If you think Bean Dad is a symptom of a broken media ecosystem (and it certainly is), may I remind you of the SUMMER OF 2001.

Also known as the SUMMER OF THE SHARK. Networks and print media were *obsessed* with shark attacks.

1/3 Image
An irony is that there were actually relatively few shark attacks, but all I remember playing in the gym on CNN was shark stuff.

I also remember thinking that if this is what they need to amplify, then surely we were due for something bad. (In fact, we were.)

2/3
The old guard media with their vast editorial discretion amplify all sorts of dumb garbage: random kidnapping, shark attack.

Bean Dad type stuff is at least weirder and somewhat more democratic.

So I think critics of new media should recalibrate a little bit on old media.

3/3
One thing about the old stupidity cycles is that they were WAY LONGER.

4/3

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ben Golub

Ben Golub Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ben_golub

4 Jan
Was grateful to share at an #ASSA2021 session today a bit on what I've learned in teaching an undergraduate course on the Economics of Networks.

A short thread to serve as a focal point for any follow-up conversation.

1/
What networks is about (very rough and probably somewhat idiosyncratic description)

2/
I taught several variants of an undergraduate elective on this exciting and growing area. It was at the applied math/econ/CS intersection -- sometimes cross-listed, sometimes just economics but open to (and taken by) applied math, CS, other students.

3/
Read 27 tweets
13 Dec 20
A polite, scathing, and comprehensive reply by @jasndoc and coauthors to the "ergodicity economics" of @ole_b_peters.

@NaturePhysics erred in not finding a referee who would ask these basic questions of the authors, but glad a reply is out there.

nature.com/articles/s4156…

1/
This thread gives my own gloss and expansion of some points Doctor et al. raise.

Peters and co think there is a hidden assumption of economic theory: specifically, they think expected utility theory secretly assumes a mathematical property called ergodicity.

This is false.

2/
Expected utility theory makes 4 assumptions, which are stated precisely and concisely in every graduate textbook. Ergodicity is not among them.

EU is not the kind of theory that can hide assumptions: it is like Newtonian mechanics, not like Freudian analysis.

3/
Read 15 tweets
12 Dec 20
Let me very briefly jot down some notes as I read...

Take a basic static input/output model, and suppose we don't worry about nonlinearities in static equilibrium (as Baqaee and Farhi very productively have done).

Then it's easy to know which shocks matter for welfare...

1/
Just look at the Domar weights of the sectors, which is a fancy way of saying their (suitably defined) size.

All the network stuff boils down to one easily-measured statistic.

Shocks matter more when they hit "bigger" sectors.

2/
Liu and Tsyvinski make the point that this won't hold in an economy with adjustment dynamics.

When input demands increase after a negative shock, it takes time to build/activate capacity.

3/
Read 11 tweets
16 Nov 20
Some networks words
a few more
a few more
Read 4 tweets
8 Nov 20
"Reductionist" (i.e., most economic) theories of collective action explain acts like voting by individual incentives, perhaps including "social" phenomena via payoff terms like social pressure or warm glow.

A short thread about an (old) complaint about such theories.

1/
A reductionist theory might say: when you vote, you're almost certainly not pivotal, but you value praise for helping, or you just like the identity of standing for X.

BUT: "praise," "blame," and "identity" are not individualistic ideas.

2/
Praise, blame, identity, etc. make sense only in a community and a culture that gives them meaning.

"Individualistic" accounts with these special payoff adjustments are incomplete without some engagement with the sources of those "non-individualistic" reasons and motives.

3/
Read 12 tweets
6 Nov 20
I have a game:

discuss historical events in the year corresponding to Biden's lead in the Georgia count. Your first number is 1709.
Ok, the year corresponding to TRUMP's lead, and per @DecisionDeskHQ via @kiragoldner, your next number is 1479.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!