Month: April 2012

An estimate: 

Most computational neuroscientists tend to estimate human storage capacity somewhere between 10 terabytes and 100 terabytes, though the full spectrum of guesses ranges from 1 terabyte to 2.5 petabytes. (One terabyte is equal to about 1,000 gigabytes or about 1 million megabytes; a petabyte is about 1,000 terabytes.) The math behind these estimates is fairly simple. The human brain contains roughly 100 billion neurons. Each of these neurons seems capable of making around 1,000 connections, representing about 1,000 potential synapses, which largely do the work of data storage. Multiply each of these 100 billion neurons by the approximately 1,000 connections it can make, and you get 100 trillion data points, or about 100 terabytes of information.

The Obama campaign spikes the football:

Naturally, the Romney campaign is in hysterics. Ed Morrissey sees the ad as some sort of diversion: 

What does that say about the Obama campaign’s efforts to scare voters over Mitt Romney’s supposed inability to kill Osama bin Laden?  A lot more than they’d like, especially since Osama bin Laden is already dead.  This campaign effort at its core uses an argument that’s already moot.  The Obama campaign wants to scare voters, rather than make them think, and it’s not just on Osama bin Laden but also with their “war on women” rhetoric, Seamus the dog, Romney’s wealth, and so on.  They want to talk about nearly everything except the economy and jobs, and even if they have to become a caricature of what they publicly decried in 2008, they’ll do it.

Michael Falcone compares the spot to Hillary's "get out of the kitchen" ad from 2008. Jamelle Bouie isn't convinced: 

As Benjy Sarlin jokingly noted on Twitter, “there’s a subtle difference between fearmongering Bin Laden as a scary ghost, and you know, pointing out ya killed him.” There’s nothing illegitimate about campaigning on foreign policy successes, especially when it’s something as significant as the death of Osama bin Laden. And in a campaign where the Republican nominee accuses Obama of “apologizing for America”—I can see why the campaign would want to highlight the extent to which Obama has had an aggressive foreign policy presence, disagre or otherwise.

Chait adds: 

In 2004, Democrats were furious that Bush used the 9/11 attacks as a political asset. Now, Republicans are indignant that Obama is running on having killed Osama bin Laden. (Of course, the difference is that 9/11 was at best something Bush had no responsibility for and at worst a colossal blunder, while killing bin Laden is an actual accomplishment.)

Previous Ad War Updates: Apr 26, Apr 25, Apr 24, Apr 23, Apr 18, Apr 17, Apr 16, Apr 13, Apr 11, Apr 10, Apr 9, Apr 5, Apr 4, Apr 3, Apr 2, Mar 30, Mar 27, Mar 26, Mar 23, Mar 22, Mar 21, Mar 20, Mar 19, Mar 16, Mar 15, Mar 14, Mar 13, Mar 12, Mar 9, Mar 8, Mar 7, Mar 6, Mar 5, Mar 2, Mar 1, Feb 29, Feb 28, Feb 27, Feb 23, Feb 22, Feb 21, Feb 17, Feb 16, Feb 15, Feb 14, Feb 13, Feb 9, Feb 8, Feb 7, Feb 6, Feb 3, Feb 2, Feb 1, Jan 30, Jan 29, Jan 27, Jan 26, Jan 25, Jan 24, Jan 22, Jan 20, Jan 19, Jan 18, Jan 17, Jan 16 and Jan 12.

Portland, Oregon, 12 pm

James Cameron is courting Chinese firms to co-produce the Avatar sequels:

This year China will surpass Japan as the world’s second-largest movie market, after America. Chinese box-office takings totalled 13 billion yuan ($2.06 billion) in 2011, an increase of 30% from 2010, which in turn had been more than 60% higher than in 2009. The number of movie screens has doubled in five years to more than 10,000 (and is projected to reach 15,000 in speedy fashion), and the new screens are mostly digital and 3D-capable. Meanwhile America’s market is stagnating. Takings in North America (America and Canada combined) declined by 4% in 2011, to $10.2 billion. Mr Cameron suggests that by the time "Avatar 3" is released later this decade, China may well rival America as the top movie market. 

Friday on the Dish, Andrew explained why conservatism must reconcile itself to marriage equality, flagged a hopeful moment reminiscent of the gay soldier proposal ad, listened to a reader's psychoanalysis, and called Paul Ryan out for lying on Ayn Rand. Romney faced Scylla and Charybdis on the Veep choice while immigration appeared no better, readers responded to Andrew's "Mormon Card," independents blamed Bush over Obama for the economy, young voters cared about the election, Arizona wasn't meaningfully in play, debate continued on the lack of Democratic moral argumentation, Tucker Carlson got skewered, and Beltway culture found its champion. We worried military steps would backfire in Syria, took stock of the situation in Bahrain, forecasted the Balkanization of the Middle East, compared Burmese and Arab paths to democracy, figured Africa journalism could benefit from more African journalists, and aired more reader views on Tarek Mehanna.

Andrew also raked Obama over the coals on medical marijuana. We grabbed reax to the GDP numbers, checked in on the high price of cures, got angry about medically unnecessary ultrasounds, learned that the morning after pill wasn't an abortifacient, questioned science's move towards perfect fetuses, and examined medicalized pessimism. The death penalty required the killing of innocents and the police slaughtered dogs. Americans didn't sleep enough, readers chimed in on "random racial humor," a psychoanalyst interviewed real-life superheroes, programmers bro'd out, a Britishism got explained, and two guys perfected the Craigslist ad. Ask Spencer Ackerman Anything here, Malkin Nominee here, Quote for the Day here, FOTD here, MHB here, and VFYW here.

Thursday on the Dish, Andrew delved into Romney's family tree, hammered Rubio's foreign policy speech, rolled his eyes at Romney's attempt to go after Obama for being cool, wondered why Democrats were so terrible at moral persuasion, and heartily recommended Spencer Ackerman's Ask Anything rant about DC (which you can find here).  We looked at some very preliminary projections for November, heard from a reader who thought Obama already had it in the bag, figured the GOP was likely to keep the House, met "Romney's balls," and said goodbye to Gingrich. Biden egged The Onion on, Obama's "balls" quote was sadly corrected, Romney's team obsessed over Russia, Steve Doocy received a lesson on non-apologies, and Australia fined non-voters. Ad War Update here.

Andrew also took a closer look at the UK spending cuts, watched Murdoch's semi-confession, gaped at a proposed bill legalizing necrophilia in Egypt  (that readers demonstrated is likely a fabrication), was repulsed by the (possibly fake) live burial of a Syrian protestor, and shared his Larkin reading. We looked back to when roads were used for walking, asteroids mining seemed to be a reality, and tiny houses helped the environment. Donating to the government didn't solve tax unfairness, interest on student loans mattered, a questionnaire prevented domestic violence, working from home headed off CO2 emissions, stay at home dads felt stigmatized, and postal problems weren't yet a thing of the past. Game of Thrones got torture right and extended warranties got finances wrong. Eye tricks made snakes slither, Provincetown in 1937 appeared via photograph, YouTube delivered racial humor, and a kangaroo spoon lady performed the Black Keys. Yglesias Nominee here, Chart of the Day here, VFYW here, MHB here, and FOTD here.

Wednesday on the Dish, Andrew debuted his new theories of Palin, tracked the "anti-abortion frenzy" in the state legislatures, found the ad he'd been waiting for, discovered Obama was a dishead, and waited for the VFYWhite House. We ran down Romney's poor primary showings, debated Romney and Obama on foreign policy, pointed to an area of agreement between the two candidates, and listened to Obama slow jam the news. Ad War Update here.

Andrew also reexplained his position on stimulus and debt in light of the UK's double-dip, watched the fighting surrounding the Murdoch scandal in Britain, compared the IDF's Chief of Staff to neoconservatives on Iran, and defended his claim that (right now) more violence was comitted in the name of Islam than the other monotheistic religions. We read a polemic on misogyny in the Arab world (follow-up here), delved into the history of negotiations with Iran, learned about Chinese "forumers," watched Germany attempt to neuter Mein Kampf by republishing it, and saw foreign bureaus dwindle away. Genesis didn't support anti-gay interpretations and the Vatican reembraced ant-Semites.

We also debated the importance of inequality, wondered if California would nix the death penalty, celebrated trial and error policymaking in America, understood Netflix as a utility, and examined whether lunch breaks were good for workers. Dogs altered our evolution, fertility mattered to animals, and humans created new baby rituals. Twitter ruined TV, title sequences impressed, and catchphrases didn't. Physics beat a ticket, "trashcam" photos wowed, and a Russian copyrighted his beard. Ask Spencer Ackerman Anything here, Quote for the Day here, Von Hoffman Nominee here, Yglesias Nominee here, VFYW here, MHB here, and FOTD here.

Tuesday on the Dish, Andrew went for Ross' (and the Church's) jugular on homophobia, blasted the Catholic hierarchy's out-and-out hostility towards Obama, shared stories about the pain caused by DOMA and immigration inequality, punctured Slavoj Zizek's inflated reputation by airing his thoughts on religious violence, decided it was unfair to call an overturn of the mandate "judicial tyranny," and critiqued a Romney proposal on tax reform. We discovered Democratic dislike of Mormons, broke down Mitt's problem with college educated white voters, explained why a Rubio VP choice wouldn't mucy change the race, picked out the things that mattered from tonight's (yes, tonight's) primaries, and laughed at Gingrich's Delaware strategy. Veep captured a nasty sort of Washington denizen, traditional political cartoons were pronounced dead, America's institutions fell apart, manufacturing subsidies weren't the answer, and there was a way Obamacare could increase the deficit. Ad War Updates here and here.

Andrew also revised his position on Tarek Mehanna somewhat, debated Europe with Noah Millman, delved into the latest details in the Murdoch case, noticed the paucity of corrections on Fox News, awarded Von Hoffmans to everyone for primary coverage, got excited about reading Larkin's "The Whitsun Weddings" tonight at Cooper Union, and implored you to Ask Manzi Anything. The AP received a fisking on Afghanistan, the "donate to the US government" debate continued, factories moved back to the First World, and readers discussed the least walkable cities. It wasn't clear how many women raped men, men's bathrooms had rules, Tina Fey explained pregnancy hiding, more evidence embarrassed Big Football, and readers defended video games as art. Ask Ackerman Anything here, Creepy Ad here, Chart of the Day here, VFYW Contest Winner here, VFYW here, MHB here, and FOTD here. 

Longhu, China, 10 am

Monday on the Dish, Andrew decried European austerity as counterproductive (follow-ups here and here), compared Sarkozy to Romney, blasted the international rot created by American torture, saw a sort-of hopeful sign on the NYT's coverage of the subject, defended his position on Tarek Mehanna and Anwar al-Awlaki, blasted the reaction to Peter Beinart in America, and put Arizona in play for Obama. We learned the press didn't really love Obama, delved into the real voting gaps the polling suggested exist, and set Romney's approach to his religion against Obama's. Soldiers got married (a lot), the draft likely wasn't a barrier to war, and drones were the future of airwar.

Andrew also celebrated Philip Larkin's poetry, worried about the effect of aggregation on young journalists, pushed back against search engine optimization, recounted a friend's story of "being a complete ass" (reader responses here), and reupped the poll for Ask Maggie Gallagher Anything. We debated donating to the US government, discovered a place without minimum wage, explored one idea for employing the young, and wondered how long we'd live for. Pesticides killed bees, the weather affected our views on climate change but probably didn't change our decision to bike, certain personalities might be more inclined to use drugs, music likely wasn't innate, and fingerprinting failed. Readers continued pondering the makeup of consciousness and discussed the Resurrection. Love bore fruit, women liked eye candy too, Napoloen wasn't short, and the outhouse moved indoors. Ask Spencer Ackerman Anything here, Quote for the Day here, VFYW here, MHB here, and FOTD here.

– Z.B.

Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson think the recent elections were an attempt by the government to solidify military rule, not transition to democracy:

They hope to manage this, make the regime look more respectable. But it is a gamble for them, they may fail. If they do, it will be much harder now to use repression like they have in the past, so we were just arguing that the transition was more hopeful than the status quo, where a really successful attempt to overthrow the military might just have led to civil war. Now there is more hope for change, though of course if there is change, the military still intends to be able to influence it. But again, this is probably better than the previous situation.

In a follow-up, they compare the risks inherent to the Burmese opposition's strategy to the Arab Spring's mass demonstration model:

Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya (and hopefully Syria) chart one path for the fall of a repressive extractive regime: a revolution deposing the regime — peacefully or violently, largely depending on the reaction of the regime. Burma shows another: the regime itself gradually letting go of the reins…Both the Arab and the Burmese paths towards more inclusive institutions come with serious pitfalls.

The Arab path opens the way to another group coming to power and re-creating yet another extractive regime as has been the case with many of the post-colonial governments that overthrew the colonial regimes after World War II or the Bolshevik Revolution that kicked out the czarist regime in Russia — both the military and the Muslim Brotherhood our candidate would-be usurpers in Egypt, for example.

The Burmese path risks creating the appearance of change without real change, and is also vulnerable to a reversal down the road if the new cadre of the military, still completely and forcefully dominating Burmese institutions, wishes to change direction.

Recent Dish on Burma's transition here, here and here.

(Photo: A supporter cheers on Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi as she visits her constituency on the occasion of festivities surrounding the country's new year in Kawhmu outside Yangon on April 17, 2012. Suu Kyi was elected in the recent April 1 parliamentary by-elections in a Kawhmu constituency. By Soe Than Win/AFP/Getty Images.)

Michael F. Scheier's research has shown that optimism is associated with mental and physical well-being. An unintended consequence:

[Some patients] have told me that they feel guilty. They read that optimism is associated with better health among patients recovering from illness, and they think, "If only I would be more optimistic, I'd do better." Yet, they can't put themselves in that frame of mind. Family members may chastise them too for not promoting their recovery by simply expecting good things to happen. Perhaps it was naïve not to have imagined these reactions. Regardless, it is troubling that they have occurred.

Maria Hvistendahl reports on the rapidly advancing science of identifying a baby's future traits while it's still a fetus:

Now, with the cost of DNA sequencing dropping faster than that of computing power, [researcher Dennis Lo] estimates the bill may come to one-tenth of that—still expensive, but no doubt tempting for some parents. Lo wagers complete fetal genome testing might be widely available in a clinical setting within a decade. What fetal genes might one day suggest about a baby’s eye color, appearance, and intellectual ability will be useful to parents, not insurers. But with costs coming down and insurers interested in other aspects of the fetal genome, a Gattaca–like two-tiered society, in which parents with good access to health care produce flawless, carefully selected offspring and the rest of us spawn naturals, seems increasingly plausible.

The latest report from Radley Balko on police violence towards dogs:

When police officers shoot dogs, departments usually deem the shooting justified if the officer felt threatened by the animal. But an officer's perception doesn't always mean the animal actually was a threat. In recent years, police officers have shot and killed chihuahuas, miniature dachshunds, Wheaton terriers, and Jack Russell terriers. 

Last month, a California police officer shot and killed a boxer puppy and pregnant chihuahua, claiming the boxer had threatened him. The chihuahua, he said, got caught in the crossfire. When a San Bernardino, Calif., woman called police to report a burglary in progress behind her house last month, they responded, jumped her fence to confront the burglars, then shot her dalmatian mix, Julio. He survived. Police officers have also recently shot dogs that were chained, tied, or leashed — obviously posing no real threat to officers who killed them.

Previous coverage of Balko's pet issue here, here, here, here, here and here.

Before heading to the Correspondents’ festivities this weekend, fellow national security reporter Eli Lake responds to Spencer:

Readers join the debate:

I listened to Ackerman’s epic screed on Beltway culture and took note of one quote: “The almost aggressive insulting of one’s intelligence that marks successful political discourse and combat and media discourse.” I thought about that when I saw the gang on “Morning Joe” seriously discussing this story on Politico: “Why Jeb Bush doesn’t want to be vice president”

The lede: “He’s the GOP vice presidential pick that Democrats fear most — a brassy choice who would likely deliver his crucial home state, boost the ticket with Hispanics and Catholics and appeal to both conservatives and independents. The problem: Jeb Bush apparently doesn’t want the job.”

We then get paragraph after paragraph of a discussion of Bush’s positive qualities from named and unamed Republican operatives and Bush supporters, many saying they’d wish he was the Presidential nominee, not just the possible VP. We’re told, “The case for Bush is straightforward: nobody else offers his combination of political appeal, policy chops and a record of accomplishment.” (Strangely enough, there’s no actual reporting of data that demonstrates Jeb Bush is the VP pick that Democrats fear most.)

But, sadly, we learn that Bush won’t make himself available because he prefers to keep his family out of the spotlight, focus on serious policy issues…and make money through consulting and speeches. Oh, by the way, finally on the third page, in the eighth to last paragraph, Jonthan Martin manages to fit in this sentence: “Bush is not without a downside. Even though his admirers are confident that he’d be seen by voters as his own man, his last name would remind the country of his brother’s presidency and raise uncomfortable questions about political royalism.” “Bush is not without a downside.”

Please don’t let Spencer read this. He might spontaneously implode.

Another writes:

Okay, I was born in DC, where the Trader Joe’s is now, and I lived in the city for 24 years. Even now that my ID is from another state, I think of it as just a temporary blip away from my beloved, taxed-without-representation home. I am the daughter of lawyers, and I even went to one of those vilified fancy private schools (even if I grew up in an area known more for its drug dealers and race riots), so presumably this should be right up my alley.

But Ackerman’s rant doesn’t ring true at all. What it sounds like is that he hates is the culture of his job. I don’t think D.C., of all places, is devoid of class critiques, especially not in the local media, nor do I think that somehow there is an American urban haven outside of the Beltway that deals better with privilege and the clashes of race and gender and money. He calls D.C. “wonderful,” but little of his rant seems concerned with the city itself.

The culture of a narcissistic and over-educated industry that deals with money and power is not somehow unique to the Beltway, even if transplants pretend like the world of cocktail parties and expense accounts and meetings with military brass is viable only in the rarefied air of Metro tunnels, heated by the humid weight of July. People often do move to get close to that world, the same way they do to New York, or San Francisco, or Los Angeles. But those cities have personalities and neighborhoods that are acknowledged in popular circles. They’re places you come from, and places you return home to, after your stint in mysterious D.C. – no decent bagels! The pizza! Anacostia! The cost of schooling! Is it to much to ask for a more personal critique of the varied Beltway worlds?

Even worse, to slam D.C. for calling it the Metro, because we’re not a real city with a real subway? Dude, if you’re going to call out public transit, complain about the late night hours or the lack of white people on the buses. But every city has a nomenclature for its transit systems and I doubt anyone would get huffy over Chicago’s “El.” No words spent on the restaurant culture that allows expensive yet middling food in large, opulent spaces to pop up downtown, only to be regurgitated every election cycle or so? Or the still-ravenous hordes of summer associates and badly-paid interns at non-profits who are flung into D.C.’s insane rental market, and who drink their student loans away on H St.? The alphabet soup of federal offices?

I appreciate his concern about the tendency to label Washingtonians as some sort of stunted breed of mutants by many outside media markets, but he just spent three minutes doing basically the same thing. Somehow I doubt Wired’s readers have any greater appreciation for the conflation of “the Beltway” and the diverse 600,000 residents who live there now than they did before.

I’m sorry, but this just really struck me the wrong way. Any chance you would highlight some of D.C.’s better points in future blog posts?