These data suggest that legislation was driven by a national agenda, and that the pattern of which laws were passed was based not on where they were economically necessary, but on where they were politically feasible. Understanding national legislative patterns The state-by-state pattern of public employment cuts, pension rollbacks, and union busting makes little sense from an economic standpoint. But it becomes much more intelligible when understood as a political phenomenon.
Why too much evidence can be a bad thing January 4, by Lisa Zyga, Phys. This reasoning sounds counterintuitive, but the legislators of the time had noticed that unanimous agreement often indicates the presence of systemic error in the judicial process, even if the exact nature of the error is yet to be discovered.
They intuitively reasoned that when something seems too good to be true, most likely a mistake was made. However, it turns out that the probability of a large number of people all agreeing is small, so our confidence in unanimity is ill-founded.
This 'paradox of unanimity' shows that often we are far less certain than we think. The researchers showed that, as the group of unanimously agreeing witnesses increases, the chance of them being correct decreases until it is no better than a random guess.
In police line-ups, the systemic error may be any kind of bias, such as how the line-up is presented to the witnesses or a personal bias held by the witnesses themselves.
Importantly, the researchers showed that even a tiny bit of bias can have a very large impact on the results overall. Counterintuitively, if one of the many witnesses were to identify a different suspect, then the probability that the other witnesses were correct would substantially increase.
The mathematical reason for why this happens is found using Bayesian analysis, which can be understood in a simplistic way by looking at a biased coin. The results would not indicate that the laws of probability for a binary system have changed, but that this particular system has failed.
In a similar way, getting a large group of unanimous witnesses is so unlikely, according to the laws of probability, that it's more likely that the system is unreliable. The researchers say that this paradox crops up more often than we might think.
Large, unanimous agreement does remain a good thing in certain cases, but only when there is zero or near-zero bias. Abbott gives an example in which witnesses must identify an apple in a line-up of bananas—a task that is so easy, it is nearly impossible to get wrong, and therefore large, unanimous agreement becomes much more likely.
On the other hand, a criminal line-up is much more complicated than one with an apple among bananas. In these situations, it would be highly unlikely to find large, unanimous agreement. Wide implications The paradox of unanimity has many other applications beyond the legal arena.
One important one that the researchers discuss in their paper is cryptography. Data is often encrypted by verifying that some gigantic number provided by an adversary is prime or composite.
One way to do this is to repeat a probabilistic test called the Rabin-Miller test until the probability that it mistakes a composite as prime is extremely low: The systemic failure that occurs in this situation is computer failure.
Most people never consider the possibility that a stray cosmic ray may flip a bit that in turn causes the test to accept a composite number as a prime.
After all, the probability for such an event occurring is extremely low, approximately per month. But the important thing is that it's greater thanso even though the failure rate is so tiny, it dominates over the desired level of security.Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty [Daron Acemoglu, James A.
Robinson] on ashio-midori.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Brilliant and engagingly written, Why Nations Fail answers the question that has stumped the experts for centuries: Why .
I’m sure I’ll get hate mail by going on record for this, too:Over-eating fats, glorifying the state of “ketosis,” and inventing many new “[Insert Diet Fad Name]- Approved” packaged foods will not serve us well, will not reverse the obesity epidemic, and will not reduce the many disease epidemics either.
The Big Short was not the first film adaptation of a successful non-fiction book covering the financial crisis. In , HBO adapted Andrew Ross Sorkin’s crisis tell-all Too Big To Fail, which. How big can a SQL Server SSIS package definition become before design-time or run-time performance is impacted?
I'm not talking about the size of the datasets being passed, or even the number of columns being returned. Too Big to Fail Summary by Andrew Ross Sorkin will bring closer to you The Inside Story of How Wall Street and Washington Fought to Save the Financial System- .
Too Big to Fail Summary provides a free book summary, key takeaways, review, quotes and author biography of Andrew Ross Sorkin’s book regarding Great Recession.
Detailed analysis of how Paulson, Geithner, Dimon, and Fuld steered through the fall of