Summary of “‘Intensive’ Parenting Is Now the Norm in America”

What’s useful about Ishizuka’s survey data is they suggest that even if parenting style differs by class, parenting attitudes-what parents think they should do-currently don’t.
Jessica McCrory Calarco, a sociologist at Indiana University who studies parenting and has written about it for The Atlantic, explained in an email why she thinks this new study is significant: “If parents from different social class backgrounds are engaging in different parenting practices it’s not because those parents value different parenting practices,” she wrote.
Because intensive parenting requires an abundance of time and money, the reason is likely that some families have more resources than others.
The timing of how it spread is somewhat uncertain: Ishizuka said there unfortunately aren’t historical survey data showing “How pervasive cultural norms of intensive parenting were among parents of different social classes and when they may have diffused.”
A plausible history of the past couple decades of American parenting is that a critical mass of families with sufficient means started engaging in intensive parenting, and then everyone else followed.
Intensive parenting is a style of child-rearing fit for an age of inequality, indicative of a stratified past, present, and future.
The past: As some social scientists have theorized, the tilt toward intensive parenting originated at least in part from parents’ anxieties about their children competing for education and jobs.
The present: As Ishizuka described, intensive parenting is an ideal that’s currently out of reach for many families.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Being Different Beats Being Better”

Who cares about a marginally better product or service? That’s the problem with most businesses and even people.
These artists didn’t try to become better versions of Jay-Z, Madonna, Beyonce, or whoever came before them.
You see, it’s not about being better, it’s about being different.
“When you launch a new product, the first question to ask yourself is not”How is this new product better than the competition?” but “First what?” In other words, what category is this new product first in?”.
Don’t ask yourself, “What am I better at?” Ask, “How am I different?”.
The easiest way to be different is to combine skills that are new in a certain area.
“Notice I didn’t say anything about the level of proficiency you need to achieve for each skill. I didn’t mention anything about excellence or being world-class. The idea is that you can raise your market value by being merely good-not extraordinary-at more than one skill.”
Public Speaking – Getting comfortable with speaking in front of a group makes you a better leader.

The orginal article.

Summary of “How the brains of master meditators change”

Richie Davidson has spent a lifetime studying meditation.
He’s studied it as a practitioner, sitting daily, going on retreats, and learning under masters.
He’s pioneered the study of it as a scientist, working with the Dalai Lama to bring master meditators into his lab at the University of Wisconsin and quantifying the way thousands of hours of meditation changed their brains.
The word “Meditation,” Davidson is quick to note, is akin to the word “Sports”: It describes a huge range of pursuits.
What he’s found is that different types of meditation do very different things to your brain, just as different sports trigger different changes in your body.
This is a conversation about what those brain changes are, and what they mean for the rest of us.
We discuss the forms of meditation Westerners rarely hear about, the differences between meditative and psychedelic states, the Dalai Lama’s personality, why elite meditators end up warmhearted and joyous rather than cold and detached, whether there’s more value to meditating daily or going on occasional retreats, what happens when you sever meditation from the ethical frameworks it evolved in, and much more.

The orginal article.

Summary of “It’s the End of the Gene As We Know It”

Now, slowly but surely, that whole conceptual model of the gene is being challenged.
These genes, we were told, come in different “Strengths,” different permutations forming ranks that determine the worth of different “Races” and of different classes in a class-structured society.
Today it’s the gene that, in the words of the Anglican hymn, “Makes us high and lowly and orders our estate.”
Another wrench in the works has been the discovery that a gene product typically undergoes rearrangements before being put to use.
All of this provides a fraught background for modern gene association studies.
The startling implication is that the gene as popularly conceived does not really exist.
The startling implication is that the gene as popularly conceived-a blueprint on a strand of DNA, determining development and its variations-does not really exist.
These radical revisions of the gene concept need to reach the general public soon-before past social policy mistakes are repeated.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Where Uniqueness Lies”

If you dropped a dozen human toddlers on a beautiful Polynesian island with shelter and enough to eat, but no computers, no cell phones, and no metal tools, would they grow up to be like humans we recognize or like other primates? Would they invent language? Without the magic sauce of culture and technology, would humans be that different from chimpanzees?
Neuroscientists, geneticists, and anthropologists have all given the question of human uniqueness a go, seeking special brain regions, unique genes, and human-specific behaviors, and, instead, finding more evidence for common threads across species.
“Humans are the only animals to use tools.” “Humans are the only animals to have culture.” “Humans are the only animals to teach their young.” But over time most of those guesses have turned out to be wrong.
Why has pinpointing the origins of human uniqueness proven so difficult?
The organization of the human brain turns out to be far more complex than many anticipated; almost anything you might have read about brain organization a couple decades ago turns out to be radically oversimplified.
Even under a microscope human brain tissue looks an awful lot like primate brain tissue.
We ask questions like, “Might there be a greater degree of asymmetry between the left hemisphere and right hemisphere in human beings than chimpanzees in a part of the brain known as the planum temporale?” That’s sort of like saying that New York is different from Paris because we have more water towers on the roof.
If it seems like scientists trying to find the basis of human uniqueness in the brain are looking for a neural needle in a haystack, it’s because they are.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The emerging Boeing 737 MAX scandal, explained”

Boeing executives are offering a simple explanation for why the company’s best-selling plane in the world, the 737 MAX 8, crashed twice in the past several months, leaving Jakarta, Indonesia, in October and then Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in March.
The 320 family competes with a group of planes that Boeing calls the 737 – there’s a 737-600, a 737-700, a 737-800, and a 737-900 – with higher numbers indicating larger planes.
New engines on an old plane As the industry trade publication Leeham News and Analysis explained earlier in March, Boeing engineers had been working on the concept that became their 737 MAX even back when the company’s plan was still not to build it.
Trevor Sumner March 16, 2019 Recall, after all, that the whole point of the 737 MAX project was to be able to say that the new plane was the same as the old plane.
The new planes are pretty different As far as we can tell, the 737 MAX is a perfectly airworthy plane in the sense that error-free piloting allows it to be operated safely.
As the New York Times reported, “For many new airplane models, pilots train for hours on giant, multimillion-dollar machines, on-the-ground versions of cockpits that mimic the flying experience and teach them new features” while the experienced 737 MAX pilots were allowed light refresher courses that you could do on an iPad. That let Boeing get the planes into customers’ hands quickly and cheaply, but evidently at the cost of increasing the possibility of pilots not really knowing how to handle the planes, with dire consequences for everyone involved.
Boeing is now in a bad situation One emblem of the whole situation is that as the 737 MAX engineering team piled kludge on top of kludge, one thing they came up with was a cockpit warning light that would alert the pilots if the plane’s two angle-of-attack sensors disagreed.
A political scandal on slow-burn The 737 MAX was briefly a topic of political controversy in the United States as foreign regulators grounded the planes, but President Donald Trump – after speaking personally to Boeing’s CEO – declined to follow.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The Revolutionary Discovery of a Distributed Virus”

In 2012, two researchers calculated that the odds of successfully getting every segment in the same cell become too low with anything more than three or four segments.
FBNSV, with its eight segments, “Should never have evolved,” Blanc says.
Perhaps, he realized, these viruses don’t actually need to unite their segments in the same host cell.
His colleagues Anne Sicard and Elodie Pirolles labeled pairs of FBNSV’s genes with molecules that glowed in different colors-red for one segment, for example, and green for another.
Each of the eight segments carries a gene with its own vital role.
See the problem? If these segments end up in different cells, the DNA-copying one shouldn’t be able to make capsules, the capsule-making gene shouldn’t be able to copy itself, and both of them would be stuck.
The DNA-making protein can get into a cell with the capsule-making gene, and copy it.
Think of the eight segments as factories in different cities, shipping assembly robots to one another so that each site can manufacture its own separate product.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Is the Insect Apocalypse Really Upon Us?”

They say that 41 percent of insect species are declining and that global numbers are falling by 2.5 percent a year, but “They’re trying to quantify things that we really can’t quantify at this point,” says Michelle Trautwein from the California Academy of Sciences.
“I don’t see real danger in overstating the possible severity of insect decline, but there is real danger in underestimating how bad things really are. These studies aren’t perfect, but we’d be wise to heed this warning now instead of waiting for cleaner studies.”
The factors that are probably killing off insects in Europe and North America, such as the transformation of wild spaces into agricultural land, are global problems.
Insects, though diverse, are also particularly vulnerable to such changes because many of them are so specialized, says May Berenbaum from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
“So what happens if the island goes, or the crab goes? That’s the kind of danger that insects face. Very few of them can opportunistically exploit a broad diversity of habitats and supplies.”
The loss of even a small percent of insects might also be disproportionately consequential.
Doing something is hard because insect declines have so many factors, and most studies struggle to tease them apart.
In their review, Sánchez-Bayo and Wyckhuys point the finger at habitat loss above all else, followed by pesticides and other pollutants, introduced species, and climate change, in that order.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The Rise and Fall of Gene-as-God”

Now, slowly but surely, that whole conceptual model of the gene is being challenged.
These genes, we were told, come in different “Strengths,” different permutations forming ranks that determine the worth of different “Races” and of different classes in a class-structured society.
Today it’s the gene that, in the words of the Anglican hymn, “Makes us high and lowly and orders our estate.”
Another wrench in the works has been the discovery that a gene product typically undergoes rearrangements before being put to use.
All of this provides a fraught background for modern gene association studies.
The startling implication is that the gene as popularly conceived does not really exist.
The startling implication is that the gene as popularly conceived-a blueprint on a strand of DNA, determining development and its variations-does not really exist.
These radical revisions of the gene concept need to reach the general public soon-before past social policy mistakes are repeated.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Should a self-driving car kill the baby or the grandma? Depends on where you’re from”

The classic trolley problem goes like this: You see a runaway trolley speeding down the tracks, about to hit and kill five people.
You have access to a lever that could switch the trolley to a different track, where a different person would meet an untimely demise.
The Moral Machine took that idea to test nine different comparisons shown to polarize people: should a self-driving car prioritize humans over pets, passengers over pedestrians, more lives over fewer, women over men, young over old, fit over sickly, higher social status over lower, law-abiders over law-benders? And finally, should the car swerve or stay on course?
Rather than pose one-to-one comparisons the experiment presented participants with various combinations, such as whether a self-driving car should continue straight ahead to kill three elderly pedestrians or swerve into a barricade to kill three youthful passengers.
Carmakers may find, for example, that Chinese consumers would more readily enter a car that protected themselves over pedestrians.
“The discussion should move to risk analysis-about who is at more risk or less risk-instead of saying who’s going to die or not, and also about how bias is happening.” How these results could translate into the more ethical design and regulation of AI is something he hopes to study more in the future.
“In the last two, three years more people have started talking about the ethics of AI,” Awad said.
“More people have started becoming aware that AI could have different ethical consequences on different groups of people. The fact that we see people engaged with this-I think that that’s something promising.”

The orginal article.