True, Manhattan population density peaked in 1910, stayed high through the 1940's, and then has fallen gently ever since.

However, I suspect that daytime population density has risen. By that I mean how many people flood the city by car, tunnel, ferry, and most of all rail (subway, commuter transit from suburbs) to work. Manhattan hasn't built any more land, but it sure has built office space vertically so that ever more workers can commute in, scurry about, work, and then head home back to the 'burbs. And by day all those people need to move about. That's why I figure subway use, taxis, buses, and "ride-share" services are busier than ever.

--JS

I'm from the NYC area. Demand for taxi service has always been high. Supply was always held artificially low by the medallion system. And service was awful. If you could get a taxi at all, the price would be sky-high. They'd show up slowly and unreliably. There were places they just wouldn't go, such as lousy service to the outer boroughs of NYC.

With uber, I declare with a click, "I want a ride", and my demand is instantly matched to supply. The ride arrives in minutes.

The industry hasn't been "de-skilled". The industry never had skill. I've known how to drive since I was 16 years old. That minimal skill learned decades ago makes me fully ready to join this industry. What vaunted skill has been "de-skilled" down to simple driving? It's always been simple driving. Yeah, yeah, throw in knowledge of the streets and directions and short cuts that make an experienced cabby better than a newbie, but that's still the same today. I feel bad for those with low skills who have to take whatever job they can get in today's economy, like a job driving. But it's supply and demand. If a zillion other people can easily do your job, it's not going to be highly paid. I think when Freakonomics podcast did an in depth review of the economics of driving for uber (an interesting look at gender pay gap issue), uber driver could take home $15-$20/hr. Yes, that's not great. But it's pretty good for entry level minimally (essentially un-)skilled labor.

I think this article is just an excuse to let loose the anti-Tech, anti-WallStreet passions of the Slashdot crowd. Light your torches and get yer pitchforks...
--JS

Yeah, one can learn coding in many ways and at many speeds. But it's the rest of what a 4 year degree can get you that shouldn't be missed. Yes, we can sarcastically note that the 4 year degree gets one unlimited beer and date rape and video games. But if one doesn't squander one's time, it can also give a student the opportunity to take a course in writing, journalism, media, ethics, history, politics, philosophy, and more. So I'd point out that the 4 year degree can help make us better citizens, even if we pick up most of the coding skills in high school or on the side. We need adult citizens in the ranks of programmers, not just proficient coders. --JS

Odd medication to complain about. Crbamazepine (Tegretol) was a highly used seizure/epilepsy medication 25 years ago, and to lesser extent, used for migraines or bipolar disorder. Now it is rarely used for any of these.

I'm puzzled why there is particular concern over a medicine that is rarely used any more.
-- Josh

1) "new" study? Published 2015. Someone is just catching up on their reading, although why they'd read this... 2) psych testing and surveys via Amazon Mechanical Turk? -- JS

a) I'm salaried
b) I'm very well paid, so I have no complaints
c) I'm generous, and I generally want to respond to people who need help or are reaching out to me
d) I'm productive. If I have downtime that isn't filled with other stuff (I do have a life -- hobbies, spouse, kids), then if I plow through a few emails in a spare few minutes, that's less I have to do when at work

All that said, if it's not my turn to be on call for my group, I'll take a stray inadvertent call, but I'll say, "it's not my turn tonight, call so-and-so." I'm far from a work-a-holic, I make sure my priorities like family and personal well-being are balanced. I never come in early, and I often dash away at the dot of 5 pm or whenever my coverage work is done. Decent balance, works for me.

I heard a cool explanation from Eric Ries (Lean Startup) on why Silicon Valley startups seem to be overvalued. I never understood it til I heard him explain it in a Q&A session at LSE.

Typical companies are worth what the fundamentals of their business suggest they are worth. Based on usual stuff like assets, customer base, supply and demand, sector growth, etc. Proctor & Gamble, Firestone Tire, Kraft Foods, etc., mainly valued in this conventional way.

But startups have a second component of valuation. It's the lottery ticket aspect. Startups often have potential for explosive growth if they get it just right and succeed. There are a lot of startups out there, and who knows which will succeed, but if each has a 1% chance of blossoming into a $100 million company, then owning it is worth roughly $1 million. Proctor & Gamble and Kraft and General Electric don't have this explosive growth potential because they are highly established and highly diversified. Any project in their big companies which took off would only slightly move the needle on overall profitability. But for Tesla, if they hit product-market fit and take off, the lottery ticket pays off for the investors.

So startups have a dual component valuation, part assets and current business operations and part lottery ticket. And every time something goes well for a startup, it's a double win. The current business picture improves, and the chances of that lottery ticket explosive growth occurring seem more promising.

That's why the valuations seem so outsized compared to standard companies. Made sense to me.

It is a massive overstatement to say that birth defects are going to be prevented. Did anyone here read the article? I did. This is still in the realm of science and optimism and hypothesis. 1. researchers looked at genes in human family members of those with multiple congenital anomalies, found some genetic stuff, speculated genetic issues could have caused birth defects (and maybe miscarriages) and could be fixed by increased NAD (Niacin, Vit B3) 2. researches put the speculated problematic genes with CRISPR technology into mice. 3. supplementing mice with NAD (Niacin, a.k.a. B3) reduced birth defects That's it. There are a lot of hypotheses and assumptions here, and not a single human miscarriage or birth defect has been prevented yet. This article is great for forming hypotheses like "we oughtta test women/couples for these genes" or "we oughtta give pregnant women vit B3 supplements". But until we actually do these medical studies testing these ideas, we know nothing and have not advanced human health. -- Josh (yes, I am a doctor and I practice obstetrics and I'm not recommending any additional supplementation with Vit B3 until we have outcomes evidence in humans)

"Fail fast, fail frequently, fail cheap" I forget the book I read that in. --Josh

Hi folks, I am a primary care doctor. I have tons (literally) of obese patients with all the attendant consequences like diabetes, arthritis, sleep apnea, high blood pressure, poor circulation, and more. I do not prescribe weight loss drugs, never have, doubt I ever will. Reasons are simple and obvious. 1) they don't work. They produce an insignificant amount of weight loss and do it only over the shortterm. 2) they have bad side effects. Along with the lack of benefit, they sure do harm people. Xenical causes such massive diarrhea as to cause fecal incontinence. Pooping your pants uncontrollably... do I need to explain any further why no one takes this med? 3) they have a LONG history of causing severe and unanticipated health damage. Heart valves with fenfluramine, addiction with amphetamines, etc. 4) they do nothing to change people's underlying weak efforts at diet, exercise, and fitness, which produce real health. When patients stop the drugs, they lose the (minimal) benefit, and they go back to being what they were before. --JSt

Hi folks, Nice to imagine that something about "orgo" is fruitful to the process of making doctors, but I disagree. Organic chemistry has NOTHING to do with day to day doctoring for probably 99.9% of us. I don't have to draw a molecule of penicillin or know anything about how it interacts with other molecules in order to use it for strep throat or syphilis. We need in this day and age doctors who know science, probability, the human psyche, communication, and teamwork. But they don't need to know organic chemistry. And there are other fruitful ways to weed out those who can't hack it in med school. I know because I am a physician and I teach medical students and resident physicians in New York. --JSt

"I haven't had a flu shot, or any other vaccination, in over 10 years. I have managed just fine." Yes. I love the "no vaccines and I've been fine" argument. I counter with, "so if you don't wear your seat belt for 10 years driving and are lucky enough not to crash, that means it's fine to keep on not wearing your seat belt, right?" Right. --JSt