Interesting article and methodology. I wish you could play with the ranking features to see how the ranking evolves.
I didn't know Kevin Munger. You could definitely seen regarding his field and publications why he would weight 25% of the score to the methodology citations though. Which is partly why his index is very flawed, seeing how qualitative endeavors would be squashed (Qualitative methodologies being very dependant on context). Maybe it does bridge a gap between disciplines that are quantitatively oriented ; STEM and social sciences. The humanities would be nowhere though.
It does beg the question of rankings to begin with ... A dean should know better than to statsmaxx (note the irony).
I thought it was fairly obvious the author was trying to point out the issue with quantitative rankings by setting up the stats to juice his score. It would be fun to play with the stats and figure out how to make yourself come out on top though. Unfortunately I'm not in political science, so it's not much good to me.
No : rights were put in place because poor people struggled to get them ; the governments then placed hurdle to "control" expenses. On garanteeing housing, the only thing that works to get people out of the streets is state controlled housing. But maybe getting things built is more important ?
I don't know you but I doubt you're largely responsible for the climate crisis. What I mean is that the "we" is a unsteerable concept. As such, I don't consider myself responsible. I do as much as my limited power lets me (also i guess I could resort myself to more potent ways of political expression). People that have power are responsible.
I was going to comment on that. This is clearly a vibe-coded webpage. It sort of smells like GPT to me, or at least front-end design. But the author clearly went back and forth to make it beautiful. This is not the first output he got.
This is the kind of stuff I point to when people talk about AI slop. AI is just a tool. You're still the person who has to deliver the output and have some taste.
MANY years ago I hopped into a cab in Manhattan and the driver in one smooth gesture pushed the flag down and shoved a paper at me, saying “test me!”
It was a US citizenship exam, I think 50 questions. We went through them a couple of times. I’m not a US citizen myself but I knew them answers and he didn’t know many. But if that was his goal I hope he made it.
I was equally stunt, but get this : Visa wants to know how much people are going to spend using their services. This is not a sound socio-economic analysis of the wealth transfer. I think overall few people read this type of report.
Instead, it gives insight on a phenomenon that is expected to be an "event". They show that it's going to be gradual, that it already started. Maybe it is a way to inform potential investors in Visa ? Maybe it is a report intended for the business side customers (i.e. commerces) ? I don't know.
Plus, it gives an interesting insight on how the "_real_" economy is still a topic of research where every discourse seem to be on financial performances. I found it interesting after having a repulsed reaction to what I considered a grossly irrelevant account of socio-economic dynamics of the so called "great wealth transfer" (horrible name), like you.
I didn't know Kevin Munger. You could definitely seen regarding his field and publications why he would weight 25% of the score to the methodology citations though. Which is partly why his index is very flawed, seeing how qualitative endeavors would be squashed (Qualitative methodologies being very dependant on context). Maybe it does bridge a gap between disciplines that are quantitatively oriented ; STEM and social sciences. The humanities would be nowhere though.
It does beg the question of rankings to begin with ... A dean should know better than to statsmaxx (note the irony).