Andrew Little

@anthlittle.bsky.social

Prof at UC Berkeley. Formal theory, political beliefs, democracy. Associate Editor at ‪@ajpseditor.bsky.social‬ https://anthlittle.github.io/

Two tricky things here. 1 it’s very hard to tell the difference between someone inputting their own notes to an LLM and “one shot” asking for a review based on a paper upload. 2 one shotting will topically produce a mediocre but not terrible review on content.

Jeremy Labrecque@jeremylabrecque.bsky.social · 7d ago

When you get a peer review that is clearly AI-generated, do you just immediately notify the editors of this? Do you address any reasonable points the AI made? Having my first experience with a clearly AI generated peer review.

Getting a PhD is a weird career choice if you aren‘t a curious person, and most curios peoples’ interests don’t lie nearly within a subfield of one discipline. (Not a knock on Paul’s answer I just find it odd that people ask this question.)

Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham@paulgp.com · 5mo ago

My friend is teaching to his Economics Ph.D. students and explaining why they should be interested in topics that are not in their subfield. The friend asked for statements about why learning from other fields is good. Here was my answer: " Five things:

Judging by the (non)response to this, I should admit I was wrong. The democratic pessimists would not have said Orban losing would be evidence against their position. Rather, there is nothing that they would admit is evidence against their position 🤷‍♂️

Andrew Little@anthlittle.bsky.social · 6mo ago

Something I would like to hear from people who are confident the world is getting less democratic is what evidence or events would lead you to revise that belief? Part of what I'm getting at here is I'd bet a common answer a few years ago would have been "Orban losing" bsky.app/profile/anth...

Something I would like to hear from people who are confident the world is getting less democratic is what evidence or events would lead you to revise that belief? Part of what I'm getting at here is I'd bet a common answer a few years ago would have been "Orban losing" bsky.app/profile/anth...

Andrew Little@anthlittle.bsky.social · 6mo ago

One case is one case but it is remarkable how we just saw another wave of reports about the dire state of global democracy, and the poster child of this purported decline just lost a competitive election.

Don’t totally disagree with this, but peacefully conceding defeat is important! And many figures similar to Orban did not do this. Unclear how much of this is a difference in authoritarian goals vs just losing by so much that trying to fight it was futile.

Zack Beauchamp@zackbeauchamp.bsky.social · 6mo ago

A lot of Orbán's American fans are saying that this election proved he was never an authoritarian in the first place. This is completely wrong — and, in fact, betrays a complete misunderstanding of both Hungarian politics and modern authoritarianism. Here's why.

One case is one case but it is remarkable how we just saw another wave of reports about the dire state of global democracy, and the poster child of this purported decline just lost a competitive election.

New paper with Stephanie Zonszein! Political news is more important than ever, but local papers are shuttering across the US. In recent years, innovative community-centered outlets led by journalists have taken to WhatsApp and social media to reach groups such as immigrants. What are their effects?

Bild

Very nice paper, to be more spicy I would say it shows how both sides of the "is moderation good" debate misread the implications of spatial models of political competition (or, if you must, the "median voter theorem")

David Broockman@dbroockman.bsky.social · 7mo ago

New short paper w @jkalla.bsky.social ! Candidates gain from moderation, but less than many theories expect. Many conclude voters must not care about issues. This is wrong. Small *average* effects mask large effects on specific issues & are consistent with widespread issue-based voting 🧵