On The Gist, our attempt to track the new scoops that affected the Mueller investigation.
We’re not playing “Is That Bulls--t” on the show today, but if we were, comedy writer Nell Scovell would probably say, “Yes.” Yes, the dearth of women in late-night writers’ rooms is bulls--t. Yes, men’s explanations are bulls--t. And, yes, sometimes women themselves willingly succumb to the bulls--t because, as Scovell says, “Look, this s--t is deep.” Her new book is Just the Funny Parts.
In the Spiel, denigrating the top 80 books sold on Amazon.
Macy’s surprises. Walmart slips. Home Depot sells off. PayPal makes a big buy. And Campbell’s Soup gets a shakeup. Our analysts discuss those stories and dish out some marital advice for the royal wedding. Plus, Villanova sports law professor Andrew Brandt talks about the Supreme Court’s decision on sports gambling.
Thanks to Molekule for supporting our podcast. Get $75 off your 1st order at http://www.molekule.comand use the promo code “fool”. Thanks also to HelloFresh. Go to HelloFresh.com/MF30 and use the code MF30 to get $30 off your first week of deliveries.
Why is it that computers are so much faster than brains at some tasks?
Or could human brains one day be used to better effect? Listener Praveen from India was wondering how it can be that supercomputers are so very powerful compared to the human minds that created them. So CrowdScience, with the help of a small voice-activated guest presenter, is off to discover how the first computers remembered what they were told, how a million processors are being connected together to mimic a small percentage of a human brain, and how the mind-boggling speeds of modern computing is enabling the current leaps in artificial intelligence.
Producer: Alex Mansfield
Presenter: Marnie Chesterton
Speakers:
Sarah Baines, David Lewis - Museum of Science and Industry, Manchester
James Sumner, Steve Furber - University of Manchester
Aldo Faisal - Imperial College, London.
(Photo: 3D transparent human head and brain image. Credit: Getty images)
On March 5, 2018, the Supreme Court decided U.S. Bank National Association v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, a case involving how appellate courts should review a lower court’s determination that a person related in some way to a bankruptcy debtor is an “insider”--and therefore subject to special restrictions that the federal Bankruptcy Code imposes on insiders. In 2011, the Village at Lakeridge (“Lakeridge”) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, which seeks to facilitate a reorganization that allows the debtor to maintain viability while restructuring debts. At the time, Lakeridge owed millions of dollars to its owner MBP Equity Partners (“MBP”), as well as to U.S. Bank. Lakeridge’s proposed reorganization plan placed both creditors in separate classes and would have impaired their interests. U.S. Bank objected, which precluded a consensual plan, but under the Code MBP’s status as an “insider”--being the owner of Lakeridge--meant that MBP could not provide the requisite consent to force a “cramdown” of the plan over U.S. Bank’s objections. Lakeridge was therefore faced with liquidation unless MBP could transfer its claim against Lakeridge to a non-insider who would agree to the reorganization plan. Kathleen Bartlett, a member of MBP’s board, persuaded retired surgeon Robert Rabkin--with whom she was romantically involved--to purchase MBP’s multimillion-dollar claim for $5,000. Rabkin then consented to the reorganization plan. U.S. Bank again objected, arguing that the transaction was not truly at arm’s length due to the romantic relationship between Bartlett and Rabkin; Rabkin was essentially a “non-statutory” insider. The Bankruptcy Court rejected this argument, deeming Rabkin’s purchase a “speculative investment,” and noting that Rabkin and Bartlett lived separately and managed their own affairs. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed that judgment, concluding that it could not reverse unless the lower court had committed a “clear error.” The Supreme Court then granted certiorari to address the proper standard of review. By a vote of 9-0 the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Ninth Circuit. In an opinion delivered by Justice Kagan, the Court held unanimously that the Ninth Circuit acted properly in reviewing the Bankruptcy Court’s determination of non-statutory insider status for clear error rather than undertaking de novo review. Justice Kennedy filed a concurring opinion. Justice Sotomayor also filed a concurring opinion, which was joined by Justices Kennedy, Thomas, and Gorsuch. To discuss the case, we have Tom Plank, Professor of Law, at the University of Tennessee School of Law. As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.
(0.22) Are more children from working families in poverty?
(6.50) Progress 8 ? explaining the new school league tables for England
(12.51) Can a garden product really make your grass 6 times greener?
(18.03) ?Data is? versus ?data are?
(20.21) Royal Wedding economics
The corruption revealed in Brazil's Operation Car Wash scandal was widespread, brazen, and seemingly unstoppable. One of the judges who helped bring the scandal to light is Sérgio Moro. Moro was interviewed by Mary Anastasia O’Grady of The Wall Street Journal during the 2018 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty dinner held in New York this week.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, located in western Asia, has historically been the seat of several massively influential empires. Today, it's home to over 81 million people and some of the world's most lucrative petroleum supplies. Currently tensions between Iran and the West are ratcheting up at an unprecedented rate, and both sides portray the other as unrepentent antagonists hellbent on destruction. So how did we get here? Join the guys as they delve into the strange history of Iran, imperialism, the West and war.
Professor Martha Few’s For All Humanity: Mesoamerican and Colonial Medicine in Enlightenment Guatemala (University of Arizona Press, 2015) describes the implementation of public health reforms in late eighteenth-century Guatemala and the diverse ways that indigenous communities engaged and resisted these programs. Contrary to expectations, colonists were often ahead of administrators in Spain in adopting new medical methods, such as inoculating patients against smallpox. But bringing these to rural communities, some with a significant degree of autonomy, required adaptation and compromise; and if resistance was stiff, medical officers reacted with the persecution of indigenous practices in ways that mirrored the church’s anti-idolatry purges. By bringing Guatemala and its native residents into the networks of Atlantic medicine in the eighteenth century, For All Humanity illuminates the plurality of medical cultures that interacted in the production of the Enlightenment.
Martha Few is Professor of Latin American History and Gender, Women’s, and Sexuality Studies at Penn State University.
