Comments on: Malthusianisms

By: Yaroslav Bulatov

Yaroslav Bulatov — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 01:24:31 +0000

Why does the cell provider with the best network data speed in US have the worst smart-phones? Because if they had better phones, more people would switch and fill network capacity

By: 60naranja

60naranja — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:29:38 +0000

“Why can’t everyone just agree to a family-friendly, 40-hour workweek? Because then anyone who chose to work a 90-hour week would clean our clocks.”

Doesn’t this fail to take into account 1) diminishing returns (how much more productive is 90 hours a week versus 40?) and 2) social selection, where “cheaters” face ostracism from the larger society and therefore do not have access to the same resources (e.g., steroids in competitions, or, well, legislation in general)?

By: Arkady

Arkady — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:05:48 +0000

Why do all metaphors (“A is B”) eventually break down? Because if they didn’t, A really would be the same as B and it would not be a metaphor.

By: matt

matt — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:58:14 +0000

The problem is not drivers that slow near near an accident (they do that to avoid hitting the car in front, as said). It’s drivers that don’t speed back up as quickly as possible. Instead, once the path in front is open (because the driver in front is back at 70+mph instead of 30 mph), people like to wait for a little while, to see what was going on.

By: MostlyAPragmatist

MostlyAPragmatist — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:38:42 +0000

I have a pet peeve about drivers who complain about rubbernecking:

Why does everyone slow down near an accident? Because if they didn’t they’d plow into the car that slowed down ahead of them (in other words, they slow down for the same reason you do.)

By: Dana

Dana — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:18:20 +0000

Why aren’t there more mathematical “geniuses”?

Because those that are, are usually too busy solving problems that intrigue them, and feel special about themselves, to ensure others become as good.

Because those that aren’t, know they aren’t, and if they see a “genius”, they admire him/her, instead of aspiring to be as good.

By: Pat Cahalan

Pat Cahalan — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:27:50 +0000

@ informatimago

> In conclusion: all these malthusianisms are
> circumvented by human ingenuity

No, they aren’t. Some of them may be, however.

Someone needs to extend the idea of incompleteness into the technology sphere. Desalination plants add resources, they don’t reduce demand. Without both, you’re still going to hit your Nash equilibrium at “they keep watering their laws until they are”.

@ tim

Your editorial comment #12 is unnecessary and incorrect. All software does indeed suck. The best you can hope for is software compiled with the –suck-less flag.

By: I. J. Kennedy

I. J. Kennedy — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 22:13:41 +0000

Why did the dog wag his tail? Because nobody would wag it for him.

By: orthonormal

orthonormal — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:24:03 +0000

Why does any good discussion on the Internet soon get swamped with low-quality comments?

Because any conversation that no crackpots are interested in, must be pretty stale indeed.

By: Ninguem

Ninguem — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:29:53 +0000

@Carl Lumma:

Washer/Dryer, Dishwasher, Vacuum cleaner, Microwave all became common in the 50s/60s and reduced the amount of housework needed to keep a house running, so by the 70s most people (read women) had less housework to do and could afford to be employed outside of the home. Of course, there are other reasons (e.g. birth control leading to smaller families, changes in social mores, etc.)