Very interesting article. Some of these statistics are surprising. Only 1% of Times readers comment and only 3% of Times readers read comments? Only a third of Times readers visit the homepage? Those numbers are far smaller than I would have expected (an expectation based solely on my own experience; I enjoy reading the comments on Times articles and I always access articles through the Times home page).
David Leonhardt (of NYT's The Upshot) was on Charlie Rose the other night discussing the Times's approach to digital [1]. The leaked memo complements the interview nicely.
The conclusion that you have drawn is based on a misinterpretation of what constitutes as "capital". If "capital" meant "government debt", then the rate of return on capital would indeed equal the interest rate on government debt. However, when economists refer to capital, they are referring to the market value of the cumulative stock of a nation's capital.
What is "capital"? Piketty defines capital as:
"the sum total of nonfinancial assets (land, dwellings, commercial inventory, other buildings, machinery, infrastructure, patents and other directly-owned professional assets) and financial assets (bank accounts, mutual funds, bonds, stocks, financial investments of all kinds, insurance policies, pension funds, etc.) less the total amount of financial liabilities (debt)."
Furthermore, national capital can be broken down into public capital and private capital:
"[National capital is] the sum of public capital and private capital. Public capital is the difference between assets and liabilities of the state (including all public agencies), and private capital is of course the difference between the assets and liabilities of private individuals."
...and can be broken down into domestic capital and net foreign capital:
"Domestic capital is the value of the domestic capital stock (buildings, firms, etc.) located within the borders of the country in question. Net foreign capital...is the difference between assets owned by the country's citizens in the rest of the world and assets of the country owned by citizens of other countries."
The rate of return on capital:
"...measures the yield on capital over the course of the year regardless of it's legal forms (profits, rents, dividends, interest, royalties, capital gains, etc.), expressed as a percentage of the value of capital invested. It is therefore a broader notion than the 'rate of profit', and much broader than the 'rate of interest', while incorporating both."
You practice, thats how. You practice eliminating subvocalization and regression. You practice focusing on multiple words at a time rather than a single word. And - once you get a hang of those skills- you practice moving your eyes across a page at a faster pace.
I have been practicing for a little under a year with the help of a speed reading app (not Spritz). It was frustrating at first; I won't pretend that I internalized even 50% of what I was reading when I started learning how to speed read. But as my eyes assimilated to reading larger chunks of words at faster speeds, I incrementally increased the speed of the text. Eventually, I was able to increase my reading speed AND understand what I was reading.
I can't attest to the effectiveness of this specific app, since I have never used it. But when you write "its way more fun & time saving to be able to imagine, drift-away in thought and understand what you are reading...", you suggest that one can only understand (and enjoy) what he is reading by reading the way you do.
Yea I noticed that too. You initially scroll down to see the rest of that sample chat inbox, which provides a smooth transition between the div with the background video and the div with the main content (since the first chat inbox spills into the second div). Looks good.
Over the past year, I have dedicated hundreds of hours towards improving my reading speed. I usually use Acceleread on my iPad; most recently I used it to read D.H Lawrence's Sons & Lovers at around 750-800 wpm. I also use Beeline -a different type of reading tool with some additional functionality for dyslexics- when reading web pages.
I've learned that certain types of prose make for poor speed reading material. Without a "rewind" option, there is no way that I can use these apps to read anything instructional or anything involving a high level of detail (such as a mystery novel). I understand that allowing the user to rewind would sacrifice speed, but speed can't always take precedence over clarity.
Also - in terms of the text- there needs to be a better method for handling quoted text. With speed reading apps that give the user the option of seeing chunks of words, it is far too easy to lose track of who is speaking when one chunk of words has an opening quotation mark and the next chunk of words [may or may not] have a closing quotation mark. I'm guessing that this problem is exacerbated by the fact that - in Spritz's case- words are only presented one at a time.
Here are some things I would I would like to see adopted by speed-readers:
Rewind functionality
Punctuation-based text color:
If the text is in between quotation marks, parenthesis or brackets, this text should be shaded a slightly different color than the rest.
Contextual deceleration:
I would love it if a speed reading app would automatically slow down at the end of a chapter. The last few sentences of a chapter are usually crafted with especially deliberate care and are meant to be savored.
More customization options for dyslexics:
For example, Beeline allows users to chose a specific type of font that is specifically geared towards dyslexics. In the future, I'd like to see speed readers enable these types of fonts (as well as customization options for line height and letter spacing).
Yea, this is probably when [otherwise cautious] people are most susceptible to falling for these scams.
When applying for jobs, there is nothing more irritating than seeing a missed call, getting excited/anxious, and calling back...a #%*@^ telemarketer. On the flip side, I briefly forget that I am unemployed, since all I think about for the next 5 minutes is inflicting the most sadistic forms of torture on every telemarketer that has ever lived.
Seriously though, googling unknown numbers does help.
> In a age if great socio economic inequality very few people at the top of the society get to have ' significant accomplishment', it is more of an indicator of you socio economic status than your actual capabilities.
The "significant accomplishment" that the interviewer is looking for is one that the interviewee had to work relentlessly towards achieving. Not one that the interviewee "[got] to have" as if it were placed under his christmas tree with a red bow on top.
How does the interviewer know that the interviewee REALLY struggled with the issue? By having the interviewee go into great detail. The author of the article suggested discussing the accomplishment for 15-20 minutes, and he outlined over twenty questions that the interviewer should ask with respect to the accomplishment.
There's a short clip where Elon Musk outlines a similar approach to interviewing applicants:
"...I ask them to tell me about the problems they worked on and how they solved them. If someone was really the person that solved it, they'll be able to answer multiple levels, they'll be able to go down to the brass-tax. And if they weren't, they'll get stuck and you can say 'Oh this person was not really the person who solved it'. Because anyone who really struggled hard with a problem never forgets it."[1]
So, in this sense, I don't believe that the quality of the interviewee's answer hinges on "socio economic status". In fact -in my opinion- the less you have handed to you, the BETTER equipped you are to answer this question in a satisfactory manor.
Of all the reasons to be suspicious of "learn to code" bootcamps, your aversion to women-only programs has me confused.
"Why female only...?": Probably because the founders of those programs would like to see more women coding. Same reason organizations like "Girls Who Code" exist. The fact that those programs are geared towards an underrepresented demographic shouldn't raise any red flags.
> Food is dirt cheap compared to housing, especially if you shop smart.
Don't be ridiculous. Have you ever tried to buy food on a minimum wage budget? If you want to eat anything that has even a modicum of nutritional value, minimum wage won't get you much.
I'm not suggesting that expensive/organic food is worth it's price. Nor am I suggesting that minimum wage should be raised to the point where everyone could afford to shop at Whole Foods. But if you honestly believe that the author is wrong when he writes "it's still difficult for people working low wage jobs to afford food", then you need a reality check.
One key component that neither the article nor the commenters have explicitly mentioned is the threat that cartels pose to the the legal marijuana business.
Since legalization could potentially eat away at a sizable chunk of a cartel's marijuana revenue stream [1], dispensaries already run the risk of being targeted by cartels/gangs. The fact that these dispensaries are forced to hold large cash balances in their back rooms makes them even more appealing as a potential target.
With respect to self-driving cars, wouldn't the increased safety of our roads greatly outweigh the privacy implications? Think of all the lives that could be saved.
>If you ask me, the privacy implications of facebook, google, et al cancel out the benefits of sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results.
We aren't just talking about "sharing photos with friends and more accurate search results" anymore. Having had many people that I care about torn away from me due to fatal car accidents, I personally believe that the trade-off here is a no-brainer.
>Still, this is a reminder that we've all failed to create a better world with technology.
Self-driving cars can (and will) create a better world.
I think you're missing one of the author's implicit underlying messages.
Wealth is awesome; no doubt about it. But, as you are accumulating wealth, are you simultaneously creating value? Personal wealth and value creation don't always go hand-in-hand.
Also, as the author (and commenters) pointed out, this isn't a reflection of all of Finance. Stocks, bonds, future, options and other derivatives are essential for growth. We will always need ways to finance investment and tools to manage the accompanying risk. The author was saying that he was getting rich by trading credit default swaps (and probably synthetic CDOs), which -ultimately- played the largest role in destroying massive amounts of value post-2008 because of the sheer volume at which they were being traded (and because the securities that the CDSs were insuring were backed by subprime loans).
Honestly though, you don't have to know much about the 2008 crash to recognize the weakness of your argument. Elon Musk, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates may be (or may have been) addicted to wealth and success. But they accumulated wealth by creating innovative products.
The same could not be said of the typical fixed-income trader circa 2007.
>"If you don't graduate you don't have the brand. He might be able to establish an independent brand with his plugin, but that is certainly more risky."
>"A BS is a filter that you'll find for lots of jobs (or graduate school); and although there are places that will hire you, it makes things harder than they would have been otherwise."
I would disagree with both statements.
Part of the value (really, most of the value) of attending these schools is the network that you build while there. And yes, he can always write on his resume that he attended Yale from "Sept 2009-January 2013" (if he were to drop out). I attended a top university and dropped out my last semester to pursue tech related endeavors. I have reaped enormous benefits from this decision.
Once you are accepted to a top university, 90% of the "brand"-ing is complete. If you are resourceful (as this young man clearly is), the rest will take care of itself.
With regards to your second comment, the idea of a "BS as a filter" is losing credibility at an exponential rate. It might seem counter intuitive, but a top tech employer would take a second look at a Yale dropout who wrote a popular plug-in. A majority of applicants at these firms already come from the best schools in the country. On it's own, even an ivy-league degree isn't as great of a filter as you might think. (Note: This applies to jobs with the highest concentration of ivy-league applicants)
Your penultimate sentence contains some sweeping generalizations. Not everyone who submits a review for a class is motivated by spite. Of course, as with any voluntary review system, participation will come from those who are strongly opinionated. But that goes both ways (Also, I could be wrong, but I believe that the site only included numeric reviews...leaving no room for reviews such as “sucks ASS and Booawles!!!!!”, or whatever that means).
Some teachers ARE lousy. And some teachers present the course material in an engaging, captivating manner.
And yes, some students are lazy. But others want to learn, preferably from the latter type of professor. Labeling any student who forms an opinion about a professor as an "entitled [student] who failed after submitting a paper a month late" reveals a lack of faith in the ability of a young adult to take a genuine interest in his educational experience.
I disagree. Completely. First of all, I object to your classification of a 4-year educational experience as a "commodity" that is offered on a "take-it-or-leave-it" basis. In fact, every student is guaranteed (and therefore, entitled to) the right to chose the classes that he takes. Yes, there are gen-ed requirements. Yes, there are majors. But, generally speaking, a STUDENT is responsible for tailoring his education.
The value of the "product" lies within the choices that it offers students (both in terms of courses/professors and in terms of post-grad prospects).
If Yale prescribed to your notion of higher education, each student would be handed a list of pre-determined courses that he would have to take each semester. Instead, Yale students are allowed to chose their own courses/majors, and in some cases are allowed to create their own majors. Why? Because "choice" is the underpinning of the liberal arts philosophy.
So, within this context, I believe that I should be able to use a well-designed course listing platform as I am considering what courses to take. Especially at 58k/yr.
If I'm paying $58,000 to attend an institution (rather, if my family is sacrificing $58,000 for me to attend an institution...or,worse yet, if I am taking out $58,000 worth of student loans per year), I should be able to use a course listing service so that I can tailor my academic experience however I chose. THAT is how we open this debate, not with comments about who the proper copyright holder is or whether or not this constitutes as deep packet inspection.
David Leonhardt (of NYT's The Upshot) was on Charlie Rose the other night discussing the Times's approach to digital [1]. The leaked memo complements the interview nicely.
[1] http://www.charlierose.com/watch/60387818