Links to Consider

Brian Chau on when compromise fails; Om Malik on Apple Vision Pro as a TV set; Larry Summers on an Israel-hater leading Harvard's initiative to address antisemitism; Emily Oster on classroom rewards

Brian Chau writes,

While the compromise of exchange is driven by self interest, the compromise of norms is driven by imposition on others. … Exchange is driven by differentiation: the seller of a stock and the buyer of a stock disagree on whether its price will increase. Norms are driven by homogeneity. No one ever negotiates for a norm used to restrict themselves; they could simply self-impose it instead.

The striking conclusion: the norms driven by rational self-interest are negotiated away. And the corollary: those driven by emotion and collective delusion triumph.

In politics, material goods can be compromised. Politicians from rural states can vote to give politicians from urban states some goodies in exchange for getting their own goodies.

But social norms are harder to compromise. If you believe that abortion is murder, then no compromise is going to seem satisfactory. If you believe that a woman should have absolute control over whether to carry a fetus to term, no compromise is going to seem satisfactory.

We think of compromises involving material goods as win-win. But a compromise involving norms can never feel like win-win.

For example a political compromise on norms might look like giving something to each side. So the left gets gay marriage and the right gets gun rights. At best, political compromise on norms means that a few people on each side unhappy. At worst, political compromise means that a centrist majority is unhappy. He suggests that we should be happy that we get polarization/gridlock, because the alternative may be a victory by extremists.

Om Malik writes,

Apple Vision Pro has ultra-high-resolution displays that deliver more pixels than a 4K TV for each eye. This gives you a screen that feels 100 feet wide with support for HDR content. The audio experience is just spectacular. In time, Apple’s marketing machine will push the simple message — for $3,500, you get a full-blown replacement for a reference-quality home theater, which would typically cost ten times as much and require you to live in a McMansion.

Pointer from Ben Thompson.

I don’t use any conventional entertainment. But depending on the ergonomics and how well it works with the Web, this might do something for me.

You know that my hobby is Israeli dancing. When there is a dance I wish I knew better, I can find it on YouTube. And when I’m desperate for a session to join, one can be found on Zoom or Facebook.

Among the shortcomings of trying to follow dancing on a computer is that as you move around in a circle, at some point you lose eye contact with the screen until you whip your head around. As my wife puts it, “I feel like an owl.”

The experience would potentially be a lot better if the screen moved with me. I’ll be curious about this.

It could make a difference for everybody who works out. You can watch what you want at the gym. At home, it might be easier and more enjoyable to take Zumba classes or to ride a stationary bike.

Or it could turn out that if you’re not sitting still, the thing just destroys your sense of balance or has some other adverse effect. If so, then I won’t be getting one.

Larry Summers tweets,

Prof Penslar has publicly minimized Harvard’s anti-Semitism problem, rejected the definition used by the US government in recent years of anti-Semitism as too broad, invoked the need for the concept of settler colonialism in analyzing Israel, referred to Israel as an apartheid state and more. While he does not support BDS he has made clear that he sees it as a reasonable position. None of this in my view is problematic for a professor at Harvard or even for a member of the task force but for the co-chair of an anti-Semitism task force that is being paralleled with an Islamophobia task force it seems highly problematic.

Pointer from Tyler Cowen.

On the other hand, if Professor Penslar administers the task force well and it comes out with constructive recommendations, it might prove hard for people to dismiss it as pandering to Jewish whining.

Actually, the very creation of the task force is what sends a bad signal as far as I’m concerned. The root cause of the problem at Harvard and universities isn’t antisemitism. It’s spineless leadership.

If Harvard were run by vertebrates, they would say that from now on they will protect free speech full stop. This includes speech that offends Jews. It even includes speech that offends social justice activists and triggers snowflakes. Furthermore, Harvard will expel and/or prosecute anyone who engages in assault or intimidation of students or faculty, commits vandalism, or interferes with classrooms or speakers. Done.

Emily Oster writes,

• Token economies or classroom-based reward systems have been shown to improve behavior in both general-education and special-education classrooms.

• The bulk of the evidence does not suggest that external rewards destroy intrinsic motivation.

• Implementation matters: reward systems should not be punishment systems.  

She is answering the question of whether it is a good idea to pay students to behave and/or try harder to learn. Cash rewards are rarely tried. Usually, students are rewarded with “tokens” that might be traded in for treats or special privileges.

Oster is careful to evaluate research. These sorts of incentive systems appear to be able to overcome the Null Hypothesis, although I am not sure that there is enough research to show long-term gains in student achievement.

I am skeptical that you can keep a given reward system in place for years without it degrading. In business, if you keep the same bonus system in place, employees will come up with ways to game it. And an incentive system eventually is perceived as serving as a punishment system. People who don’t get the bonus come to see that as punishment.

In the case of a child, you want the child to sit still. But do you want to make him feel inferior because he can’t sit still? Or suppose a kid has a hard time learning math. Doesn’t already feel bad enough, without also missing out on some treat or privilege?

substacks referenced above:

@

Polarization Saves You From Qanon-DEI