My afternoon train reading:

• Special report: exchange-traded funds (Fidelity)
• Apple, Icahn and the Cash Pile: Manjoo vs. Berman (WSJ) see also Why Apple Wants to Bust Your iPhone (NYT Mag)
• Nobel Prize Winner Fama to CNBC’s Santelli: ‘There’s So Much Confusion In What You Said It’s Difficult To Answer’ (Business Insider)
• The Scientist Who Helped Save New York’s Subway from Sandy (Live Science) see also Hurricane Sandy Hasn’t Shifted Climate Narrative (Climate Central)
• Islamic Finance Can Save the World (Bloomberg)
• Leaked documents reveal the secret finances of a pro-industry science group (Mother Jones) see also This week’s other huge (but little-noticed) fight: Wall Street’s newest scheme (Salon)
• China’s Growth: Why Less is More (IMF)
A Judge Admits error: Mea culpa (Economist)
• Sitting on the Sidelines: Fear & Selective Memory (Investing Caffeine)
• 6 Things You Should Quit Doing To Be More Successful (Forbes)

What’s up with that?


Source: Climate Central


Category: Financial Press

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

7 Responses to “10 Tuesday PM Reads”

  1. beaufou says:

    The Forbes article reminds me of people who constantly say: Don’t discuss politics and religion with family and friends.

    Awful, Oprah advice.

  2. chartist says:

    I was really afraid Forbes was going to say quit drinking to be more successful…

  3. mpetrosian says:

    Six things you should stop doing is an awesome article. There so much of this content on TBP, You guys should have a brain or mental health section of the site.

  4. bear_in_mind says:

    Here’s a sobering read from Zeit Online examining how a six-month snippet of raw metadata can be used to track pretty much your *every* movement:

    Tell-all telephone

  5. rd says:

    And now for something completely different – an interesting paper on environmental risk management during the Middle Ages in Europe was recently published:

  6. Syd says:

    With climate-change legislation stymied at the federal level, a coalition of West Coast states and one Canadian province on Monday signed a regional pact to rein in greenhouse gas emissions and fight global warming.

  7. bear_in_mind says:

    I call B.S. on BOTH Apple articles!

    To wit, Catherine Rampell provides a limited number of anecdotes to serve as a form of professional reporting:

    “But the same thing seemed to be happening to a lot of people who, like me, swear by their Apple products. When I called tech analysts, they said that the new operating system (iOS 7) being pushed out to existing users was making older models unbearably slow.”

    Hmmm, that’s deep, Catherine. Please tell your audience how MANY PEOPLE constitutes “a lot” in your reporting experience? How many of these people did you speak with directly for feedback? And how MANY tech analysts did you consult and what metric did you employ to qualify them as an analyst? Finally, how MANY users did tech analysts document and refer you to contact who report they owned older model iPhones and experienced iOS7 made their phones UNBEARABLY SLOW?

    Felix Salmon uses a quote from Dennis Berman a much more pedestrian fashion, but doesn’t challenge the underlying assumption contained in this passage:

    “Berman concedes that Apple is an extremely rare outlier in the corporate world: it makes a lot of money without having to invest a huge amount up front.”

    Berman would be accurate if his observation wasn’t flat-Earth wrong. Apple has consistently been one of the biggest investors worldwide in product R&D across the consumer technology sector (excluding DOD and aerospace, of course). The only corporations with greater R&D budgets would be Intel, then possibly H-P (before being dismantled by C. Fiorina) and IBM (before they divested PC operations to Lenovo).

    So Berman, apparently just became aware of Apple in 2009 or 2010, and all the lean woeful years of strife and struggle apparently… never happened? Several decades of R&D investment all swept under a rug because Apple launched three ground-breaking, market-rupturing products in a decade?

    C’mon Felix and Mr. Berman, show a little less off-the-cuff, know-it-all-I-tis and demonstrate a little more rigor and perspective.