gelbach

@gelbach.bsky.social

7669 Followers 1887 Following

Expert provider of lay opinions, and also of Duo push approvals. Day job: Herman F. Selvin Professor of Law at UC Berkeley Law. Opinions my own, not intended to represent UC's. Formerly economics professor at Maryland and Arizona

Back in 1999, Orin makes fun of Jonah (and "Economists!") for offering value in return for the chance to select the lone bay-view office. Quite the contrast to the present moment, when Orin promotes auctioning off office assignments....Must be something in the SLS water....
The goal of the paper is not to provide an exact answer to this question, as the an- swer will surely depend on parameters that we cannot precisely quantify. Instead, the paper develops some simple models to elucidate the economic forces that are involved in thinking through these questions. Several insights emerge: 1. The curvature of utility is very important. With log utility, the models are re markably unconcerned with existential risk, suggesting that large consumption gains that A.I. might deliver can be worth gambles that involve a 1-in-3 chance of extinction. 2. For CRRA utility with a risk aversion coefficient (γ) of 2 or more, the picture changes sharply. These utility functions are bounded, and the marginal utility of con- sumption falls rapidly. Models with this feature are quite conservative in trading off consumption gains versus existential risk. 3. These findings even extend to singularity scenarios. If utility is bounded — as it is in the standard utility functions we use frequently in a variety of applications in economics — then even infinite consumption generates relatively small gains. The models with γ ≥ 2 remain conservative with regard to existential risk. 4. A key exception to this conservative view of existential risk emerges if the rapid in- novation associated with A.I. leads to new technologies that extend life expectancy and reduce mortality. These gains are “in the same units” as existential risk and do not run into the sharply declining marginal utility of consumption. Even with a future-oriented focus that comes from low discounting, A.I.-induced mortality reductions can make large existential risks bearable.
Nyt: Schlossberg’s Defeat Dampens Dream of a Renewed Camelot
Analysis Lebanon Emerges as Weak Link in U.S.-Iran Deal to War The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, once seen as a secondary front to the war on Iran, has become one of the main obstacles to ending it
Blue Lagoon overcrowding being limited to 4,000 at one go once more
Picture of the Alps as we fly into Milan from the northwest
Town Meeting meme
NEWS MAN MADE PEOPLE REMEMBER NEWS WAS NOT ALWAYS CONTENT DISPENSER BETWEEN DRUG COMMERCIALS AND ADS FOR GOLD PRESIDENT PHONE. SO NEWS MAN MUST GO.
Are there other examples of a country’s authorities so frequently threatening to shoot it in the groin?
Times headline credulously reporting that us officials say they are nearing a Hormuz deal
From Claude— Here are a few tightened versions, leaning into the conviction and that pastoral cadence: "I get being upset about a messed-up order. But friend, if that stirs you more than watching the pump drain a family dry—we've forgotten what's worth our anger." "Be honest about what's breaking you. It isn't the wrong order. It's the price of filling your tank, the choice between gas and groceries. That's the burden. That's where our outrage belongs." "They want you mad about the small stuff so you forget the big stuff. But the real sin is a family working full-time and still coming up short. Keep your eyes there."
Scientists Gave Cocaine to Salmon and You Will Absolutely Believe What Happened Next After scientists exposed wild fish to cocaine and a cocaine metabolite, they observed that, as in the lab, fish on cocaine do not act like normal fish.
Screenshot of Figure 1, captioned, "An Urn", and citing source "Source: Maya Funerary Urn, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maya_funerary_urn.jpg (last visited June 2, 2014)."
NYT headline: Florida Democrat Resigns From Congress 20 Minutes Before Expulsion Vote Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, a Florida Democrat, had been charged with stealing $5 million in federal funds
Trump lawnmower boy meme where he yells "NOW SEEDS, START GROWING"
“Trump knows exactly what he is doing,” wrote Liz Peek, a columnist for the Hill and Fox News contributor. “Trump will continue to use maximalist (and sometimes outrageous) military and diplomatic pressure in his campaign to rid the Middle East of Iran’s near 50-year campaign of terror.”
I ain’t reading all that I’m happy for you though Or sorry that happened
The whole concept of “my truth” is that everyone’s truth is relative, as in, it’s personal to them. Therefore, “my truth” is in direct opposition to objective or absolute truth. To have a clear definition would put an objective truth label on the “my truth” movement. This is contrary to what it stands for! If there were a precise definition, it would defeat the whole purpose of “my truth.” The beauty of the “my truth” movement is that it can be whatever you or I want it to be.
Email newsletter screenshot with title “NEWS ANALYSIS With the threat to wipe out Iran’s civilization, Trump’s rhetoric went beyond bluster”
Peet Hegseth tweet that says "Back to the Stone Age"
Dogs on a chair
Counsel for the petitioner candidly said on argument that he wanted this information to help prepare himself to examine witnesses, to make sure he overlooked nothing. He bases his claim to it in his brief on the view that the Rules were to do away with the old situation where a law suit developed into ‘a battle of wits between counsel.’ But a common law trial is and always should be an adversary proceeding. Discovery was hardly intended to enable a learned profession to perform its functions either without wits or on wits borrowed from the adversary.
In the Senate, a whopping 73 of the 100 sitting senators have a median net worth of more than $1 million. That’s hardly representative of the U.S. population.
Community note indicating that the proposal originated as satire, in https://www.chinatalk.media/p/its-time
Hound in dog bed
Tillis calls on Miller to depart WH
A Two-Step Positive Theory of New/Extensive Literatures in Constitutional Law Jonah B. Gelbach February 2, 2026 All too often, scholars fail to explain how the literature of American Constitutional Law filters from creation/long-existence (as the case may be) into arguments offered in front of the Supreme Court. Accordingly, this Article offers a suddenly relevant/long-overdue expiation, in the process presenting a two-step positive theory of such. The Article is most relevant to areas that satisfy four conditions. First, that the legal content of written law seems textually clear as a facial matter. Second, that case law has affirmed that facially clear content. Third, that long practice is such that if there had been any textual or doctrinal ambiguity, it would have been effectively liquidated by practice consonant with the textual and doctrinal reality. Fourth, and finally, is the condition that all of the first three conditions are to be overturned in favor of the opposite result. Although these four conditions might seem to be a demanding bunch to fit together, as I shall show, the theory’s ease of application commends it. Part I of the Article introduces Step 1. Part II introduces Step 2. The conclusion follows. I. STEP 1 Step 1 requires only to answer a simple question: “What is the Trump Administration’s wish as to the legal content of the U.S. Constitution?” Evidence necessary to answer the Step 1 inquiry is often available in court filings, but even more frequently can be discerned via social media posts made by the President or other influencers on the right. Once evidence sufficient to complete Step 1 has been marshaled, we turn to Step 2. II. STEP 2 Like Step 1, Step 2 requires only to answer a simpler question. The question is: “Is the Constitution’s legal content what the Trump Administration wishes?” Here is where Step 1 and Step 2 differ. Whereas Step 1 involves a mixed question of law and fact, whose answering requires the scholar to investi…
For law and economics is not a single doctrine but a sprawling,contradictory, and often self-conflicted field. It is a mix of theoreticalmodeling, behavioral insights, empirical analyses, and normativedebates about human well-being.8 Often, its policy conclusions areambiguous, contingent, and deeply contested. It’s no grand ne-oliberal blueprint; it’s an ongoing, fractious reckoning of incen-tives, trade-offs, and the messy realities of institutional design. And if you dive into the literature, you will find a field deeplyengaged in the analysis of power and inequality at a level of so-phistication beyond the LPE critique’s wildest comprehension,from exposing how financial markets routinely fail,9 to how giantasset managers distort competition,10 to how state-sponsored racialexclusion inflicted generational losses in wealth and education.11This is mainstream law and economics. Mistaking it for neoliberalsorcery is not just an error, it is an evasion. It’s a way to sidestepthe hard work of engagement by pretending the entire field isnothing more than an ideological trick. This is what makes theLPE critique so frustrating. It demands to be taken seriouslywhile refusing to do the same in return.
Supply room door with sign that says "This door must be locked at ALL times" with annotations pointing out that the door is ajar (but not, of course, a jar)
Bathroom sign that says:Do not put anything except for toilet tissue into the toilet toilets. Everything else must be put into the trash cans. Thank you!
Jay Rosen post quoting Brian Stelter claiming CBS not MAGA-captured
Toast
Headline that says President Trump is mulling a North American trade pact without Canada
Position description The UC Berkeley School of Law is searching for a researcher to work with faculty doing empirical legal research. Researchers will work for 1-2 years with multiple UC Berkeley Law faculty members. Work involves potentially the full scope of activities involved in quantitative empirical scholarship: creating and cleaning datasets, writing and executing code to generate results, creating tables and figures of results, writing and presenting research papers, and generally working to assist descriptive analysis as well as the study of the effects of law and policy. Applicants will receive mentoring from faculty within a tight-knit research community at UC Berkeley Law and will have access to a broad range of activities at UC Berkeley. This is a good opportunity for candidates interested in spending 1-2 years developing research skills in anticipation of attending law school and/or PhD programs in the social sciences. As such, in addition to providing research mentorship, faculty will help researchers to engage in additional education and training, such as auditing courses, attending research seminars, etc.
Jackson bullseye guitar
My dog Elvis
NBC news: Trump removes racist video depicting the Obamas as apes The White House initially defended Trump's post, saying it was "from an internet meme video." But after backlash — including from Republicans — it was removed.
BTC bouncing back! (A little anyway)
Chart of bitcoin over last year, including cliffdive over last week
Two-Step Positive Theory of New/Extensive Literatures in Con Law All too often, scholars fail to explain how the literature of American Constitutional Law filters from creation/long-existence (as the case may be) into arguments offered in front of the Supreme Court. Accordingly, this Article offers a suddenly relevant/long-overdue expiation, in the process presenting a two-step positive theory of such. The Article is most relevant to areas that satisfy four conditions. First, that the legal content of written law seems textually clear as a facial matter. Second, that case law has affirmed that facially clear content. Third, that long practice is such that if there had been any textual or doctrinal ambiguity, it would have been effectively liquidated by practice consonant with the textual and doctrinal reality. Fourth, and finally, is the condition that all of the first three conditions are to be overturned in favor of the opposite result. Although these four conditions might seem to be a demanding bunch to fit together, as I shall show, the theory’s ease of application commends it. Step 1 requires only to answer a simple question: “What is the Trump Administration’s wish as to the legal content of the U.S. Constitution?” Evidence necessary to answer the Step 1 inquiry is often available in court filings, but even more frequently can be discerned via social media posts made by the President or other influencers on the right. Once evidence sufficient to complete Step 1 has been marshaled, we turn to Step 2. Like Step 1, Step 2 requires only to answer a simpler question. The question is: “Is the Constitution’s legal content what the Trump Administration wishes?” Here is where Step 1 and Step 2 differ. Whereas Step 1 involves a mixed question of law and fact, whose answering requires the scholar to investigate the facts about claims about the law, answering Step 2 involves only typing. One types the letters “Y”, “e”, and “s”, in that order, followed by a period.
Picture of Buster Bluth, the leading Millerganger
guitar with peace sign