Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘The New York Times’ Category

Photo: RossHelen/iStock

By Rose Maura Lorre | Wirecutter

Uninvited guests can ruin any gathering, but mosquitoes may be the worst party crashers of all. Feeling forced to take your warm-weather, al fresco festivities inside because of bugs is a summer bummer. However, it’s also a problem that comes with many potential remedies. The first one is to reduce or eliminate standing water—which serves as a mosquito breeding ground—from your outdoor space.

Mosquitoes need just a few ounces of water for their eggs to hatch, which takes anywhere from four days to seven days as the eggs mature and insects emerge, Dan Markowski, PhD, technical adviser at the American Mosquito Control Association, said in an email interview. “A cup, maybe half a cup, could easily be enough water for mosquitoes to successfully lay their eggs,” he added.

That’s why even though spatial and topical repellents should be a part of your bug-bite defense plan, a “dump and drain” strategy to rid your property of potential skeeter breeding spots pays big dividends.

“Preventing mosquitoes from breeding is the best way to ensure you don’t get bitten, mostly because it’s a numbers game,” Markowski said. In other words, contending with a few mosquitoes is much better than contending with lots of mosquitoes. By letting them multiply unabated on and around your property, you’re much more likely to have to deal with the latter. Here we share how to make your outdoor space less hospitable to mosquitoes and their eggs, whether you’ve got an expansive yard, a cozy balcony, or anything in between.

Your mosquito-reducing game plan

Read the expanded article here.

Read Full Post »

Sian Beilock

Sian Beilock, the president of Dartmouth. | Caleb Kenna for The New York Times

By David Leonhardt | The New York Times

‘Convinced by the data’

Dartmouth College announced this morning that it would again require applicants to submit standardized test scores, starting next year. It’s a significant development because other selective colleges are now deciding whether to do so. In today’s newsletter, I’ll tell you the story behind Dartmouth’s decision.

Training future leaders

Last summer, Sian Beilock — a cognitive scientist who had previously run Barnard College in New York — became the president of Dartmouth. After arriving, she asked a few Dartmouth professors to do an internal study on standardized tests. Like many other colleges during the Covid pandemic, Dartmouth dropped its requirement that applicants submit an SAT or ACT score. With the pandemic over and students again able to take the tests, Dartmouth’s admissions team was thinking about reinstating the requirement. Beilock wanted to know what the evidence showed.

“Our business is looking at data and research and understanding the implications it has,” she told me.

Three Dartmouth economists and a sociologist then dug into the numbers. One of their main findings did not surprise them: Test scores were a better predictor than high school grades — or student essays and teacher recommendations — of how well students would fare at Dartmouth. The evidence of this relationship is large and growing, as I explained in a recent Times article.

A second finding was more surprising. During the pandemic, Dartmouth switched to a test-optional policy, in which applicants could choose whether to submit their SAT and ACT scores. And this policy was harming lower-income applicants in a specific way.

The researchers were able to analyze the test scores even of students who had not submitted them to Dartmouth. (Colleges can see the scores after the admissions process is finished.) Many lower-income students, it turned out, had made a strategic mistake.

Dartmouth

Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H. | Caleb Kenna for The New York Times

They withheld test scores that would have helped them get into Dartmouth. They wrongly believed that their scores were too low, when in truth the admissions office would have judged the scores to be a sign that students had overcome a difficult environment and could thrive at Dartmouth.

As the four professors — Elizabeth Cascio, Bruce Sacerdote, Doug Staiger and Michele Tine — wrote in a memo, referring to the SAT’s 1,600-point scale, “There are hundreds of less-advantaged applicants with scores in the 1,400 range who should be submitting scores to identify themselves to admissions, but do not under test-optional policies.” Some of these applicants were rejected because the admissions office could not be confident about their academic qualifications. The students would have probably been accepted had they submitted their test scores, Lee Coffin, Dartmouth’s dean of admissions, told me.

That finding, as much as any other, led to Dartmouth’s announcement this morning. “Our goal at Dartmouth is academic excellence in the service of training the broadest swath of future leaders,” Beilock told me. “I’m convinced by the data that this will help us do that.”

It’s worth acknowledging a crucial part of this story. Dartmouth admits disadvantaged students who have scores that are lower on average than those of privileged students. The college doesn’t apologize for that. Students from poor neighborhoods or troubled high schools have effectively been running with wind in their face. They are not competing fairly with affluent teenagers.

Share Dartmouth

“We’re looking for the kids who are excelling in their environment. We know society is unequal,” Beilock said. “Kids that are excelling in their environment, we think, are a good bet to excel at Dartmouth and out in the world.” The admissions office will judge an applicant’s environment partly by comparing his or her test score with the score distribution at the applicant’s high schools, Coffin said. In some cases, even an SAT score well below 1,400 can help an application.

Questions and answers

In our conversations, I asked Beilock and her colleagues about several common criticisms of standardized tests, and they said that they did not find the criticisms persuasive.

For instance, many critics on the political left argue the tests are racially or economically biased, but Beilock said the evidence didn’t support those claims. “The research suggests this tool is helpful in finding students we might otherwise miss,” she said.

I also asked whether she was worried that conservative critics of affirmative action might use test scores to accuse Dartmouth of violating the recent Supreme Court ruling barring race-conscious admissions. She was not. Dartmouth can legally admit a diverse class while using test scores as one part of its holistic admissions process, she said. I’ve heard similar sentiments from leaders at other colleges that have reinstated the test requirement, including Georgetown and M.I.T.

And I asked Beilock and her colleagues whether fewer students might now apply to Dartmouth. Coffin, the admissions dean, replied that such an outcome might be OK. He noted that the test-optional policy since 2020 had not led to a more diverse pool of applicants and that Dartmouth already received more than enough applications — 31,000 this year, for 1,200 first-year slots. “I don’t think volume is the holy grail,” he said.

Finally, I asked Beilock whether she was satisfied with Dartmouth’s level of economic diversity, which is slightly below that of most similarly elite colleges. She said no. “We have aspirations to bring it up,” she said. Reinstating the test requirement, she believes, can help Dartmouth do so.

For more: Compare economic diversity at hundreds of colleges through our College Access Index.

Source: The New York Times

Read Full Post »

Sam Altman

Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

By Karen Weise and Cade Metz | The New York Times

A.I.’s big year

Just before Thanksgiving, a Silicon Valley giant appeared to implode before our eyes. A boardroom coup at OpenAI, the world’s hottest artificial intelligence company, pushed out its charismatic leader, Sam Altman.

At the time, the ouster — and Altman’s roller-coaster ride to reclaim his job as C.E.O. — seemed sudden. In reality, it was more than a decade in the making. A.I. had been simmering in the tech world, as powerful figures poured money into research and fought with one another over heady questions of humanity, philosophy and power.

This week, with our colleagues Mike Isaac and Nico Grant, we published a series recounting the recent history of A.I. and looking ahead to its future. In today’s newsletter, we explain what we learned.

Egos and breakthroughs

Powerful tech leaders — including Altman, Elon Musk and the Google co-founder Larry Page — were developing A.I. systems for years before the technology went mainstream. The men bickered over whether it would end up harming the world; some, including Musk, feared that A.I. would turn dystopian science fiction into reality, with computers becoming smart enough to escape human control.

At the heart of these disagreements was a brain-stretching paradox: The men who said they were most worried about A.I. were among the most determined to create it. They justified that ambition by saying that they alone had the morals and skill to prevent A.I. tools from becoming rogue machines that could endanger humanity.

Eventually, these disputes led them to split off and form their own A.I. labs. Each schism created more competition, which pushed the companies to advance A.I. even faster.

A ‘fatal error’

The newly formed A.I. labs improved their technology over years. But nothing captured the public’s attention like ChatGPT, OpenAI’s chatbot, which debuted last year. It was an enormous hit, attracting millions of users with its ability to write poetry, summarize research and mimic everyday conversation.

Our reporting found that Altman and OpenAI did not appreciate what they were about to unleash when they released ChatGPT. Internally, the company called the chatbot a “low key research preview.” Researchers and engineers at OpenAI were instead focused on developing more advanced technology.

ChatGPT’s popularity supercharged the competition at big tech companies like Google and Meta, Facebook’s parent company, which raced to get their own products into the world.

Though the companies were concerned that their A.I. chatbots were inaccurate or biased, they put those worries to the side — at least for the moment. As one Microsoft executive wrote in an internal email, “speed is even more important than ever.” It would be, he added, an “absolutely fatal error in this moment to worry about things that can be fixed later.”

A.I. has since sneaked into daily life, through chatbots and image generators, in the word processing programs you might use at work, and in the seemingly human customer service agents you chat with online to return a purchase. People have already used it to create sophisticated phishing emails, cheat on schoolwork and spread disinformation.

Members of the European Parliament

Members of the European Parliament. Frederick Florin/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Speed vs. safety

Though OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit, Altman transformed it into a commercial operation that investors now value at more than $80 billion. As Altman raced to advance the technology, some directors on the nonprofit’s board worried he was not being honest with them and felt they could no longer trust him to prioritize safety.

That one person could be so central to the future of A.I. — and perhaps humanity — is a symptom of the lack of meaningful oversight of the industry.

A.I. systems are advancing so rapidly and unpredictably that even on the rare occasions lawmakers and regulators have tried to tackle them, their proposals quickly become obsolete, as our colleagues Adam Satariano and Cecilia Kang found. For example, European regulators proposed “future proof” rules in mid-2021 that limited how A.I. could be used in sensitive cases, such as in hiring decisions and law enforcement. But the regulations did not contemplate the advances behind ChatGPT, which was released a year and a half later.

The absence of rules has left a vacuum. The leading A.I. companies have proposed some voluntary guidelines — like using watermarks to help consumers spot A.I.-generated material — but it’s not clear how much they will matter.

European regulators this week are in marathon sessions to write the world’s strictest A.I. regulations, and they will be worth watching. In the meantime, companies continue to push ahead. On Wednesday, Google demonstrated a powerful new A.I. system called Gemini Ultra, even though Google hasn’t yet completed its customary safety testing. The company promised it would be out in the world early next year.

Related: Artists are using A.I. to produce or augment their work. Read about one.

Source

Read Full Post »

NYT

Asylum seekers have been living in tents outside a police station in Chicago. | Credit Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York Times

By Ernesto Londoño and Julie Bosman

The buses packed with Venezuelan migrants are now arriving in downtown Chicago day and night, doubling in number in recent weeks. City officials are struggling to open more shelters, while more than 2,300 migrants are sleeping at police stations, in lobbies and just outside in makeshift camps.

At the city’s airports, migrants who have just landed sleep on the floor, many with babies and toddlers, as local officials plead for more help from the federal government.

“We don’t have any place for them to go,” said Cristina Pacione-Zayas, deputy chief of staff for Mayor Brandon Johnson. “We are scrambling.”

Like New York and a number of other cities in the country, Chicago is straining to provide for the growing numbers of migrants who have arrived over the last year on buses from the U.S.-Mexico border. But with Chicago’s infamously cold winter fast approaching, volunteers and leaders are worried that things will only get worse.

The situation is putting new pressure on Mr. Johnson, who took office in May.

Mr. Johnson, a Democrat, said this week that he intended to travel with a city delegation to the border, where they would gather information about the flow of migrants.

NYT1

A young Venezuelan boy rode his bike in front of the Inn of Chicago, where more than 400 asylum seekers are being housed. Credit | Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York Times

The crisis has caused clashes in the Chicago City Council, whose members have fought over how much to spend on the asylum seekers amid other pressing priorities in the city of 2.7 million people.

“It’s a logistical nightmare,” said Andre Vasquez, the chairman of the city’s Committee on Immigrant and Refugee Rights. “You’re going to see more people on the street figuring out a way to survive.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts