What’s Controlling You?

This entry was posted in Psychology Technology on by

This is cool:

A DEVICE that can pick up on people’s emotions is being developed to help people with autism relate to those around them. It will alert its autistic user if the person they are talking to starts showing signs of getting bored or annoyed.

At least on first look it is cool.
Mark Kleiman exclaims:

But I’m less excited by the potential benefits than I am dazzled by the idea that a piece of software that runs on a computer small enough to fit in your pocket can be taught to recognize the symptoms of boredom or annoyance, as well as other emotions not expressed by a simple facial expression. The implications for social-psych and anthropology research, to say nothing of marketing studies, should be profound.

Heck, the implications for everyday interactions of many kinds could be profound or even stultifying.
Profound in the sense that anyone who is not a master of body language would find it useful to have this kind of helpful feedback.
Stultifying when everyone is interacting with others based on feedback from this or a similar device rather than directly from the people they are communicating with.

Just imagine the feedback algorithms your favorite government drone might like to have programmed into something like this. They could create a real nation of sheep.

Bible Studies

This entry was posted in Religion on by

BlondSense Liz thinks teaching the Bible in school is a capital idea:

There is so much wisdom in the bible. There’s lots of good stuff for children’s edification. I think the dirty parts ought to be censored though.
Kids need to know just how much God loves them and looks out for them. They need to know that if they follow the Lord,…

She shares some exemplary child oriented selections and requests you let her know your favorite children’s bible stories.

Who’s Paying?

This entry was posted in Health Care Taxation on by

Jane Galt has written a series of posts on health care that are worth while reading for all. The latest in the series is here and both Tyler Cowan and Arnold Kling quote this sentence:

Have the government pay for all health care expenditures above 15% of adjusted gross income, and cover 100% of health care expenditures by people living under 200% of the poverty line.

Both have suggestions to tweak Jane’s proposal and you should also read their posts.
Jane’s proposal with some tweaks has a lot to recommend it but the framing, yes, the framing needs to change. It needs to change for this and all other discussions that include a phrase similar to “..the government pay…” Everyone needs to be clear that the government really does not pay for anything. It takes money from you and I, the payers, and gives the money to someone else, the payees.

So, one thing missing from the above statement is the mechanism for and the rate at which the government is going to take money from you and me and distribute it to others. Once this is defined then let the payers decide whether they will fund this.