Prod Allo

No, this is not correct. There is very much a tradeoff, definitionally. “Allocative efficiency” refers to producing goods and services that meet consumer demand, e.g. producing the colors of cars that people want to buy. It is future-oriented, generally. However, Pareto efficiency (rather, optimality) is where a person cannot be made better off without making someone else worse off. The two concepts are related (sometimes) but not the same thing at all. To expand that thought a bit, Pareto efficiency is about finding the correct balance between allocative and productive efficiency, not just concentrating on allocative efficiency alone1.

The person who wrote that is confused and should read their textbooks again, but more closely this time.

  1. It is trivial to run a thought experiment where one could crash the entire economy by concentrating on allocative efficiency exclusively. Not very Pareto optimal then, really.

Shape of the Possible

For some reason I can’t stop thinking about how often people on Reddit (and other places) are fervently insistent that things are “impossible” that have already been occurring for years. I can’t help but feel that has some sort of meaning, is some sort of indicator of both a disconnection from reality and that it’s just difficult to stay apprised of what’s occurring in such a rapidly-changing world.

It’s mystifying that those types are so insistent about it when it’d take all of two minutes of research to show that that they are wrong. For instance, it’s a common Reddit trope to declare that voice cloning is impossible or that it takes an enormous quantity of samples. But I went to Speechify, gave it 30 seconds of a sample reading and it cloned my voice 95% accurately. It’d pass just fine over a crappy cell phone and anyone would be fooled.

I just am having trouble getting past the fact that things that are now trivially easy so many people are strangely rabid about their impossibility.

FDC

This is hilarious (and accurate): Female Delusion Calculator.

ย .

Social media has led all too many women to believe in the fact they have a shot at obtaining that 0.6% of the male population. Good luck with that. When you have 80% of women competing for 0.6% of the available men, the dating market becomes what you see now.

Social media has ruined women’s minds. Not only women’s minds, but they are particularly bad off now. Since I am happy as I am, I just feel sad for them as I stand on the sidelines looking on, amused and confused.

One Two

My hope is that Harris will trump Trump by enough of a margin that the highly-likely coup attempt will fizzle. We have more important shit to do than defend the republic against the divorced dads/incel brigade. We must get ready for probable war with China and likely war with Russia while dealing with climate change.

And that is quite enough, thank you.

Most Climate Policies Donโ€™t Work. Hereโ€™s What Science Says Does Reduce Emissions.

Mobility vs. density in American history.

How the worldโ€™s last wild red wolves are avoiding extinction.

A Very Good Sign: Kamala Harris Is Going Right at Corporate Greed.

The surprise Kursk offensive caught Putin and the Russians off guard, but no one, not even the Ukrainians, seems to know what happens next.

I founded a pioneering tech magazine. Tech killed it off.

Bidenโ€™s Asylum Restrictions Are Working.

Are You Sure Your House Is Worth That Much? Climate risk is still not being priced into American homeownership.

NASA not comfortable with Starliner thrusters, so crew will fly home on Dragon.

DNA Tests Are Uncovering the True Prevalence of Incest.