Both an Atheist and a Believer in Divine-Right Monarchy

Wednesday, November 19th, 2008

Mencius Moldbug half-jokes that he is both an atheist and a believer in divine-right monarchy, citing Sir Robert Filmer‘s Patriarcha. before explaining his own less-theocratic take:

But an atheist, such as myself, has a simpler way of getting to the same result. Really, what Filmer is saying, is: if you want stable government, accept the status quo as the verdict of history. There is no reason at all to inquire as to why the Bourbons are the Kings of France. The rule is arbitrary. Nonetheless, it is to the benefit of all that this arbitrary rule exists, because obedience to the rightful king is a Schelling point of nonviolent agreement. And better yet, there is no way for a political force to steer the outcome of succession — at least, nothing comparable to the role of the educational authorities in a democracy.

Geek Pop Star

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

Jason Zengerle calls Malcolm Gladwell a Geek Pop Star, but after the amazing success of The Tipping Point and Blink, Gladwell has decided to get serious — something that often spells the end of a good run:

Where he once focused on cool-hunting and T-shirts in his New Yorker articles, now it’s IQ tests and pension systems. “There is a kind of underlying social vision in a lot of his pieces,” says Henry Finder, his editor at the magazine. “The basic vision says how we fare in life isn’t just determined by ourselves and our character, it’s determined by a lot of other things that are beyond our control.” Gladwell has expanded that social vision into a book that he describes as “more political” and “a little angrier” than his previous efforts. “The interesting part of this now is trying to figure out what you do with the idea,” he says, explaining the new approach he took with Outliers, “as opposed to before, where the interesting part was just explaining the idea.” Bruce Headlam, a childhood friend of Gladwell’s who’s now an editor at the New York Times, calls Outliers “the book that’s closest to Malcolm’s heart.”

“When I wrote Tipping Point, my expectation was it would be read by my mom and that was it,” Gladwell says. “I had no notion I was creating a kind of public document. Now I realize I have a bit of a podium, so it seems silly to put the podium to waste.”

I feel like I’m about to watch a “very special episode” of my favorite sitcom.

Origins of the joint-stock corporation

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

Nick Szabo explains the origins of the joint-stock corporation:

The modern joint-stock corporation has many sources in medieval Europe. First among these was corporate law itself. Although the era is commonly referred to as “feudalism,” for the hierarchy of individually owned “fiefs” of land and control of serfs as fixtures of that land, large amounts of wealth in Europe were actually controlled by corporate entities. Chief among these were church lands, the corporate entities being dioceses, religious orders and the Roman Church itself. These entities controlled a substantial fraction of the land in Western Europe. Furthermore cities (with varying degrees of political independence), merchant guilds, craft guilds, and many charitable entities (such as hospitals) were legal “corporations,” i.e. artificial and perpetual legal persons under law. Some basic issues in corporate law (for example, when are officers individually liable for acts of the corporation, and when the corporation is liable for acts of its agents) had already been solved in canon law and urban law long before the joint-stock corporation.

Another source of the joint-stock corporation was the tradition of dividing ownership over tangible things into “shares.” For example, it was common in Italian maritime states fund the construction and operation of ships by dividing them into a certain number of shares (24 and 64 were common divisions). Share owners were responsible for funding voyages (not including cargo, which was typically paid for by trading partnerships called commenda) as well as the initial construction capital, and divided up the profits (fees paid by the merchants less costs). This tradition faded away in Venice when that republic’s government took over ship ownership, but thrived across the Italian penninsula in Genoa. Ship shares became embedded into maritime law all over Europe and even survived the British Empire (today in Canada when you register a boat the government still registers 64 shares in it for its owner). The only organization controlled by the shareholders, however, was the captain and crew of the ship.

The medieval organizations that most resembled later joint-stock corporations were the Genovese maone. These bore some strong resemblances to the publicani tax farming corporations of the Roman Republican era, although it is not clear how they could have survived the intervening Late Empire and Dark Ages other than as very obscure (and perhaps now lost) written descriptions. In form and function maone also bore strong resemblances to some early joint-stock companies such as the Bank of Amsterdam, Bank of England, and the Dutch and English East India Companies.

The Italian cities often sold off their tax receivables to wealthy merchants at a discount as a way to borrow funds. (Discounting was one of the many ways late medieval financiers avoided the rather lax and narrow usury restrictions). The debts were divided into equal shares called loca or partes. Legally, these shares were personal property (chattels) and could be freely traded.

Technically, no organization was created when the city sold its tax receivables to merchants. However, to effectively collect the taxes, the holders of loca formed an organization called a maona or societas comperarum. This organization would then subcontract to tax farmers to collect the taxes. By the fourteenth century, Genovese maone also engaged in military conquest and colonization. These were, quite literally, corporate raiders.

Normally, maone were temporary, but some of them ended up lasting for a long time. In 1346 the Maona di Chio e di Focea (a company for managing the taxes of Chios and Focea) was formed. This organization’s members obtained from Genoa the exclusive right to collect taxes from Chios (an Aegean island) and Phocaea (a port on the Anatolian coast). But first the company would have to conquer them! Although technically a temporary organization, it lasted until 1566.

Rather than going to buy receivables from Genoa, subscriptions to the di Chio e di Focea’s loca shares (still legally debt, but to be paid out in dividends as taxes and trading revenues were collected) went to fund 29 galleys to conquer Chios and Phocaea. The Genovese Republic, for a fee, granted the organization exclusive rights to collect taxes from the conquered territories as well as special trading privileges. The conquests, taxes, and trading were at least partially successful, and by the 16th century more than 600 persons owned loca of the maona. This function and some of this structure would later be emulated by the Dutch and English India Companies, but with a basic legal difference — “shares” in these later joint-stock companies would constitute ownership (like ship shares) not debt as with the maona.

The most famous Genovese maona was the Officium procuratorum San Giorgio, later the Banco di San Giorgio. Founded in 1407, this bank (and a later Genovese bank along the same lines, the Bank of Genoa) would be the inspiration for later central banks such as the Bank of Amsterdam and the Bank of England. Banco di San Giorgio came to administer most of the Genovese Republic’s debts. Dividends were paid out of tax collections (less directly than with earlier maona, but still more directly than the later Bank of England). The maona business was becoming more monopolistic, as it had become in Venice and would become with later central banks.

At the same time, however, the ship share system spread to northern Europe and branched out beyond ships. In Italy and Germany by the 16th century a wide variety of mines were divied up into ownership shares. During the Reformation, a pious follower of Martin Luther gave him some kuxen, shares in a mine in Saxony. Luther complained that he did not know what to do with them. (Indeed, since as with ship shares the mine managers could call on investors to pay up more capital, ownership was not for the financially naive).

One of his references is Meir Kohn’s The Capital Market Before 1600, which I mentioned earlier, while discussing Dead Dead-Pledges.

Professor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

The first German professor of Islamic theology, who was hired for outreach to Muslim immigrants, has not quite fulfilled his role:

Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany’s first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn’t like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.

So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.

His doubt grew after he considered applying the same scrutiny Biblical history had received to his own religion:

He devoured works questioning the existence of Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Then “I said to myself: You’ve dealt with Christianity and Judaism but what about your own religion? Can you take it for granted that Muhammad existed?”

He had no doubts at first, but slowly they emerged. He was struck, he says, by the fact that the first coins bearing Muhammad’s name did not appear until the late 7th century — six decades after the religion did.

He traded ideas with some scholars in Saarbrücken who in recent years have been pushing the idea of Muhammad’s nonexistence. They claim that “Muhammad” wasn’t the name of a person but a title, and that Islam began as a Christian heresy.

Prof. Kalisch didn’t buy all of this. Contributing last year to a book on Islam, he weighed the odds and called Muhammad’s existence “more probable than not.” By early this year, though, his thinking had shifted. “The more I read, the historical person at the root of the whole thing became more and more improbable,” he says.

He has doubts, too, about the Quran. “God doesn’t write books,” Prof. Kalisch says.

Most scholars agree that Muhammad’s life is better documented than Jesus’s:

“Of course Muhammad existed,” says Tilman Nagel, a scholar in Göttingen and author of a new book, “Muhammad: Life and Legend.” The Prophet differed from the flawless figure of Islamic tradition, Prof. Nagel says, but “it is quite astonishing to say that thousands and thousands of pages about him were all forged” and there was no such person.

Prof. Kalisch holds the kind of religious views one would expect from an academic:

Religions, he says, are “crutches” that help believers get to “the spiritual truth behind them.” To him, what matters isn’t whether Muhammad actually lived but the philosophy presented in his name.

Busy del Toro Talks Hobbit, Hellboy II DVD

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Guillermo del Toro, who directed Hellboy II — which just came out on DVD (and Blu-ray) — is currently involved in a bunch of fantasy movie projects: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Slaughterhouse-Five, At the Mountains of Madness — and The Hobbit:

Del Toro, who always carries a notebook so he can make character notes, sketch creatures and develop shot ideas, says he won’t travel with his Hobbit notebook for fear of exposing his secret vision for the film to the world.

“With something as big as The Hobbit, if I were to lose that notebook, there would be legal hell to pay,” he said. “So, I have a safe place for that one, and it stays there.”
[...]
After getting his kids off to school every morning in Los Angeles, del Toro sits down to write Hobbit for two hours. Afterward, he’ll deal with whatever project is on the agenda — whether he’s serving as a producer, writer and/or director for the film in development.

“Not every movie needs my attention at the same time every day,” del Toro said. “So, I deal with the film in front of me — one at a time. The secret is to compartmentalize. As long as you’re only working 12 hours a day, it’s OK.”
[...]
Someday, del Toro will be sitting down to record commentaries for the two Hobbit movies he’s writing and directing for producer and Oscar winner Peter Jackson. He said he’s in close communication with the original Lord of the Rings director daily, whether it’s by phone, via video conference or after a 14-hour flight to New Zealand.

There’s still plenty of Tolkien lore to hammer into shape for the screen.

“We envision The Hobbit as one film told in two chapters,” del Toro said. “We’re not looking at where we’ll separate the story yet because you have to look at the novel as one story.”

Del Toro must be closing in on wrapping the Hobbit script, though — he said he sees preproduction beginning in January.

The Grief That Makes LOLCats Good

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Jay Dixit submits that the true genius of lolcats lies in their tragedy

In one classic example, one cat is crying, and another is hugging it and saying, “Don’t crai. We’ll get cheezburger someday.” It’s sweet and poignant and wistful all at the same time. Life can be hard, it says, and we don’t always get what we want, but even as we long for things we may never have, we draw succor from the reassurances of those we love. Sure, it’s ridiculous that what the cat is yearning for is a cheeseburger. But the cheeseburger is not really a cheeseburger — it’s a symbol.


Here’s another: A brown and black calico looks out the window of his apartment only to notice a beautiful white female on the balcony across the way. His heart quickens, in the scenario I imagine, then he swallows hard and quickly looks away, unable to muster the courage to speak to her. The caption: “Evry dayz, 3 o’clockz … Mebe one day I sez meow to her.” Who among us hasn’t felt that longing and regret? Who among us hasn’t passed an attractive stranger in the supermarket or on the street, only to kick ourselves afterward for letting the opportunity slip between our fingers?

If anything, this reminds me of the grief that made Peanuts good.

The Statin News

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Michael Blowhard cites Michael Eades on the recent statin news:

Let’s look at [the study] in the best light possible. If we do, we find that a small group of unusual patients — those with low LDL-cholesterol and high C-reactive protein — may slightly decrease their risk for all-cause mortality by taking a drug that costs them almost $1,300 per year and slightly increases their risk for developing diabetes. That’s the best spin possible given the data from this study. Compare that to the spin the media is giving it.

Sober Science of Migrating Rubber Duckies

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Flotsam science is the sober science of migrating rubber duckies:

Consequently, Dr. Behar and his colleagues at the University of Colorado this past August released 90 yellow rubber ducks into the melt water flowing down a chasm in the largest of Greenland’s 200 glaciers — the Jakobshavn Isbrae — which has been thinning rapidly since 1997. Each duck was imprinted with an email address and, in three languages, the offer of a reward. If all goes well, Dr. Behar hopes that one day they will emerge 30 miles or so away at the glacier’s edge in the open water of Disko Bay near Ilulissat, bobbing brightly amid the icebergs north of the Arctic Circle, each one a significant clue to just how warming temperatures may speed the glacier’s slide to the sea.
[...]
Researchers call it flotsam science.

As a scholarly discipline, it is perennially impoverished. Its only professional journal is a newsletter with a circulation of 600 called The Beachcombers Alert, published by retired oceanographer Curtis Ebbesmeyer in Seattle. More than anyone, Dr. Ebbesmeyer turned every beachcomber’s passion for sea-swept debris into a research tool by establishing an international network to gather traceable flotsam, such as Dr. Behar’s yellow ducks.

Indeed, it was a shipment of such bath tub toys washed overboard in the Pacific during a 1992 storm that accidentally launched this unusual field.

Each of the 28,200 plastic ducks, turtles and frogs that spilled from the ill-fated cargo container was stamped with a unique manufacturing code. As they washed ashore — sometimes thousands of miles from the original spillage — scientists soon realized they could trace the toys back to the launch point, documenting previously unsuspected ocean currents.

In the years since, Dr. Ebbesmeyer and his colleagues have tracked flotillas of floating hockey gloves, sodden sneakers, Guinness bottles, Japanese tops and New England lobster pot tags. All were labeled with some unique identifier that, in the serendipity of science, turned them from trash into data points charting vast, circular ocean gyres.

These global conveyor belts swept some of the tub toys from the 1992 spill through the Bering Strait into the Arctic Ocean, where the pack ice carried them over the North Pole into the North Atlantic Ocean, said Dr. Ebbesmeyer. Eleven years later in 2003, one of the plastic ducks turned up in Maine, while one of the plastic frogs washed up in Scotland, more than 7,000 miles from where it started.

Dr. Ebbesmeyer likes to call his research endeavor, documented last year in the American Geophysical Union’s journal, Eos, “accidental oceanography.”

Cringely For U.S. Chief Technology Officer

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Robert X. Cringely recommends himself for CTO of the USA:

The U.S. CTO — at least this FIRST U.S. CTO — will be the buyer-of-cool-stuff-in-chief for the entire nation.

I would make a better buyer-in-chief than almost anyone else because of two important characteristics in my warped personality: 1) I would be immune to special interest groups so this wouldn’t turn into another National Information Infrastructure boondoggle, and; 2) yet as a true enthusiast I would buy with such reckless abandon that I’d easily fulfill the economic stimulus needs while spewing money widely enough to guarantee at least a few good technical investments for the nation.

This latter point probably requires some explanation. As we can see from the current $700 billion bank bailout, the ranks of those actually benefiting are pretty small. We’re $325 billion into the thing and consumers — the people paying for it — have yet to benefit at all as far as I can tell. Most banks haven’t even benefited. And those that have benefited have done little to share their wealth. To put things in the most positive light I can, let’s attribute this to the very surgical nature of this process. To put it more honestly, nothing really changes except the rich get richer.

Look at Al Gore’s National Information Infrastructure program of the 1990s, which was intended to build for us all exactly the sort of data network enjoyed today by people in Japan and Korea. $200 billion in tax credits were distributed, primarily to telephone companies. That’s $200 billion in government revenue foregone, which is just the same, it seems to me, as writing a check. And what did we get for it? Limited Internet service in schools and no Internet service in homes. The DSL we have today we paid for, believe me — phone companies sell that stuff at a profit. However well intentioned Al was, his system was gamed by the phone companies who took the money and ran.

Transparency : Finance :: Independence : Energy

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Transparency is to financial regulation what independence is to energy, Arnold Kling says — “something that sounds obviously good but on closer examination offers no guidance toward sensible economic policy”:

The primary need, in my view, was (and is) triage. Insolvent banks need to be shut down. Banks that might be solvent except for temporarily depressed asset prices need to be supervised very closely. Then healthy banks can go out and operate without fear of being dragged down (or competitively driven down) by the zombies.

Any policy that puts off doing the triage is a bad policy. Ergo, TARP was a bad policy, both in its original design and in its revised implementation.

Kling asks and answers eleven questions about the financial crisis:

  1. To what extent were regulatory anomalies responsible for the shift from old-fashioned lending to securitized lending?

    100 percent responsible. Perverse capital requirements in particular.

  2. What role did low down payments and speculation play in the housing bubble?

    An essential role. In recent years, more than 15 percent of loans went for non-owner-occupied housing.

  3. Were executives responding to perverse incentives or lack of knowledge?

    Lack of knowledge; suits vs. geeks divide; Richard Syron did not think he was setting up Freddie Mac to fail, even though he was warned.

  4. How should credit default swaps be regulated?

    Government policy should be “Buyer beware!” There is no natural seller for CDS. CDS exploit a regulatory anomaly. We need to align regulations with reality — if a diversified portfolio of low-rated bonds has a great risk-return profile, then capital regulations should say so. If not, then the regulations should not advantage low-rated bonds backed by CDS.

  5. What can be done to improve transparency?

    This is a phony issue, sort of like energy independence. Specialized knowledge is the essence of financial intermediation. The problems that are attributed to lack of transparency are problems of regulatory anomalies.

  6. What can be done about systemic risk?

    Every firm is a financial intermediary, and the demise of any firm can be labeled as systemic risk. You don’t create a firewall by saving firms. At best, you create a firewall by having a rapid, orderly process for closing them.

  7. What can we learn from international comparisons?

    This is a really hard problem, but there are differences, e.g. Canada vs. Iceland.

  8. Suppose we had stopped the housing bubble. Would some other bubble have emerged somewhere else?

    I suspect that financial crises are inevitable. They might be smaller if people did not get complacent about the ability of government to prevent them.

  9. Who saw it coming?

    In the aggregate, no one. Dean Baker and others saw the housing bubble, but as far as I know did not see the financial leverage on top of it — AIG. Ed Gramlich saw the risky subprime loans, but his solution was to have Freddie and Fannie do more in that market. Warren Buffett coined the phrase “derivatives are weapons of mass financial destruction,” but then he bought into Goldman Sachs and into the original Paulson plan to have the government try to revive the weapons market.

  10. Should government take from the ants to give to the grasshoppers?

    Try to keep people in houses they should not have bought in the first place with newly-subsidized mortgages and attempt to keep house prices high, while those who acted prudently and did not speculate or take on unaffordable houses get no positive reinforcement? Bail out financial institutions using other people’s money? Tax people who saved for their own retirement to help pay for the defined-benefit pension promises of auto companies, other private firms, state and local governments, Social Security, and Medicare?

  11. Is government failure avoidable?

    Would pro-regulatory ideology and skill prevent crises? As intermediation becomes increasingly specialized, can centralized regulation overcome the discrepancy between dispersed knowledge and concentrated power? If Basel capital requirements were too crude and clumsy for the U.S., how can international co-ordination of regulation more broadly be anything but a disaster?

Peter Schiff Was Right

Sunday, November 16th, 2008

He seems half-crazy, but Peter Schiff was right when he predicted the current crisis — all while other “experts” openly laughed at him:

(Hat tip à mon père.)

Bond With A Broken Heart

Sunday, November 16th, 2008

Madhulika Sikka defends Daniel Craig and the character he plays, a Bond with a broken heart:

Here’s the truth — I’ve been a Bond fan since I was a child. Look, I grew up in England, and James Bond movies were a must-see event in my family. He’s a character who made Britain feel good about itself at a time when the empire was definitely a distant memory. (And it seems he still does. Quantum‘s opening day smashed box-office records in Britain two weeks ago, even beating out previous record holder — another British icon — Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.) The movie Bond I grew up with was all about cool gizmos and gadgets, exotic ports of call, a bit of wit and the occasional double entendre. What’s not to love? Moneypenny and I were in agreement on that.

But I found Ian Fleming’s Bond when I re-read Casino Royale, the book that launched the franchise more than 50 years ago. The Bond in these pages actually has feelings — feelings of doubt, fear, love and loss. So, I am here to tell you to forget about those cartoonish renditions you know from the movies. You need to go back to the source.

Gentlemen, Craig’s Bond works because he went back to the source. I’ll be the first to admit I thought the choice of Craig as Bond was ill-advised — why was this actor with the steely blue eyes who looks more like a Russian gangster taking the role that rightfully belonged to Clive Owen? But I was so wrong.

When he exploded on the screen in Casino Royale, he had done his homework. This Bond is a man that women can love because he loved a woman — Vesper Lynd — a woman who died. If you are looking for motivation, here it is. In the chapter that describes Lynd’s death, Bond is clearly a broken man.

Now maybe it was the heartbreak that turned him into the carefree sex machine, the cavalier Bond that most men would like to be and the Bond that we know so well from the movies, a man who went through as many women as he went through ports of call. But Daniel Craig’s Bond is not that Bond — yet.

Cure Juvenile Delinquency in the Slums

Sunday, November 16th, 2008

When anyone tries to use the phrase “reality-based community” on you, Mencius Moldbug suggests, point him at this:

Colbert Wags His Finger at Jane Austen Baseball

Saturday, November 15th, 2008

Although I enjoyed his Tip of the Hat and Wag of the Finger to Marvel Comics, it gets really good before that, when Colbert Wags His Finger at Jane Austen Baseball — because, you see, the word “baseball” appeared in her Northanger Abbey 40 years before the game was played in America.

(This was only recently discovered. The intersection of Austen scholars and sports historians is empty.)

A transcript:

Austen wasn’t writing about American baseball. It was a Jane Austen version, where the ball is not hurled about rudely, but introduced to the bat through proper channels at a society function.

And one does not steal bases like a commoner. One sends word ahead to the next base by messenger, requesting permission to approach at the base’s leisure.

Of course, what the bat cannot reveal is that though he loves the ball desperately, he has sworn an oath of loyalty to the glove to whom the ball was promised. So the bat must pretend he hates the ball, swatting at it, though he wishes nothing more than to profess his undying affection, but he can’t, he mustn’t, he shan’t! And so, the bat must retreat to the gardens of his estate and pine.

Quoting Will

Saturday, November 15th, 2008

Arnold Kling finds that Quoting Will Wilkinson reassures him that others are as pessimistic and paranoid about the financial collapse as he is:

We’re going to get lectured a lot — probably by many of the same twenty-five year olds who have invested heavily in home decor featuring presidential power porn — on how the failure of this or that is due to a failure of all 300 million of us to come together like a bunch of Amish at a barn-raising. It will of course be the fault of the ideologues who think the Green Economy Five Year Plan is moronic, not a reflection of the diverse range of opinion in a free society, and certainly not that fact the Green Economy Five Year Plan will in fact be moronic.