817 karma · joined October 26, 2009
@johnjhorton http://www.john-joseph-horton.com/
Also, I don't see how it's ironic that I used Python---it seems irrelevant. Whitespace in Python has a well-defined, commonly understood purpose; using tabs or spaces to indicate hierarchal data relationships is not at all standard, presumably because it creates messy dependencies across rows of data.
For example, if you look for the time series I was after on data.gov, the "Download CSV" button brings you to...the BLS page, with all the problems I discussed.
http://explore.data.gov/Labor-Force-Employment-and-Earnings/...
http://pewsocialtrends.org/2009/09/17/take-this-job-and-love...
https://skitch.com/johnjosephhorton/fih62/quartz-2
Obviously, there are some statistical power issues. It's unfortunate that they didn't get someone to help them with a power analysis up front---given how many very tech savvy people are interested in Kahn Academy and want to see it succeed, I think they could have gotten this sort of assistance pretty easily.
http://googlescholar.blogspot.com/2011/07/google-scholar-cit...
https://skitch.com/johnjosephhorton/fjmuc/ssrn-id1094622.pdf...
From WHO/USAID report on Malaria detection (executive summary):
"In malaria patients, a prompt and accurate diagnosis is the key to effective disease management. The two diagnostic approaches currently used most often, however, do not allow a satisfactory diagnosis of malaria. Clinical diagnosis, the most widely used approach, is unreliable because the symptoms of malaria are very non-specific. Microscopic diagnosis, the established method for laboratory confirmation of malaria, presents technical and personnel requirements that often cannot be met, particularly in facilities at the periphery of the health care system. In addition, delays in the provision of the microscopy results to the clinician mean that decisions on treatment may be taken without the benefit of the results. Thus, the recent introduction of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria is of considerable interest."
http://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/3736/how-to-build-a-bu...
That being said, labor markets are very complex and there's lots of strategic maneuvering going on. Given the indeterminacy of much of game theory (i.e., it depends on how you model the scenario), I'm sure you could be right under the proper assumptions.
But to bring it back to the SO example, it's hard to imagine a scenario where giving high ability workers the ability to truthfully signal that high ability hurts. Low ability workers can be hurt i.e., either I know you're bad from your SO rep, or I start to think "hey - where's your SO profile? you must be bad." In the pre-SO system, the low ability workers were getting an unearned rent (assuming the market existed at all) at the expense of the high ability workers and firms (which is market-killing).
Imagine the worst case job market, which is that anyone can hang out a shingle and say "I'm a highly skilled Python programmer." Suppose 1/2 are good, and add value +1 to their companies, and 1/2 are bad, and "add" -1 to their companies if hired. If there is absolutely no way to tell before hand who is good and who is bad, then no one is getting hired---the expected gain from hiring is zero. We have complete market failure (this is the "market of lemons" example).
Now suppose you throw in some signals---schooling, resumes, interviews etc. if firms can tell w/ probability .8 whether someone is what they say they are. People now get hired, but even the good ones take a haircut b/c firms still wrongly hire bad programmers because the signals available--while better than nothing---are not perfect. I think SO is basically raising .8 to .95 (so to speak). This is valuable to firms and to workers and I can easily imagine a world where firms pay to get to .95 (and good workers pay to be evaluated with the .95 lens).
full disclosure - I work at oDesk, but I had this idea before I started.
That being said, I think it is useful to know the complex methods, even if you don't use them.
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/kana...
2) I'd be very cautious about interpreting causality, even if the results are true. Beauty is influenced by environmental factors (diet, exercise, health care etc.) that are correlated with parental and own-income. Some of these same factors also influence intelligence. There's a decent chance this research boils down to "being poor sucks."
A government-run defined contribution plan would almost certainly have to have some kind of guaranteed payment floor to be politically viable, which would encourage serious moral hazard in investing.
I also wonder how many companies can offer defined contribution plans because their employees are also automatically part of a defined benefit plan (i.e., social security).
I think also if you didn't generate public feedback (i.e., you didn't list the most down voted sites for example) you'd avoid the kind of Beiber-to-DPRK stunt that 4chan would be interested in.