Roasting the Pig to Burn Down the House: A Modest Proposal

This essay addresses the question whether one should support regulatory proposals that one believes are, standing alone, bad public policy in the hope that they will do such harm that they will ultimately produce (likely unintended) good results. For instance, one may regard a set of proposed regulations as foolish and likely to hobble the industry regulated, but perhaps desirable if one believes that we would be better off without that industry. I argue that television broadcasting is such an industry, and thus that we should support new regulations that will make broadcasting unprofitable, to hasten its demise. But it cannot be just any costly regulation: if a regulation would tend to entrench broadcasting\u27s place on the airwaves, then the regulation will not help to free up the spectrum and should be avoided. Ideal regulations for this purpose are probably those that are pure deadweight loss - regulations that cost broadcasters significant amounts of money but have no impact on their behavior. Am I serious in writing all this? Not entirely, but mostly. I do think that society would benefit if the wireless frequencies currently devoted to broadcast could be used for other services, and the first-best ways of achieving that goal may not be realistic. I am proposing a second-best - a fairly cynical second-best, but a second-best all the same. I would prefer not to go down this path, but if that is the only way to hasten the shriveling of television broadcasting\u27s spectrum usage, then it is probably a path worth taking

Restricting the Weak-Generative Capacity of Synchronous Tree-Adjoining Grammars

The formalism of synchronous tree-adjoining grammars, a variant of standard tree-adjoining grammars (TAG), was intended to allow the use of TAGs for language transduction in addition to language specification. In previous work, the definition of the transduction relation defined by a synchronous TAG was given by appeal to an iterative rewriting process. The rewriting definition of derivation is problematic in that it greatly extends the expressivity of the formalism and makes the design of parsing algorithms difficult if not impossible. We introduce a simple, natural definition of synchronous tree-adjoining derivation, based on isomorphisms between standard tree-adjoining derivations, that avoids the expressivity and implementability problems of the original rewriting definition. The decrease in expressivity, which would otherwise make the method unusable, is offset by the incorporation of an alternative definition of standard tree-adjoining derivation, previously proposed for completely separate reasons, thereby making it practical to entertain using the natural definition of synchronous derivation. Nonetheless, some remaining problematic cases call for yet more flexibility in the definition; the isomorphism requirement may have to be relaxed. It remains for future research to tune the exact requirements on the allowable mappings.Comment: 21 pages, uses lingmacros.sty, psfig.sty, fullname.sty; minor typographical changes onl

Lessons from a Restricted Turing Test

We report on the recent Loebner prize competition inspired by Turing's test of intelligent behavior. The presentation covers the structure of the competition and the outcome of its first instantiation in an actual event, and an analysis of the purpose, design, and appropriateness of such a competition. We argue that the competition has no clear purpose, that its design prevents any useful outcome, and that such a competition is inappropriate given the current level of technology. We then speculate as to suitable alternatives to the Loebner prize.Comment: 20 page

The End of Institutional Repositories and the Beginning of Social Academic Research Service: An Enhanced Role for Libraries

As more and more universities establish Institutional Repositories (IR), awareness is developing about the limitations of IRs in enhancing the academic research service. The concept of an IR needs to be expanded to include the integration of the processes that transform intellectual endeavor into a broadening array of academic and research support services which are fundamentally social. These include, but are not limited to – (1) sharing institutionally developed intellectual product (traditional IR) (2) informing others of the availability of this product with defined purpose (3) collecting additional academically relevant materials in digital formats using IRs (4) disseminating timely information about what has been collected to researchers (5) creating an environment that encourages awareness and exchange of information (6) and more…. In brief, information gathering, dissemination, and discussion in the form of library service must become a crucial part of researchers’ networks. An IR cannot and should not be viewed as a stand alone endeavor. It needs to be viewed and used as a research and communication tool in an environment that synergizes all elements of the research process. If an IR does not create discussions between librarians (information specialists) and researchers, its potential is lost both to the academy and the library. The library and its librarians must be interactive with researchers and the institution served. With the advent of digital acquisition that IRs started, a new vision of the role of librarians can be fulfilled. The foundational concepts behind this vision are found in my article: The Library as an Agent of Change: Pushing the Client Institution Forward Information Outlook (Journal of the Special Libraries Association), Vol. 3, No. 8, August 1999, pages 37-40. The above is not theoretical. It is being practiced every day at the Martin P. Catherwood Library of the School of Industrial and Labor Relations (ILR) at Cornell University where I work. By combining the uses of an IR, known as the DigitalCommons@ILR – see http://www.digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu, with a discipline-based Internet news service, see -- http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/iws/news-bureau/index.html, supported with outstanding web content, technical support for both print and digital collecting, reference, referral, and teaching, a goal has been realized. The library is seamlessly integrated into the outreach, research and teaching of the institution it serves. The library is part of the social fabric and network of the school

Algorithms and Speech

One of the central questions in free speech jurisprudence is what activities the First Amendment encompasses. This Article considers that question in the context of an area of increasing importance – algorithm-based decisions. I begin by looking to broadly accepted legal sources, which for the First Amendment means primarily Supreme Court jurisprudence. That jurisprudence provides for very broad First Amendment coverage, and the Court has reinforced that breadth in recent cases. Under the Court’s jurisprudence the First Amendment (and the heightened scrutiny it entails) would apply to many algorithm-based decisions, specifically those entailing substantive communications. We could of course adopt a limiting conception of the First Amendment, but any nonarbitrary exclusion of algorithm-based decisions would require major changes in the Court’s jurisprudence. I believe that First Amendment coverage of algorithm-based decisions is too small a step to justify such changes. But insofar as we are concerned about the expansiveness of First Amendment coverage, we may want to limit it in two areas of genuine uncertainty: editorial decisions that are neither obvious nor communicated to the reader, and laws that single out speakers but do not regulate their speech. Even with those limitations, however, an enormous and growing amount of activity will be subject to heightened scrutiny absent a fundamental reorientation of First Amendment jurisprudence

Bootstrapping

Virtually every action depends on some conditions precedent. Law is no exception. The common law and precedent involve reliance on earlier developments, as do more particularized phenomena like slippery slopes and path dependence. In some situations, an actor undertakes permissible action Y and thereby renders its action Z legally permissible, a phenomenon I refer to as bootstrapping. Some commentators have raised concerns about the consequences of allowing bootstrapping, notably in the context of the individual mandate in the 2010 health care act. In this article I consider whether we, as citizens, should find bootstrapping, or a particular category of bootstrapping, particularly troubling. Bootstrapping is ubiquitous, so disallowing all bootstrapping by government actors would render the government unable to act. And I find that most possible distinctions are not useful. The one possible exception is a distinction between simultaneous and nonsimultaneous bootstrapping, as the former presents a situation in which the bootstrap is certain. Disfavoring simultaneous bootstrapping will do both too little (to the President) and too much (to Congress). I conclude that the costs of disfavoring some bootstrapping outweigh the benefits

Synagapetus dubitans, a caddisfly new to Britain

The caddisfly species Synagapetus dubitans has been found recently for the first time in the UK in 2010. This study reports on the sampling and discovery of that species in North Yorkshire. A list of sites where S. dubitans (either as larvae or adults) has been found is give