural areas outside the city. The demographics were as you’d expect: mainly poor and working class kids, but with a smattering of middle class children like me who whose parents were left-ish, educated, professionals – teachers, vicars, nurses, etc, one or two academics, and the chief education officer (dad was shocked when he started in Oxfordshire just how many of his colleagues in the LEA leadership sent their kids private and I am sure he was not unduly diplomatic about it).

Peers was quite progressive – indeed, the Graunida had an article about how it had once been a school of the future when it was finally closed. It had a School Council, to which I was, I now realise rather surprisingly, elected by other 6th formers (maybe no-one else wanted to do it?). Mr. B, my rather posh Maoist [1] history teacher once told me that the School Council was supposed to be like a parliamentary democracy but that in practice it didn’t work that way, because it mainly endorsed what the head teacher wanted. This, I pointed out, was exactly how he thought a parliamentary democracy worked, so I couldn’t figure out what his complaint was. My role (again, I don’t quite understand how this happened) was to serve on the PTA, the main job of which seemed to be to organize dog shows to raise funds for the school, dog shows being the special enthusiasm of the couple who led the PTA, a policeman and his wife. I remember at the first meeting being kind of awestruck both by the whole scene and, especially, by a rather disheveled woman called Meg who turned up a late, clearly had no time either for the policeman or for dog shows, and yet equally clearly had more organizational sense than any of the other parents. (The dog show experts were manifestly annoyed by her, probably thinking that she was the kind of person who lived on Stratford Street, had probably been a member of the International Socialists who had left when Cliff took them in a Leninist direction, and drove a green 2CV with a “Nuclear Power: No Thanks” sticker on it. If they did think that, I’m pretty certain they were right on all counts; but they also accepted all her suggestions none of which, nearly 50 years later, I can remember).

A few days later I got a phone call at home from Meg.

[click to continue…]

I was doing a deep dive into early Canadian history, because reasons, and found a couple of fun stories to share.  Because hey — this Sunday is National Indigenous Peoples Day!

The Bad Overwinter

So a recurring thing in early Canadian history was the Bad Overwinter. A group of Europeans — usually French — would show up in Canada with a shipload of trade goods.  They would hang out with the Indians for a bit, and then would decide to leave some guys behind over the winter. Maybe they wanted to have a permanent trading post, maybe they were trying to start a colony, whatever.

So they’d leave, say, twenty guys on Sable Island or the Avalon Peninsula or on the upper St. Lawrence River with some building materials and tools and food, and in late September they would sail back to France.

Sometimes people that know and like each other, and that would never employ snark with each other, can still talk entirely past each other online. Carlo Ludovico Cordasco (Sheffield) wrote a fruitful and prudent sub-stack post (here) on the ‘longstanding debate on AI and deskilling.’ As he notes it was prompted by my Kvetching about a 2 June announcement by The University of Chicago’s President that it has a contract with Anthropic to give all of its students, and all of its staff and faculty, full access to Claude Enterprise.

Now, I viewed that announcement by Paul Alivisatos (the University President) the way I interpret many of that university’s public announcements during the last two decades: as a cynical, branding ploy aiming to keep the university in the eyes of influencers who may alert full tuition paying parents that they should send their kids to the UofC. In my view, in its public communication, the university has stopped trying to be the academy for would-be-academics and those closely adjacent to it.

Anyway, when I first participated in howling about Alivisatos’ announcement, the fate of skill was far from my mind. I viewed the UofC as vice-signaling its path away from all that is noble and beautiful about higher education. (I explain my position on that near the end of this post.) But I was interpreted as a techno-luddite about the role of AI. I ruminated a bit on Carlo’s essay. In response, I focus more on governance than de-skilling.

[click to continue…]

The SpaceX IPO, valuing a motley collection of dubious business at over a trillion dollars, marks the abandonment of the Efficient (financial) Markets Hypothesis, one of the zombie ideas I criticised in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis. Not only do financial markets fail in the task of valuing assets accurately, but the institutional structures that are supposed to make them work have given up trying.
[click to continue…]

Jerry Cayford at Three Quarks Daily has written a piece responding to the near-farcical “jungle primary” in California where it appeared possible at one point that both of the candidates making it through to the general election might be Republicans. The proposed response is to allow the top five candidates through to the general election, which would be run under Ranked Choice Voting.

Here’s the conclusion:

Final Five Voting emerges as the single most powerful way to address political dysfunction, “the root cause of the decades-long inability of our government to make progress on America’s most pressing economic and social problems” (18). (Better legislative rules take a strong but secondary position.) Harvard Business School’s large-scale, multi-year project has given us, then—along with valuable information, analysis, and insight—a thesis vitally relevant to our public conversation about electoral reform: the stakes of that conversation are immeasurably higher than we usually recognize. To make this point, HBS not only documented the magnitude of America’s decline and crisis, but also spotlighted electoral reform as the very top priority in reversing our long slide. Not just easing polarization, gridlock, and other narrowly “political” problems. Not just making California’s elections sensible. Breaking the politics industry’s self-serving duopoly is how we address everything else as well. 

Do you want to repair crumbling roads and bridges, lower infant mortality rate, or fix K-12 education? The single most effective remedy is “nonpartisan top-five primaries and ranked choice voting in general elections.” Are you trying to improve health care, life expectancy, or public transportation? Your method is “Final Five Voting.” The powerful message of HBS’s U.S. Competitiveness Project is that electoral reform is our main tool to end dysfunctional politics, strengthen U.S. competitiveness, and stop America’s decline. Want paid leave and walkable cities? Or—updating from 2019 to today—do you seek to compete with China on anything at all, unwind predatory monopolies, or develop more useful, less dangerous artificial intelligence? All of it. The basic aspects of a civilized life. The answer is the same. Put your effort into nonpartisan top-five primaries and ranked choice voting in general elections, aka Final Five Voting.

Last week, because of a combination of bad planning (my bad) and endless delays (Deutsche Bahn’s bad), I arrive very late in a hotel in Berlin. I had to ring the doorbell. The guy at the reception started giggling the moment I came in, which irritated me at first (did my hair look so funny, after all these hours on the train?). But he quickly reassured me that it wasn’t about me. It was about the fact that he had pressed the button for the daily closing of the system about ten seconds before I rang the door bell (it was just after 3am). It meant that the computer was busy for a while and it would take a few minutes before he could check me in. He apologizes profusely – and we started chatting.

[click to continue…]

Google maps said it would take 2.5 hours to drive from our place in the Blue Mountains to Hill End. Maybe we’re slow. And sure, we stopped to check out nearby gold mining village Sofala on the way. But we left home shortly after 8am and arrived at Hill End in time for us to claim early seats at the micro-pub for lunch. That was pretty good timing actually, though no thanks to the Google lady.

The purpose of this day trip was nerdy, for Hill End might have a reasonable claim to be Australia’s Deadwood.

[click to continue…]

One my betes noires has been in the news lately. Jonathan Haidt has been annoying me since at least 2012, when I was critical of his bothsidesism on the culture wars.

At the time, he was a concern troll, posing as a liberal worried about other liberals who were, he claimed, misunderstanding Republicans. Whereas liberals thought of Republicans as bigots and misogynists, concerned with preserving their own position in racial and gender hierarchies, Haidt explained that they actually had their own set of values, based on order, purity, honour and loyalty. The wheels started falling off that one when Donald Trump, the antithesis of all of these things, came along and received the unqualified support of the supposed believers in purity.

Haidt responded by reinventing himself a free speech advocate, concerned about cancel culture and the coddling of young minds. He hung out on the “Intellectual Dark Web” with Bari Weiss and Stephen Pinker. Now that Weiss is busy suppressing reporting of Trump’s crimes, the IDW appears to have shut up shop.

?Haidt’s next reinvention was an almost complete backflip. Despite having no relevant research background (as discussed his previous focus was on adult voters, followed by a shift to scolding college students) he suddenly became an authority on the effects of smartphone use on teenagers. His concerns about freedom of speech suddenly went out the window, replaced by a fear that the speech teens encountered on their phones was making them depressed as miserable.

Haidt’s work writings on this topic inspired the Australian government to pass legislation aimed at banning access to social media platforms for people under 16. It’s been mostly ineffective, but for the minority of kids who have left social media, a notable impact has been reduced access to news.

Possibly because recognition of this failure is spreading, Haidt has gone back to the “coddling” theme in a commencement address at NYU, for which he was roundly booed. Haidt appears not to have noticed that, far from protecting students from views that might upset them, NYU is busy suppressing speech by students that offends the administrators and of course the Trump Administration.

The kind of concerned punditry of which Haidt is an exponent never goes out of style, even if the topics of concern change from time to time. Given his ability to leap from one topic to the next with a fine disregard for consistency, I expect he will be around to annoy me for a long time to come.

Mostly I leave Sunday photography to our colleague, the estimable Chris Bertram. Still, this Sunday I was walking the dog in the hills above my town. (“My town” being a modest community of a couple of thousand people in the rolling countryside of northern Bavaria.)


[copyright me, yesterday]

And by the side of a grassy meadow, I stopped to photograph this pretty little yellow flower:

[they look so innocent]

A moment with the app revealed that this was Ranuncula bulbus, the Bulbous Buttercup.  There are a bunch of species in the genus Ranuncula, which is another way of saying there are a lot of different kinds of buttercup.  That’s because buttercups appear to be a recent evolutionary radiation, and a pretty successful one.

But when I did a quick search on these little guys?  I found they used to have another name.  The Bulbous Buttercup was once known as Saint Anthony’s Turnip.

Saint… what?
[click to continue…]