Newmark's Door

Needless to say it will be very nice if this pans out.

Mattson has spent decades researching calorie intake and Alzheimer’s disease. In several studies of mice genetically altered to display symptoms of Alzheimer’s he’s found that those fed intermittent fasting diets — where you cycle through short periods of eating and longer periods of fasting — fared better than those who ate whenever they wanted. They had better cognitive function, lived longer and, most importantly, had less plaque build up in their brains.

The Alzheimer's researchers could use some luck because after a whole lot of time and effort, they haven't made much progress: "Alzheimer’s researchers shift focus after failures".

Sounds reasonable.

The mystery isn't so much how a childless couple in Kansas has trouble making ends meet on half a million a year, but why--even anonymously--they would post this information and invite public comments.

(An explanation that I'm ashamed I didn't think of immediately is that the whole thing is simply phony.)

Useful reminder.

According to the National Weather Service, more than half of flood-related drownings take place after a vehicle has been driven into flood water. “A mere [six] inches of fast-moving flood water can knock over an adult,” the agency warns. Think your car is any safer? “It takes just 12 inches of rushing water to carry away most cars and just two feet of rushing water can carry away SUVs and trucks.”

Courtesy of my wife:

"Notice the uncanny likeness b/t Biden listening to this guy excoriate him for deportations during the Obama era and the Covington HS kid."

Disappointingly little data--just an anecdote or two and some comments from observers--but if this finding held up on closer examination, wouldn't that be . . . unexpected?

"With the benefit of hindsight, there may be a simple explanation for the rapid rise and rapid fall of the far left: Its appeal was always more negative than positive."

The vicious infighting over the leadership of a top Brooklyn preschool. 

It seems as though the new head was not a good fit with at least some of the parents and staff. The message to me is this is why interviewers spend a bunch of time trying to determine if new hires are "clubbable"--whether they are compatible with the existing corporate culture.

Here's an alternate takeaway: ".  . . the article was published was to stir up anger against a bunch of rich white women in Brooklyn".

The not-so-good status of the "new Brooklyn"--or was it the new Amsterdam?--now the City of Marches. As the author puts it, ". .. . like the milk from the goat they kept in their front yard, things turned pretty sour pretty quick."

By law professor Glenn Reynolds, proprietor of Instapundit. 

I've been reading Instapundit regularly for at least 15 years. (I know this because my first link to it on this blog is dated 3/7/04.) In my opinion it's one of the very best things on the Net. Prof. Reynolds is consistently calm, reasonable, informed, and usually, magnificently correct. 

But on this issue--using antitrust to break up Google, Twitter, and Facebook--I'm sorry to say I sharply disagree with him. (The piece linked to doesn't quite state that he favors antitrust against the social media giants. But he regularly calls for just that on Instapundit.)

I note first that the core products of all three firms have been, and still are, absolutely free. And at least for Google, my experience is that quality--good to begin with--has improved over time. (See also "The Real Issue in Tech Antitrust: Where’s the Harm?" and "Why sound law and economics should guide competition policy in the digital economy," pp. 3-7.) 

Logically then, the folks that want to use antitrust against these three firms must propose evading the limits on antitrust's scope that have been in place for nearly 50 years now. And that's exactly what they do propose: Antitrust should either be given unprecdented new scope--Protect workers! Protect the community! Protect the environment! Protect outer space! (The last one is a joke. For now)--or we should return to what many of its advocates see as antitrust's original purpose, that of "protecting" small businesses.

I think Prof. Reynolds's complaint against the firms falls into the "protect the community" category. He has three complaints:

Thus today’s social media world tends to give us the worst possible outcome: lots of angry, ill-informed speech, coupled with censorship of things that the platform owners don’t like or are pressured into killing. Add to that a tremendous loss of privacy as platforms monetize people’s personal data, and it’s easy to see why the tech giants aren’t as popular as they once were.

Building houses in California is not for the faint-hearted.

Though the developer tirelessly met environmentalist demands and generated “green” credibility, the project has endured more than a quarter-century of roadblocks and red tape, courtesy of California’s mammoth bureaucracy—including “lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit,” says Wendy Devine, who oversees a website focused on Newhall Ranch news. . . . The developer produced more than 109,000 pages of documents, navigated the review of 25 government agencies, appeared at 21 public hearings, and attended over 700 meetings. Finally, the project broke ground last year.

(This piece also illustrates an underreported phenomenon: how innocent laws lying around can be completely repurposed by interest groups.)

"Negative-yielding debt topped $13 trillion in June, having doubled since December, and now makes up around 25% of global debt. In Germany, 85% of the government bond market is under water. That means investors effectively pay the German government 0.2% for the privilege of buying its benchmark bonds; the government keeps 2 euros for every 1,000 euros borrowed over a period of 10 years."

I think the space program was probably taxpayer money wisely spent. And that piece only gives part of the story: here's more.

UPDATE: Second link fixed now.

Link via Economics Job Markets Rumors by a poster who cracked "Unless you're 12, you have NO excuse not to have any pubs by now!"

Heh. The Babylon Bee.

Very much related: "US women’s soccer team equal-pay gripe is less than it seems" and "The so-called 'wage gap' doesn't apply to the women's soccer team".

And the Babylon Bee: "Women's Soccer Team Sues To Overturn Unjust Law Of Supply And Demand".

.

MJ should know.

Five funny minutes with the very funny Kathleen Madigan.

That would be nice. The predictor believes there's about 1 in 4 chance that Alabama will play Clemson--yet again!--for the national championship.

Not a great answer but better than I could come up with.

1995 inteview discussing most of the Stones's biggest hits till that point.

A bit more Stones-related stuff:

Have The Rolling Stones Ever Stopped Touring?

"Paint It Crimson: Nick Saban Speaks on His 50-Year Love Affair With the Rolling Stones".

"Shine A Light" (4 minute video.)

Robert Stacy McCain, nostalgic for long past California, discusses the iconic "California Dreamin'".

An absolute gem. (2.5 minute video.)

Quite cool.

Who would have thought today's designers would borrow from the infamous Pontiac Aztek?

I thought what the heck, but it sounds real.

Unsurprising to an economist at least: if it's good, it will sooner or later get crowded.

Yet another famous findng in social psychology seemingly bites the dust.