The new bit is the Triassic transition, but an Economist article is a handy summary of current thoughts on the Permian and later extinctions (emphases mine):
Economist: Rise of the dinosaurs
… This cycle has happened five times in the history of modern life. The most famous occasion was 65m years ago, when the dinosaurs were wiped out and the mammals emerged victorious from the wreckage. A bigger mass extinction, at the end of the Permian period 251m years ago, killed 70% of the world’s land vertebrates (and 96% of all marine animals) and paved the way for the age of reptiles.
Exactly which sort of reptile would come out on top, however, was not something that was decided until later—201.4m years ago, to be precise. This was towards the end of the Triassic period. Then, the ranks of aetosaurs, phytosaurs, shuvosaurs and many other uncrocodile-like relatives of the crocodiles were suddenly thinned, and a previously obscure group came to the fore. The result, once natural selection had done its work over the course of millions of years, was the now familiar cast of Allosaurus, Diplodocus,Triceratops and Tyrannosaurus rex…
… The dinosaurs were done for, as everybody knows, by a collision with an asteroid. The Permian was curtailed by massive volcanism. But what exactly happened towards the end of the Triassic has been much debated. A study just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, by Jessica Whiteside of Brown University in Rhode Island and her colleagues, pretty well nails it down. It was the geological chaos that created the North Atlantic Ocean.
… The initial volcanism as North America split from Europe released carbon dioxide from deep inside the Earth. That produced a greenhouse effect which, in turn, melted seabed structures known as methane clathrates, which trap that gas in ice. This caused a massive release of 12C-rich methane into the atmosphere, explaining the initial drop in 13C concentrations. The methane, being a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, exacerbated things, while the carbon dioxide acidified the oceans, killing most of the animal shellmakers and fertilising the photosynthesis of planktonic plants. The subsequent plankton bloom sucked up the12C and the isotope ratio veered off in the opposite direction.
The greenhouse warming and the acid rain also did for the forests and many of the reptiles. Only once things had settled down could the survivors regroup. New species of trees took over. The forests grew back. And a bunch of hitherto not-so-terrible lizards began their long march.
So a spike in CO2 from deep sources led to a methane spike. Together the two baked and acid burned the planet. A plankton bloom sucked down the CO2 and things settled down again.
We, of course, are on track to repeat history.
CO2 or not, we are in the midst of a mass “holocene” extinction anyway. What comes from that remains to be seen, but if humans last a bit longer it might be retrospectively labeled the transition to the age of the machines.
You may have heard that the Senate passed a health care bill. It is likely that it will be further amended by the House, and of course there will be challenges, but it is probable that the directives in the bill will be turned into law.
It is conceivable that this bill will have some implications for the future of health care, so it is useful to learn what is in it. It is quite a large bill.
Uwe Reinhardt, a well known health economist, recommended a summary prepared by the Congressional Research Service [1]. Even the summary takes a while to read. One can, however, get a sense of it simply by looking at the headings. I’ve excerpted them below. There are quite a few odd bits in there, but the scope of this bill is occasionally breathtaking.
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – Summary of Senate Bill – Library of Congress March 2010
Title I: Quality, Affordable Health Care for All Americans
Subtitle A: Immediate Improvements in Health Care Coverage for All Americans
Subtitle B: Immediate Actions to Preserve and Expand Coverage
Subtitle C: Quality Health Insurance Coverage for All Americans
Part I: Health Insurance Market
Part II: Other Provisions
Subtitle D: Available Coverage Choices for All Americans
Part I: Establishment of Qualified Health Plans
Part II: Consumer Choices and Insurance Competition Through Health Benefit Exchanges
Part III: State Flexibility Relating to Exchanges
Part IV: State Flexibility to Establish Alternative Programs
Part V: Reinsurance and Risk Adjustment
Subtitle E: Affordable Coverage Choices for All Americans
Part I: Premium Tax Credits and Cost-sharing Reductions
Subpart A: Premium Tax Credits and Cost-sharing Reductions
Subpart B: Eligibility Determinations
Part II: Small Business Tax Credit - (Sec. 1421, as modified by section 10105)
Subtitle F: Shared Responsibility for Health Care
Part I: Individual Responsibility
Part II: Employer Responsibilities
Subtitle G: Miscellaneous ProvisionsTitle II: Role of Public Programs
Subtitle A: Improved Access to Medicaid
Subtitle B: Enhanced Support for the Children's Health Insurance Program
Subtitle C: Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment Simplification
Subtitle D: Improvements to Medicaid Services - (Sec. 2301)
Subtitle E: New Options for States to Provide Long-Term Services and Supports
Subtitle F: Medicaid Prescription Drug Coverage
Subtitle G: Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) Payments
Subtitle H: Improved Coordination for Dual Eligible Beneficiaries
Subtitle I: Improving the Quality of Medicaid for Patients and Providers
Subtitle J: Improvements to the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC)
Subtitle K: Protections for American Indians and Alaska Natives
Subtitle L: Maternal and Child Health ServicesTitle III: Improving the Quality and Efficiency of Health Care
Subtitle A: Transforming the Health Care Delivery System
Part I: Linking Payment to Quality Outcomes under the Medicare Program
Part II: National Strategy to Improve Health Care Quality
Part III: Encouraging Development of New Patient Care Models
Subtitle B: Improving Medicare for Patients and Providers
Part 1: Ensuring Beneficiary Access to Physician Care and Other Services
Part II: Rural Protections
Part III: Improving Payment Accuracy
Subtitle C: Provisions Relating to Part C
Subtitle D: Medicare Part D Improvements for Prescription Drug Plans and MA-PD Plans
Subtitle E: Ensuring Medicare Sustainability
Subtitle F: Health Care Quality
Subtitle G: Protecting and Improving Guaranteed Medicare BenefitsTitle IV: Prevention of Chronic Disease and Improving Public Health
Subtitle A: Modernizing Disease Prevention and Public Health Systems
Subtitle B: Increasing Access to Clinical Preventive Services
Subtitle C: Creating Healthier Communities - (Sec. 4201, as modified by Sec. 10403)
Subtitle D: Support for Prevention and Public Health Innovation - (Sec. 4301)
Subtitle E: Miscellaneous Provisions - (Sec. 4402)Title V: Health Care Workforce
Subtitle A: Purpose and Definitions - (Sec. 5001)
Subtitle B: Innovations in the Health Care Workforce - (Sec. 5101, as modified by Sec. 10501)
Subtitle C: Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce
Subtitle D: Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training - (Sec. 5301)
Subtitle E: Supporting the Existing Health Care Workforce - (Sec. 5401)
Subtitle F: Strengthening Primary Care and Other Workforce Improvements- (Sec. 5501, as modified by Sec. 10501)
Subtitle G: Improving Access to Health Care Services - (Sec. 5601)
Subtitle H: General Provisions - (Sec. 5701)Title VI: Transparency and Program Integrity
Subtitle A: Physician Ownership and Other Transparency - (Sec. 6001, as modified by Sec. 10601)
Subtitle B: Nursing Home Transparency and Improvement
Part I: Improving Transparency of Information - (Sec. 6101)
Part II: Targeting Enforcement - (Sec. 6111)
Part III: Improving Staff Training - (Sec. 6121)
Subtitle C: Nationwide Program for National and State Background Checks on Direct Patient Access Employees of Long Term Care Facilities and Providers - (Sec. 6201)
Subtitle D: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research - (Sec. 6301, as modified by Sec. 10602)
Subtitle E: Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP Program Integrity Provisions - (Sec. 6401, as modified by Sec. 10603)
Subtitle F: Additional Medicaid Program Integrity Provisions - (Sec. 6501)
Subtitle G: Additional Program Integrity Provisions - (Sec. 6601)
Subtitle H: Elder Justice Act - Elder Justice Act of 2009 - (Sec. 6702)
Subtitle I: Sense of the Senate Regarding Medical Malpractice - (Sec. 6801)Title VII: Improving Access to Innovative Medical Therapies -
Subtitle A: Biologics Price Competition and Innovation
Subtitle B: More Affordable Medicine for Children and Underserved Communities - (Sec. 7101)Title VIII: Class Act - Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act or the CLASS Act - (Sec. 8002, as modified by Sec. 10801)
Title IX: Revenue Provisions -
Subtitle A: Revenue Offset Provisions - (Sec. 9001, as modified by section 10901)
Subtitle B: Other Provisions - (Sec. 9021)Title X: Strengthening Quality, Affordable Health Care for All Americans -
Subtitle A: Provisions Relating to Title I - (Sec. 10101) Revises provisions of or related to Subtitles A, B, and C of Title I of this Act
Subtitle B: Provisions Relating to Title II
Part I: Medicaid and CHIP - (Sec. 10201)
Part II: Support for Pregnant and Parenting Teens and Women - (Sec. 10212)
Part III: Indian Health Care Improvement - (Sec. 10221)
[1] These summaries are written in a programming language for the creation of regulations. The bulk of the omitted material begins with command verbs that tell regulators what to do. I created this summary by regex operations on paragraphs beginning with the command operators which include:
It’s a very structured document that resembles generated software code and could indeed be created from a regulatory meta-language.Allows
Amends
Applies
Appropriates
Authorizes
Declares
Directs
Establishes
Excludes
Expands
Expresses the sense
Provides
Reauthorizes
Redesignates
Requires
Revises
Sets forth
Welcome to Your Viral World | The Loom | Carl Zimmer for Discover Magazine
...Line up all the viruses on Earth end to end (go ahead, I’ll wait), and they’ll stretch over 10 million light years....Is this conceivable? I know our planet is a seething ball of virii, but even a single light year is a very great length.
E.T. voted greatest ever children's film
1. E.T: The Extra-Terrestrial
2. Toy Story
3. Mary Poppins
4. Lion King
5. Wizard of Oz
6. Bambi
7. Back to the Future
8. Shrek
9. Finding Nemo
10. Labyrinth
11. 101 Dalmatians
12. Aladdin
13. Beauty and the Beast
14. The Goonies
15. The Jungle Book
16. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
17. Alice in Wonderland
18. Home Alone
19. Ice Age
20. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
21. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
22. Annie
23. Cinderella
24. Monsters Inc
25. Madagascar
26. Sound of Music
27. Wallace and Gromit – The Wrong Trousers
28. Mrs Doubtfire
29. Babe
30. Beethoven
31. Beetlejuice
32. Black Beauty
33. The Little Mermaid
34. The Railway Children
35. A Bug's Life
36. Dumbo
37. Wall-E
38. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
39. A Little Princess
40. Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure
41. Jurassic Park
42. Kung-Fu Panda
43. Who Framed Roger Rabbit
44. Billy Elliot
45. Lady and the Tramp
46. Neverending Story
47. Short Circuit
48. Sleeping Beauty
49. An American Tail
50. Chicken Run
Burton Malkiel wrote “A Random Walk down Wall Street” in 1973. He believed the prices of publicly traded assets reflected all publicly available information. John Bogle, influenced by Malkiel, created index funds to reduce the risks of random market fluctuations and to profit from this rational pricing.
Peter Lynch wrote “One up on wall street” in 1989. He didn’t agree with Malkiel; he felt that “local knowledge” and personal experience could detect under and overpriced shares.
I suspect each was more or less right for his era. That is, I suspect share prices in the mid to late 1960s were more or less rationally priced. I suspect share prices in the late 1970s and early 1980s were not rationally priced, and that the anomalies were potentially discoverable by a rational investor with limited resources.
Of course by the time each person wrote their book, their era had passed.
Which brings me to our current era.
Since Lynch’s book we have experienced 20 years of economic turbulence fundamentally driven, I suspect, by the commercialization of the microprocessor and the industrialization of what we once knew as the third world. As a side-effect of these fundamental changes, including the collapse of the fourth estate, we have shifted towards the upper end of the historic scale of corporate and governmental corruption.
So what is the rational small investor strategy of today?
Of course I don’t know. My only personal insight is that I don’t yet see much short term correlation between share prices and the value of most of the goods and services I buy. Companies that deliver lousy value seem to track with their industry. The exceptions are a few companies that are intensely monitored (Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc); I think they are rationally priced but they are, of course, very volatile.
This would suggest we’re still in a Lynch era, where one should be able to use local knowledge to detect anomalies and profit from them. Over the past 10 years though you couldn’t detect the anomalies using the “local knowledge” he described – you had to be an insider who was able to sniff out fraud and corruption. In the past decade some have done very well detecting evidence of corruption and de facto fraud, and shorting companies like Lehman.
Of course by the time people like me decide shorting corrupt corporations is a good strategy, its time has passed.
I where are we today? I’m guessing that we’re in transition back to a Malkiel era. So for a few years shorting corruption might still work, but increasingly share prices will be a random walk. Even if index funds were a crummy investment over the past decade (everything was, except shorting fraud), this might be their time again. I wouldn’t mind some 1960s style dull dividend paying companies though.
Of course by the time anyone writes the “Random walk” or “One up” book of our era, that strategy will have passed into history.
Oh, and if you take investment advice from me, you totally deserve your impending financial ruin.
This Is Your Faulty Brain, On a Microchip - Memory forever - Gizmodo
... Starting in your 20s—not old age—behavioral evidence suggests that you enter a linear cascade of general cognitive decline....The Gizmodo article, clearly written by a young chap, imagines we'll outsource our recall and declining cognition to an onboard chip (vs., say Google). Sure.
This decline is notably seen in tasks that are highly mentally demanding, like speed of processing (how quickly you handle incoming information), attention, working memory (how well you manipulate and keep information active in your mind), and, of course, long term memory.
In real life, these effects are seen in everything from how long it takes to learn a new skill to how quickly you can recall a factoid....
The battle of the sexes: Face off | The EconomistSo non-geeks really do need to destroy civilization. This explains the GOP.
... Mating preferences, too, vary with a society’s level of economic development. That, at least, is the conclusion of a study by Ben Jones and Lisa DeBruine of Aberdeen University, in Scotland, published this week in the Proceedings of the Royal Society.
Dr Jones and Dr DeBruine, themselves a married couple, examined what might be called the Deianira paradox. Hercules, demigod and paragon of masculinity in the ancient world, was indirectly done for by his own sexual prowess—his jealous wife, Deianira, accidentally poisoned him with a potion she thought would render him eternally faithful. Deianira’s predicament is a woman’s ultimate dilemma. In a man, the craggy physical characteristics associated with masculinity often indicate a strong immune system and thus a likelihood of his producing healthier offspring than his softer-featured confrères will. But such men are also more promiscuous and do not care as much about long-term relationships, leaving women to raise their kids alone.
Nowadays, sound parenting is often more important to the viability of a man’s offspring than Herculean strength. That, some researchers suspect, may be changing the physical traits that women look for in a mate, at least in some societies. A study carried out in 2004, for example, discovered that women in rural Jamaica found manly types more desirable than did women in Britain, which led to questions about whether those preferences were arbitrary or whether women in different parts of the world might be adapting to circumstances that place different emphasis on manliness in the competitive calculus.
Dr Jones and Dr DeBruine therefore looked to see if there is an inverse relationship between women’s preference for masculine features and national health. Sure enough, they found one. In environments where disease is rampant and the child-mortality rate is high, women prefer masculine men. In places like America and Britain, where knowing how to analyse health-care plans is more important than fighting off infection, effeminate men are just as competitive...
... Neither wealth nor mating pattern had much impact on women’s preferences for manly men. Disease rates, by contrast, seemed to be directly related to how they went about choosing a mate—the healthier the society, the less women valued masculinity. Hygiene and wimps, it seems, go hand in hand....
Under the current system of incentives, only demonic health insurance companies can prosper…
Demons And Demonization - Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com
The usual suspects have been attacking Obama for “demonizing” insurance companies; but saying that people do terrible things isn’t demonization if they do, in fact, do terrible things.
And health insurers do, because they have huge financial incentives to act in an inhumane way — most obviously, by revoking coverage when people get sick, using whatever rationale they can devise.
Read this report by Murray Waas on Assurant Health (previously called Fortis), which used a computer algorithm to identify every client with HIV, then systematically revoked coverage on the flimsiest of grounds — and appears to have systematically hidden any paper trail showing how it made its decisions…
… the evidence is that the overwhelming majority of rescissions, not just at Assurant but across the board, are, in fact, without justification…
… And to repeat what I and other have repeatedly explained, you need the whole package to make this work. You can’t end discrimination based on medical history unless you require that health as well as sick people have insurance, to broaden the risk pool. And you can’t mandate coverage unless you provide aid to those who otherwise couldn’t afford it.
Right now, we have a system that creates huge incentives for bad, one might say demonic, behavior: Assurant made $150 million by revoking coverage, almost always without cause…
In this system of incentives and a competitive marketplace, a virtuous corporation will lose out to one that follows the incentives. The virtuous corporation must either abandon virtue or die. Soon, only the demonic survive.
The same incentives, of course, apply in education. If a provider is judged by educational outcomes, the most successful strategy is to use “recission” to get rid of low performing students. Only the demonic survive.
We need to change the system.
Incidentally, it’s typical that the very first (asinine) comment on Krugman’s post is by someone who didn’t read the second to last paragraph. Eliminating patient discrimination while allowing patient choice on coverage timing is a recipe for bankrupting insurance companies. At that point,the patients are demonic.
We need the entire package.
Editorial - Rewriting History in Texas - NYTimes.comClearly a loss for Reason in Texas, but, really, there wasn't much to lose. Publishers have been anticipating this, textbooks are being designed so that Texas-specific editions can be inexpensively created.... The Texas Board of Education, notorious for its past efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution in public schools, has now moved to revise the social studies curriculum to portray conservative ideas and movements in a more positive light and emphasize the role of Christianity in the nation’s founding.
