Podcast appearances and mentions of stephen dubner

It used to be that making documentary films meant taking a vow of poverty (and obscurity). The streaming revolution changed that. Award-winning filmmaker R.J. Cutler talks to Stephen Dubner about capturing Billie Eilish's musical genius and Martha Stewart's vulnerability — and why he really, really, really needs to make a film about the New York Mets. SOURCES:R.J. Cutler, filmmaker. RESOURCES:Fight for Glory, documentary (2025).Martha, documentary (2024)."Reality Check: The Boom—or Glut—in Streaming Documentaries Has Sparked a Reckoning Among Filmmakers and Their Subjects," by Reeves Wiedeman (Vulture, 2023)."Inside the Documentary Cash Grab," by Mia Galuppo and Katie Kilkenny (The Hollywood Reporter, 2022).Billie Eilish: The World's a Little Blurry, documentary (2021). EXTRAS:“Ari Emanuel Is Never Indifferent,” by Freakonomics Radio (2023).

Today's guest is Peter Moskos, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He spent two years as a police officer in Baltimore. I asked him to come on and talk about his new book, Back from the Brink, Inside the NYPD and New York City's Extraordinary 1990s Crime Drop. It's one of my favorite books I've read this year (and it was one of my three book recommendations on Ezra Klein's show last week).Peter spoke with hundreds of police officers and NYC officials to understand and describe exactly how the city's leaders in the early 1990s managed to drive down crime so successfully.We discussed:* How bad did things get in the 1970s?* Why did processing an arrest take so long?* What did Bill Bratton and other key leaders do differently?* How did police get rid of the squeegee men?I've included my reading list at the bottom of this piece. Thanks to Harry Fletcher-Wood for his judicious transcript edits.Subscribe for one new interview a week.Peter, how would you describe yourself?I would say I'm a criminologist: my background is sociology, but I am not in the sociology department. I'm not so big on theory, and sociology has a lot of theory. I was a grad student at Harvard in sociology and worked as a police officer [in Baltimore] and that became my dissertation and first book, Cop in the Hood. I've somewhat banked my career on those 20 months in the police department.Not a lot of sociologists spend a couple of years working a police beat.It's generally frowned upon, both for methodological reasons and issues of bias. But there is also an ideological opposition in a lot of academia to policing. It's seen as going to the dark side and something to be condemned, not understood.Sociologists said crime can't go down unless we fix society first. It's caused by poverty, racism, unemployment, and social and economic factors — they're called the root causes. But they don't seem to have a great impact on crime, as important as they are. When I'm in grad school, murders dropped 30-40% in New York City. At the same time, Mayor Giuliani is slashing social spending, and poverty is increasing. The whole academic field is just wrong. I thought it an interesting field to get into.We're going to talk about your new book, which is called Back from the Brink, Inside the NYPD and New York City's Extraordinary 1990s Crime Drop. I had a blast reading it. Tell me about the process of writing it.A lot of this is oral history, basically. But supposedly people don't like buying books that are called oral histories. It is told entirely from the perspective of police officers who were on the job at the time. I would not pretend I talked to everyone, because there were 30,000+ cops around, but I spoke to many cops and to all the major players involved in the 1990s crime drop in New York City.I was born in the ‘90s, and I had no idea about a crazy statistic you cite: 25% of the entire national crime decline was attributable to New York City's crime decline.In one year, yeah. One of the things people say to diminish the role of policing is that the crime drop happened everywhere — and it did end up happening almost everywhere. But I think that is partly because what happened in New York City was a lot of hard work, but it wasn't that complicated. It was very easy to propagate, and people came to New York to find out what was going on. You could see results, literally in a matter of months.It happened first in New York City. Really, it happened first in the subways and that's interesting, because if crime goes down in the subways [which, at the time, fell under the separate New York City Transit Police] and not in the rest of the city, you say, “What is going on in the subways that is unique?” It was the exact same strategies and leadership that later transformed the NYPD [New York Police Department].Set the scene: What was the state of crime and disorder in New York in the ‘70s and into the ‘80s?Long story short, it was bad. Crime in New York was a big problem from the late ‘60s up to the mid ‘90s, and the ‘70s is when the people who became the leaders started their careers. So these were defining moments. The city was almost bankrupt in 1975 and laid off 5,000 cops; 3,000 for a long period of time. That was arguably the nadir. It scarred the police department and the city.Eventually, the city got its finances in order and came to the realization that “we've got a big crime problem too.” That crime problem really came to a head with crack cocaine. Robberies peaked in New York City in 1980. There were above 100,000 robberies in 1981, and those are just reported robberies. A lot of people get robbed and just say, “It's not worth it to report,” or, “I'm going to work,” or, “Cops aren't going to do anything.” The number of robberies and car thefts was amazingly high. The trauma, the impact on the city and on urban space, and people's perception of fear, all comes from that. If you're afraid of crime, it's high up on the hierarchy of needs.To some extent, those lessons have been lost or forgotten. Last year there were 16,600 [robberies], which is a huge increase from a few years ago, but we're still talking an 85% reduction compared to the worst years. It supposedly wasn't possible. What I wanted to get into in Back from the Brink was the actual mechanisms of the crime drop. I did about fifty formal interviews and hundreds of informal interviews building the story. By and large, people were telling the same story.In 1975, the city almost goes bankrupt. It's cutting costs everywhere, and it lays off more than 5,000 cops, about 20% of the force, in one day. There's not a new police academy class until 1979, four years later. Talk to me about where the NYPD was at that time.They were retrenched, and the cops were demoralized because “This is how the city treats us?” The actual process of laying off the cops itself was just brutal: they went to work, and were told once they got to work that they were no longer cops. “Give me your badge, give me your gun."The city also was dealing with crime, disorder, and racial unrest. The police department was worried about corruption, which was a legacy of the Knapp Commission [which investigated NYPD corruption] and [Frank] Serpico [a whistleblowing officer]. It's an old police adage, that if you don't work, you can't get in trouble. That became very much the standard way of doing things. Keep your head low, stay out of trouble, and you'll collect your paycheck and go home.You talk about the blackout in 1977, when much of the city lost power and you have widespread looting and arson. 13,000 off-duty cops get called in during the emergency, and only about 5,000 show up, which is a remarkable sign of the state of morale.The person in my book who's talking about that is Louis Anemone. He showed up because his neighbor and friend and partner was there, and he's got to help him. It was very much an in-the-foxholes experience. I contrast that with the more recent blackout, in which the city went and had a big block party instead. That is reflective of the change that happened in the city.In the mid-80s you get the crack cocaine epidemic. Talk to me about how police respond.From a political perspective, that era coincided with David Dinkins as [New York City's first black] mayor. He was universally disliked, to put it mildly, by white and black police officers alike. He was seen as hands off. He was elected in part to improve racial relations in New York City, to mitigate racial strife, but in Crown Heights and Washington Heights, there were riots, and racial relations got worse. He failed at the level he was supposed to be good at. Crime and quality of life were the major issues in that election.Dinkins's approach to the violence is centered around what they called “community policing.” Will you describe how Dinkins and political leaders in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s thought about policing?This is under Ben Ward, the [NYPD] Commissioner at the time. The mayor appoints the police commissioner — and the buck does stop with the mayor — but the mayor is not actively involved in day-to-day operations. That part does go down to the police department.Community policing was seen as an attempt to improve relations between the police and the community. The real goal was to lessen racial strife and unrest between black (and to a lesser extent Hispanic) communities and the NYPD. Going back to the ‘60s, New York had been rocked by continued unrest in neighborhoods like Central Harlem, East New York, and Bushwick. Community policing was seen as saying that police are partly to blame, and we want to improve relations. Some of it was an attempt to get the community more involved in crime fighting.It's tough. It involves a certain rosy view of the community, but that part of the community isn't causing the problems. It avoids the fact there are people who are actively criming and are willing to hurt people who get in their way. Community policing doesn't really address the active criminal element, that is a small part of any community, including high-crime communities.Arrests increased drastically during this era, more than in the ‘90s with broken windows policing. If the idea is to have fewer arrests, it didn't happen in the ‘80s. Some good came out of it, because it did encourage cops to be a bit more active and cops are incentivized by overtime. Arrests were so incredibly time-consuming, which kind of defeated the purpose of community policing. If you made an arrest in that era, there was a good chance you might spend literally 24 hours processing the arrest.Will you describe what goes into that 24 hours?From my experience policing in Baltimore, I knew arrests were time-consuming and paperwork redundant, but I could process a simple arrest in an hour or two. Even a complicated one that involved juveniles and guns and drugs, we're talking six to eight hours.In the ‘80s, Bob Davin, [in the] Transit Police, would say they'd make an arrest, process at the local precinct, search him in front of a desk officer, print him, and then they would have to get a radio car off patrol to drive you down to central booking at 100 Centre Street [New York City Criminal Court]. Then they would fingerprint him. They didn't have the live scan fingerprints machine, it was all ink. It had to be faxed up to Albany and the FBI to see if it hit on any warrant federally and for positive identification of the person. Sometimes it took 12 hours to have the prints come back and the perp would be remanded until that time. Then you'd have to wait for the prosecutor to get their act together and to review all the paperwork. You couldn't consider bail unless the prints came back either positive or negative and then you would have that initial arraignment and the cop could then go home. There are a lot of moving parts, and they moved at a glacial pace.The system often doesn't work 24/7. A lot of this has changed, but some of it was having to wait until 9 am for people to show up to go to work, because it's not a single system. The courts, the jails, and policing all march to their own drummer, and that created a level of inefficiency.So much of the nitty-gritty of what cops actually do is boring, behind-the-scenes stuff: How do we speed up the paperwork? Can we group prisoners together? Can we do some of this at the police station instead of taking it downtown? Is all of this necessary? Can we cooperate with the various prosecutors? There are five different prosecutors in New York City, one for each borough.There's not a great incentive to streamline this. Cops enjoyed the overtime. That's one of the reasons they would make arrests. So during this time, if a cop makes an arrest for drug dealing, that cop is gone and no cop was there to replace him. If it's a minor arrest, there's a good chance in the long run charges will be dropped anyway. And you're taking cops off the street. In that sense, it's lose-lose. But, you have to think, “What's the alternative?”Bob Davin is a fascinating guy. There's a famous picture from 1981 by Martha Cooper of two cops on a subway train. It's graffitied up and they're in their leather jackets and look like cops from the ‘70s. Martha Cooper graciously gave me permission to use the picture, but she said, "You have to indemnify me because I don't have a release form. I don't know who the cops are." I said, "Martha, I do know who the cop is, because he's in my book and he loves the picture.” Bob Davin is the cop on the right.Davin says that things started to get more efficient. They had hub sites in the late ‘80s or ‘90s, so precincts in the north of Manhattan could bring their prisoners there, and you wouldn't have to take a car out of service to go back to Central Booking and deal with traffic. They started collecting prisoners and bringing them en masse on a small school bus, and that would cut into overtime. Then moving to electronic scan fingerprints drastically saves time waiting for those to come back.These improvements were made, but some of them involve collective bargaining with unions, to limit overtime and arrests that are made for the pure purpose of overtime. You want cops making arrests for the right reason and not simply to make money. But boy, there was a lot of money made in arrests.In 1991, you have the infamous Crown Heights riot in Brooklyn. Racial tensions kick off. It's a nightmare for the mayor, there's this sense that he has lost control. The following year, you have this infamous police protest at City Hall where it becomes clear the relationship between the cops and the mayor has totally evaporated. How does all that play into the mayoral race between Dinkins and Giuliani?It was unintentional, but a lot of the blame for Crown Heights falls on the police department. The part of the story that is better known is that there was a procession for a Hasidic rabbi that was led by a police car. He would go to his wife's grave, and he got a little three-car motorcade. At some point, the police look at this and go "Why are we doing this? We're going to change it." The man who made the deal said ‘I"m retiring in a couple weeks, can we just leave it till then? Because I gave him my word." They're like, "Alright, whatever."This motor car procession is then involved in a car crash, and a young child named Gavin Cato is killed, and another girl is severely injured. The volunteer, Jewish-run ambulance shows up and decides they don't have the equipment: they call for a professional city ambulance. Once that ambulance is on the way, they take the mildly-injured Jewish people to the hospital. The rumor starts that the Jewish ambulance abandoned the black children to die.This isn't the first incident. There's long been strife over property and who the landlord is. But this was the spark that set off riots. A young Jewish man was randomly attacked on the street and was killed.As an aside, he also shouldn't have died, but at the hospital they missed internal bleeding.Meanwhile, the police department has no real leadership at the time. One chief is going to retire, another is on vacation, a third doesn't know what he's doing, and basically everyone is afraid to do anything. So police do nothing. They pull back, and you have three days of very anti-Semitic riots. Crowds chanting "Kill the Jews" and marching on the Lubavitch Hasidic Headquarters. Al Sharpton shows up. The riots are blamed on Dinkins, which is partly fair, but a lot of that's on the NYPD. Finally, the mayor and the police commissioner go to see what's going on and they get attacked. It's the only time in New York City history that there's ever been an emergency call from the police commissioner's car. People are throwing rocks at it.It took three days to realise this, but that's when they say “We have to do something here,” and they gather a group of officers who later become many of Bratton's main chiefs at the time [Bill Bratton was Commissioner of the NYPD from 1994-1996, under Giuliani]: Mike Julian, Louis Anemone, Ray Kelly, and [John] Timoney. They end the unrest in a day. They allow people to march, they get the police department to set rules. It still goes on for a bit, but no one gets hurt after that, and that's it.It was a huge, national story at the time, but a lot of the details were not covered. Reporters were taken from their car and beaten and stripped. The significance was downplayed at the time, especially by the New York Times, I would say.That's followed by the Washington Heights riots, which is a different story. A drug dealer was shot and killed by cops. There were rumors, which were proven to be false, that he was executed and unarmed. Then there were three days of rioting there. It wasn't quite as severe, but 53 cops were hurt, 120 stores were set on fire, and Mayor Dinkins paid for the victim's family to go to the Dominican Republic for the funeral. The police perspective again was, “You're picking the wrong side here.”Then there's the so-called Police Riot at City Hall. Nominally, it was about the CCRB, the Civilian Complaint Review Board, and setting up an accountability mechanism to control cops. But really it was just an anti-Dinkins protest. It was drunken and unruly. The cops stormed the steps of City Hall. I have the account of one of the cops who was on the top of those steps looking at this mob of cops storming to him, and he's getting worried he's going to be killed in a crush. There were racist chants from off-duty cops in the crowd. It did not reflect well on police officers. But it showed this hatred of David Dinkins, who was seen as siding with criminals and being anti-police. The irony is that Dinkins is the one who ends up hiring all the cops that Giuliani gets credit for.In the “Safe Streets, Safe City” program?Yes. That was because a white tourist, Brian Watkins, was killed in a subway station protecting his parents who were getting robbed. That led to the famous headline [in the New York Post] of “Dave, do something! Crime-ravaged city cries out for help.” He, with City Council President Peter Vallone, Sr., drafted and pushed through this massive hiring of police officers, “Safe Streets, Safe City.”The hiring wasn't fast-tracked. It might be because Dinkins's people didn't really want more cops. But it was a Dinkins push that got a massive hiring of cops. When the first huge class of police officers graduated, Bill Bratton was there and not David Dinkins.Some interviewees in your book talk about how there's physically not enough room in the police academies at this time, so they have to run classes 24/7. You cycle cohorts in and out of the same classroom, because there are too many new cops for the facilities.You have thousands of cops going through it at once. Everyone describes it as quite a chaotic scene. But it would have been hard to do what the NYPD did without those cops. Ray Kelly, who was police commissioner under Dinkins at the end [from 1992 to 1994] before he became police commissioner for 12 years under Bloomberg [from 2002 to 2013] probably could have done something with those cops too, but he never had the chance, because the mayoral leadership at the time was much more limiting in what they wanted cops to do.Crime starts declining slowly in the first few years of the ‘90s under Dinkins, and then in ‘93 Giuliani wins a squeaker of a mayoral election against Dinkins.One of the major issues was the then-notorious “squeegee men” of New York City. These were guys who would go to cars stopped at bridges and tunnel entrances and would rub a squeegee over the windshield asking for money. It was unpleasant, intimidating, and unwanted, and it was seen as one of those things that were just inevitable. Like graffiti on the subway in the ‘80s. Nothing we can do about it because these poor people don't have jobs or housing or whatever.The irony is that Bratton and Giuliani were happy to take credit for that, and it was an issue in the mayoral campaign, but it was solved under David Dinkins and Ray Kelly and Mike Julian with the help of George Kelling [who, with James Wilson, came up with broken windows theory]. But they never got credit for it. One wonders if, had they done that just a few months earlier, it would have shifted the entire campaign and we'd have a different course of history in New York City.It's a great example of a couple of things that several people in your book talk about. One is that disorder is often caused by a very small set of individuals. There's only like 70 squeegee men, yet everybody sees them, because they're posted up at the main tunnel and bridge entrances to Manhattan. And getting them off the streets solves the problem entirely.Another emphasis in the book is how perceptions of crime are central. You quote Jack Maple, the father of Compstat, as saying, “A murder on the subway counts as a multiple murder up on the street, because everybody feels like that's their subway.” The particular locations of crimes really affect public perception.Absolutely. Perception is reality for a lot of these things, because most people aren't victimized by crime. But when people perceive that no one is in control they feel less safe. It's not that this perception is false, it just might not be directly related to an actual criminal act.The other thing I try to show is that it's not just saying, “We've got to get rid of squeegee men. How do you do it?” They had tried before, but this is why you need smart cops and good leadership, because it's a problem-solving technique, and the way to get rid of graffiti is different to the way you get rid of squeegee men.This book is in opposition to those who just say, “We can't police our way out of this problem.” No, we can. We can't police our way out of every problem. But if you define the problem as, we don't want people at intersections with squeegees, of course we can police our way out of the problem, using legal constitutional tools. You need the political will. And then the hard work starts, because you have to figure out how to actually do it.Will you describe how they tackle the squeegee men problem?Mike Julian was behind it. They hired George Kelling, who's known for broken windows. They said, “These people are here to make money. So to just go there and make a few arrests isn't going to solve the problem.” First of all, he had to figure out what legal authority [to use], and he used Traffic Reg 44 [which prohibits pedestrians from soliciting vehicle occupants]. He talked to Norm Siegel of the NYCLU [New York Civil Liberties Union] about this, who did not want this crackdown to happen. But Norman said, “Okay, this is the law, I can't fight that one. You're doing it legally. It's all in the books.” And So that took away that opposition.But the relentless part of it is key. First they filmed people. Then, when it came to enforcement, they warned people. Then they cited people, and anybody that was left they arrested. They did not have to arrest many people, because the key is they did this every four hours. It was that that changed behavior, because even a simple arrest isn't going to necessarily deter someone if it's a productive way to make money. But being out there every four hours for a couple of weeks or months was enough to get people to do something else. What that something else is, we still don't know, but we solved the squeegee problem.So in 93, Giuliani is elected by something like 50,000 votes overall. Just as an aside, in Prince of the City, Fred Siegel describes something I had no idea about. There's a Puerto Rican Democratic Councilman who flips and supports Giuliani. Mayor Eric Adams, who at the time was the head of a nonprofit for black men in law enforcement, calls him a race traitor for doing that and for being married to a white woman. There was a remarkable level of racial vitriol in that race that I totally missed.10 years ago when I started this, I asked if I could interview then-Brooklyn borough president Eric Adams, and he said yes, and the interview kept getting rescheduled, and I said, “Eh, I don't need him.” It's a regret of mine. I should have pursued that, but coulda, woulda, shoulda.Giuliani is elected, and he campaigns very explicitly on a reducing crime and disorder platform. And he hires Bill Bratton. Tell me about Bratton coming on board as NYPD commissioner.Bratton grew up in Boston, was a police officer there, became head of the New York City Transit Police when that was a separate police department. Right before he becomes NYPD Commissioner, he's back in Boston, as the Chief of Police there, and there is a movement among certain people to get Bratton the NYC job. They succeed in that, and Bratton is a very confident man. He very much took a broken windows approach and said, “We are going to focus on crime.” He has a right-hand man by the name of Jack Maple who he knows from the Transit Police. Maple is just a lieutenant in transit, and Bratton makes him the de facto number two man in the police department.Jack Maple passed away in 2001 and I didn't know what I was going to do, because it's hard to interview a man who's no longer alive. Chris Mitchell co-wrote Jack Maple's autobiography called Crime Fighter and he graciously gave me all the micro-cassettes of the original interviews he conducted with Maple around 1998. Everyone has a Jack Maple story. He's probably the most important character in Back from the Brink.Jack Maple comes in, no one really knows who he is, no one respects him because he was just a lieutenant in Transit. He goes around and asks a basic question — this is 1994 — he says, “How many people were shot in New York City in 1993?” And nobody knows. That is the state of crime-fighting in New York City before this era. There might have been 7,000 people shot in New York City in 1990 and we just don't know, even to this day.One citation from your book: in 1993, an average of 16 people were shot every day. Which is just remarkable.And remember, shootings have been declining for two or three years before that! But nobody knew, because they weren't keeping track of shootings, because it's not one of the FBI Uniform Crime Report [which tracks crime data nationally] index crimes. But wouldn't you be curious? It took Jack Maple to be curious, so he made people count, and it was findable, but you had to go through every aggravated assault and see if a gun was involved. You had to go through every murder from the previous year and see if it was a shooting. He did this. So we only have shooting data in New York City going back to 1993. It's just a simple process of caring.The super-short version of Back from the Brink is it was a change in mission statement: “We're going to care about crime.” Because they hadn't before. They cared about corruption, racial unrest, brutality, and scandal. They cared about the clearance rate for robbery a bit. You were supposed to make three arrests for every ten robberies. It didn't matter so much that you were stopping a pattern or arresting the right person, as long as you had three arrests for every ten reported crimes, that was fine.This is a story about people who cared. They're from this city — Bratton wasn't, but most of the rest are. They understood the trauma of violence and the fact that people with families were afraid to go outside, and nobody in the power structure seemed to care. So they made the NYPD care about this. Suddenly, the mid-level police executives, the precinct commanders, had to care. and the meetings weren't about keeping overtime down, instead they were about ”What are you doing to stop this shooting?”Tell listeners a little bit more about Jack Maple, because he's a remarkable character, and folks may not know what a kook he was.I think he was a little less kooky than he liked to present. His public persona was wearing a snazzy cat and spats and dressing like a fictional cartoon detective from his own mind, but he's a working-class guy from Queens who becomes a transit cop.When Bratton takes over, he writes a letter up the chain of command saying this is what we should do. Bratton read it and said, “This guy is smart.” Listening to 80 hours of Jack Maple, everyone correctly says he was a smart guy, but he had a very working-class demeanor and took to the elite lifestyle. He loved hanging out and getting fancy drinks at the Plaza Hotel. He was the idea man of the NYPD. Everyone has a Jack Maple imitation. “You're talking to the Jackster,” he'd say. He had smart people working under him who were supportive of this. But it was very much trying to figure out as they went along, because the city doesn't stop nor does it sleep.He was a bulls***er, but he's the one who came up with the basic outline of the strategy of crime reduction in New York City. He famously wrote it on a napkin at Elaine's, and it said, “First, we need to gather accurate and timely intelligence.” And that was, in essence, CompStat. “Then, we need to deploy our cops to where they need to be.” That was a big thing. He found out that cops weren't working: specialized units weren't working weekends and nights when the actual crime was happening. They had their excuses, but basically they wanted a cushy schedule. He changed that. Then, of course, you have to figure out what you're doing, what the effective tactics are. Then, constant follow up and assessment.You can't give up. You can't say “Problem solved.” A lot of people say it wasn't so much if your plan didn't work, you just needed a Plan B. It was the idea that throwing your hands in the air and saying, “What are you going to do?” that became notoriously unacceptable under Chief Anemone's stern demeanor at CompStat. These were not pleasant meetings. Those are the meetings that both propagated policies that work and held officers accountable. There was some humiliation going on, so CompStat was feared.Lots of folks hear CompStat and think about better tracking of crime locations and incidents. But as you flesh out, the meat on the bones of CompStat was this relentless follow-up. You'd have these weekly meetings early in the morning with all the precinct heads. There were relentless asks from the bosses, “What's going on in your district or in your precinct? Can you explain why this is happening? What are you doing to get these numbers down?” And follow-ups the following week or month. It was constant.CompStat is often thought of as high-tech computer stuff. It wasn't. There was nothing that couldn't have been done with old overhead projectors. It's just that no one had done it before. Billy Gorta says it's a glorified accountability system at a time when nobody knew anything about computers. Everyone now has access to crime maps on a computer. It was about actually gathering accurate, timely data.Bratton was very concerned that these numbers had to be right. It was getting everyone in the same room and saying, “This is what our focus is going to be now.” And getting people to care about crime victims, especially when those crime victims might be unsympathetic because of their demeanor, criminal activity, or a long arrest record. “We're going to care about every shooting, we're going to care about every murder.”Part of it was cracking down on illegal guns. There were hundreds of tactics. The federal prosecutors also played a key role. It was getting this cooperation. Once it started working and Giuliani made it a major part of claiming success as mayor, suddenly everyone wanted to be part of this, and you had other city agencies trying to figure it out. So it was a very positive feedback loop, once it was seen as a success.When Bratton came on the job, he said, “I'm going to bring down crime 15%.” No police commissioner had ever said that before. In the history of policing before 1994, no police commissioner ever promised a double-digit reduction in crime or even talked about it. People said “That's crazy.” It was done, and then year after year. That's the type of confidence that they had. They were surprised it worked as well as it did, but they all had the sense that there's a new captain on this ship, and we're trying new things. It was an age of ideas and experiment.And it was a very short time.That's the other thing that surprised me. Giuliani fired Bratton in the middle of ‘96.It's remarkable. Bratton comes in ‘94, and August 1994 is where you see crime drop off a cliff. You have this massive beginning of the reduction that continues.That inflection point is important for historical knowledge. I don't address alternatives that other people have proposed [to explain the fall in crime] — For example, the reduction in lead [in gasoline, paint, and water pipes] or legalized abortion with Roe v. Wade [proposed by Stephen Dubner].Reasonable people can differ. Back from the Brink focuses on the police part of the equation. Today, almost nobody, except for a few academics, says that police had nothing to do with the crime drop. That August inflection is key, because there is nothing in a lagged time analysis going back 20 years that is going to say that is the magic month where things happened. Yet if you look at what happened in CompStat, that's the month they started getting individual officer data, and noticing that most cops made zero arrests, and said, “Let's get them in the game as well.” And that seemed to be the key; that's when crime fell off the table. The meetings started in April, I believe, but August is really when the massive crime drop began.To your point about the confidence that crime could be driven down double digits year over year, there's a great quote you have from Jack Maple, where he says to a fellow cop, “This is going to be like shooting fish in a barrel. As long as we have absolute control, we can absolutely drive this number into the floor.”One detail I enjoyed was that Jack Maple, when he was a transit cop, would camp out under a big refrigerator box with little holes cut out for eyes and sit on the subway platform waiting for crooks.For people who are interested in Jack Maple, it is worth reading his autobiography, Crime Fighter. Mike Daly wrote New York's Finest, which uses the same tapes that I had access to, and he is much more focused on that. He's actually the godfather of Jack Maple's son, who is currently a New York City police officer. But Maple and co were confident, and it turned out they were right.As well as having changes in tactics and approach and accountability across the NYPD, you also have a series of specific location cleanups. You have a specific initiative focused on the Port Authority, which is a cesspool at the time, an initiative in Times Square, the Bryant Park cleanup, and then Giuliani also focuses on organized crime on the Fulton Fish Market, and this open-air market in Harlem.I was struck that there was both this general accountability push in the NYPD through CompStat, and a relentless focus on cleaning up individual places that were hubs of disorder.I'm not certain the crime drop would have happened without reclamation of public spaces and business improvement districts. Bryant Park's a fascinating story because Dan Biederman, who heads the Corporation, said, “People just thought it was like a lost cause, this park can't be saved. The city is in a spiral of decline.” He uses Jane Jacobs' “eyes on the street” theory and then George Kelling and James Q. Wilson's broken windows theory. The park has money — not city money, but from local property owners — and it reopens in 1991 to great acclaim and is still a fabulous place to be. It showed for the first time that public space was worth saving and could be saved. New York City at the time needed that lesson. It's interesting that today, Bryant Park has no permanent police presence and less crime. Back in the ‘80s, Bryant Park had an active police presence and a lot more crime.The first class I ever taught when I started at John Jay College in 2004, I was talking about broken windows. A student in the class named Jeff Marshall, who is in my book, told me about Operation Alternatives at the Port Authority. He had been a Port Authority police officer at the time, and I had not heard of this. People are just unaware of this part of history. It very much has lessons for today, because in policing often there's nothing new under the sun. It's just repackaged, dusted off, and done again. The issue was, how do we make the Port Authority safe for passengers? How do we both help and get rid of people living in the bus terminal? It's a semi-public space, so it makes it difficult. There was a social services element about it, that was Operational Alternatives. A lot of people took advantage of that and got help. But the flip side was, you don't have to take services, but you can't stay here.I interviewed the manager of the bus terminal. He was so proud of what he did. He's a bureaucrat, a high-ranking one, but a port authority manager. He came from the George Washington Bridge, which he loved. And he wonders, what the hell am I going to do with this bus terminal? But the Port Authority cared, because they're a huge organization and that's the only thing with their name on it — They also control JFK Airport and bridges and tunnels and all the airports, but people call the bus terminal Port Authority.They gave him almost unlimited money and power and said, “Fix it please, do what you've got to do,” and he did. It was environmental design, giving police overtime so they'd be part of this, a big part of it was having a social service element so it wasn't just kicking people out with nowhere to go.Some of it was also setting up rules. This also helped Bratton in the subway, because this happened at the same time. The court ruled that you can enforce certain rules in the semi-public spaces. It was not clear until this moment whether it was constitutional or not. To be specific, you have a constitutional right to beg on the street, but you do not have a constitutional right to beg on the subway. That came down to a court decision. Had that not happened, I don't know if in the long run the crime drop would have happened.That court decision comes down to the specific point that it's not a free-speech right on the subway to panhandle, because people can't leave, because you've got them trapped in that space.You can't cross the street to get away from it. But it also recognized that it wasn't pure begging, that there was a gray area between aggressive begging and extortion and robbery.You note that in the early 1990s, one-third of subway commuters said they consciously avoided certain stations because of safety, and two thirds felt coerced to give money by aggressive panhandling.The folks in your book talk a lot about the 80/20 rule applying all over the place. That something like 20% of the people you catch are committing 80% of the crimes.There's a similar dynamic that you talk about on the subways, both in the book and in your commentary over the past couple years about disorder in New York. You say approximately 2,000 people with serious mental illness are at risk for street homelessness, and these people cycle through the cities, streets, subways, jails, and hospitals.What lessons from the ‘90s can be applied today for both helping those people and stopping them being a threat to others?Before the ‘80s and Reagan budget cuts there had been a psychiatric system that could help people. That largely got defunded. [Deinstitutionalization began in New York State earlier, in the 1960s.] We did not solve the problem of mental health or homelessness in the ‘90s, but we solved the problem of behavior. George Kelling [of broken windows theory] emphasized this repeatedly, and people would ignore it. We are not criminalizing homelessness or poverty. We're focusing on behavior that we are trying to change. People who willfully ignore that distinction almost assume that poor people are naturally disorderly or criminal, or that all homeless people are twitching and threatening other people. Even people with mental illness can behave in a public space.Times have changed a bit. I think there are different drugs now that make things arguably a bit worse. I am not a mental health expert, but we do need more involuntary commitment, not just for our sake, but for theirs, people who need help. I pass people daily, often the same person, basically decomposing on a subway stop in the cold. They are offered help by social services, and they say no. They should not be allowed to make that choice because they're literally dying on the street in front of us. Basic humanity demands that we be a little more aggressive in forcing people who are not making rational decisions, because now you have to be an imminent threat to yourself or others. That standard does need to change. But there also need to be mental health beds available for people in this condition.I don't know what the solution is to homelessness or mental health. But I do know the solution to public disorder on the subway and that's, regardless of your mental state or housing status, enforcing legal, constitutional rules, policing behavior. It does not involve locking everybody up. It involves drawing the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. It's amazing how much people will comply with those rules.That presents the idea that someone's in charge, it's not a free-for-all. You get that virtuous loop, which New York had achieved in 2014–2016, when crime was at an all-time low in the city. Then the politicians decided public order wasn't worth preserving anymore. These are political choices.I had a similar version of this conversation with a friend who was shocked that there were zero murders on the subway in 2017 and that that number was stable: you had one or two a year for several years in the mid-2010s.It was five or fewer a year from 1997 to 2019, and often one or two. Then you have zero in 2017. There were [ten in 2022]. It coincides perfectly with an order from [Mayor] de Blasio's office and the homeless czar [Director of Homeless Services Steven] Banks [which] told police to stop enforcing subway rules against loitering. The subways became — once again — a de facto homeless shelter. Getting rule-violating homeless people out of the subway in the late ‘80s was such a difficult and major accomplishment at the time, and to be fair it's not as bad as it was.The alternative was that homeless outreach was supposed to offer people services. When they decline, which 95% of people do, you're to leave them be. I would argue again, I don't think that's a more humane stance to take. But it's not just about them, it's about subway riders.There's one story that I think was relevant for you to tell. You were attacked this fall on a subway platform by a guy threatening to kill you. It turns out he's had a number of run-ins with the criminal justice system. Can you tell us where that guy is now?I believe he's in prison now. The only reason I know who it is is because I said, one day I'm going to see his picture in the New York Post because he's going to hurt somebody. Am I 100 percent certain it's Michael Blount who attacked me? No, but I'm willing to call him out by name because I believe it is. He was out of prison for raping a child, and he slashed his ex-girlfriend and pushed her on the subway tracks. And then was on the lam for a while. I look at him and the shape of his face, his height, age, build, complexion, and I go, that's got to be him.I wasn't hurt, but he gave me a sucker punch trying to knock me out and then chased me a bit threatening to kill me, and I believe he wanted to. It's the only time I ever was confronted by a person who I really believe wanted to kill me, and this includes policing in the Eastern District in Baltimore. It was an attempted misdemeanor assault in the long run. But I knew it wasn't about me. It was him. I assume he's going to stay in prison longer for what he did to his ex-girlfriend. But I never thought it would happen to me. I was lucky the punch didn't connect.Peter Moskos's new book is Back from the Brink, Inside the NYPD and New York City's Extraordinary 1990s Crime Drop.My reading listEssays:Johnny Hirschauer's reporting, including “A Failed 'Solution' to 'America's Mental Health Crisis',“ “Return to the Roots,” and “The Last Institutions.” “Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety,” by George L. Kelling and James Q. Wilson. ​“It's Time to Talk About America's Disorder Problem,” Charles Lehman.Books:Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America, Jill Leovy.​Prince of the City: Giuliani, New York, and the Genius of American Life, Fred Siegel.​ Cop in the Hood: My Year Policing Baltimore's Eastern District, Peter Moskos.​Dreamland: The True Tale of America's Opiate Epidemic, Sam Quinones.​Bonfire of the Vanities, Tom Wolfe. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

Nearly everything that politicians say about taxes is at least half a lie. They are also dishonest when it comes to the national debt. Stephen Dubner finds one of the few people in Washington who is willing to tell the truth — and it's even worse than you think. SOURCES:Jessica Riedl, senior fellow in budget, tax, and economic policy at the Manhattan Institute. RESOURCES:"The House Wants to Pass Trump's Agenda in One Big Bill. Here's What's in It." by Margot Sanger-Katz and Alicia Parlapiano (New York Times, 2025)."Correcting the Top 10 Tax Myths," by Jessica Riedl (Manhattan Institute, 2024)."Spending, Taxes, and Deficits: A Book of Charts," by Jessica Riedl (Manhattan Institute, 2024)."Why Did Americans Stop Caring About the National Debt?" by Jessica Riedl (Reason, 2024)."A Comprehensive Federal Budget Plan to Avert a Debt Crisis," by Jessica Riedl (Manhattan Institute, 2024)."When Does Federal Debt Reach Unsustainable Levels?" by Jagadeesh Gokhale, Kent Smetters, and Mariko Paulson (The Wharton School of Business, 2023)."The Limits of Taxing the Rich," by Jessica Riedl (Manhattan Institute, 2023). EXTRAS:"Farewell to a Generational Talent," by Freakonomics Radio (2024).

Lina Khan, the youngest F.T.C. chair in history, reset U.S. antitrust policy by thwarting mega-mergers and other monopolistic behavior. This earned her enemies in some places, and big fans in others — including the Trump administration. Stephen Dubner speaks with Khan about her tactics, her track record, and her future. SOURCES:Lina Khan, former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission and professor of law at Columbia Law School. RESOURCES:"Merger Guidelines" (U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, 2023)."The Rise of Market Power and the Macroeconomic Implications," by Jan De Loecker, Jan Eeckhout, and Gabriel Unger (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019)."US Antitrust Law and Policy in Historical Perspective," by Laura Phillips Sawyer (Harvard Business School, 2019).The Curse of Bigness: Antitrust in the New Gilded Age, by Tim Wu (2018)."Amazon's Antitrust Paradox," by Lina Khan (Yale Law Journal, 2017)."A Tempest In a Coffee Shop," by Tanya Mohn (New York Times, 2004). EXTRAS:"The Economics of Eyeglasses," by Freakonomics Radio (2024)."Should You Trust Private Equity to Take Care of Your Dog?" by Freakonomics Radio (2023)."Are Private Equity Firms Plundering the U.S. Economy?" by Freakonomics Radio (2023)."Is the U.S. Really Less Corrupt Than China — and How About Russia? (Update)" by Freakonomics Radio (2022).

It's a powerful biological response that has preserved our species for millennia. But now it may be keeping us from pursuing strategies that would improve the environment, the economy, even our own health. So is it time to dial down our disgust reflex?  You can help fix things — as Stephen Dubner does in this 2021 episode — by chowing down on some delicious insects. SOURCES:Paul Rozin, professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania.Val Curtis, late disgustologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.Sandro Ambuehl, economist at the University of Zurich.Emily Kimmins, R&D lead for the sensory and consumer-science team for Kraft Heinz.Iliana Sermeno, former chef at The Black Ant. RESOURCES:“Stink Bugs Could Add Cilantro Flavor to Red Wine,” by Alex Berezow (Live Science, 2017).“Edible insects: Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security,” by the F.A.O. (United Nations, 2013).“I Hate to Break it to You, but You Already Eat Bugs,” by Kyle Hill (Scientific American, 2013).“Five Banned Foods and One That Maybe Should Be,” by Leah Binkovitz (Smithsonian Magazine, 2012).“Effects of Different Types of Antismoking Ads on Reducing Disparities in Smoking Cessation Among Socioeconomic Subgroups,” by Sarah J. Durkin, Lois Biener, and Melanie A. Wakefield (American Journal of Public Health, 2009).“Flesh Trade,” by Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt (The New York Times, 2006).“Feeding Poultry Litter to Beef Cattle,” by Jay Daniel and K.C. Olson (University of Missouri, 2005). EXTRAS:"Why Does Everyone Hate Rats?" by Freakonomics Radio (2025).

In Episode 8 of Season 2, Fawn O'Breitzman, founder of The Sexploratorium, shares how she turned a career in academia into a mission to revolutionize sex education. With over 25 years of experience teaching sex and gender studies, she discusses the deep-rooted gaps in sex ed, the cultural forces shaping them, and why shame-free, fact-based education is so essential.A stage 4 lymphoma diagnosis became the catalyst for a bold decision—cashing out her retirement to create an educational sex museum unlike anything else in the world. The Sexploratorium, located in Denver, challenges taboos, normalizes discussions around sexuality and gender, and provides a safe space for learning.Fawn dives into the state of sex education in the U.S., the barriers to comprehensive learning, and the generational misconceptions that persist. She also explores the censorship of sexuality, the erasure of sex workers from history, and the unexpected ways the museum has become a resource for the LGBTQ+ community, the sober community, and those seeking honest conversations about sex.This episode is an eye-opening look at how history, culture, and policy impact what we learn about our own bodies—and why it's time for change. Whether you're an educator, parent, or simply curious, Fawn's insights will challenge assumptions and inspire a new way of thinking about sex education.Guest Information:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sexploratoriumdenverFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/sexploratoriumdenver/Web: https://www.sexploratoriumdenver.com/museumReferences:Museum of Sex (New York City) – https://www.museumofsex.com/NEMO Science Museum (Amsterdam) – https://www.nemosciencemuseum.nl/Freakonomics (Book by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner) – https://freakonomics.com/books/#freakonomicsDon't forget to subscribe and leave a review if you enjoyed this episode.Credits and Acknowledgements:Hosted, Produced, and Edited by Heather Pridemore. https://www.linkedin.com/in/heather-pridemore-mba/Thank you for tuning into small acts of rebellion. Ready to start a revolution? Please share it with others who aspire to redefine success on their own terms.Don't forget to subscribe for more stories of personal and professional defiance. For additional content, follow us on Instagram @smallactsofrebellionpodcast & @PridemoreCoaching and visit us at PridemoreCoaching.com.Keep owning your story!

#368“That's way too many pawns.”Roundtable2024.10.11This week, Ellen kicks things off with a chat about how games tell players, “This might be tough!” and how to make that fun and fair. Stephen and Mark jump in with their takes on what makes difficulty settings shine. Then, Mark thinks about the practice taking familiar game mechanics and twisting them into something fresh. Think pacifist runs or limited equipment modes. Why limit yourself to one way to play when you can remix the whole game? As always, there are some goofs in here, too.Unity 6 Preview is now available - Nancy Larue, UnityUnity is canceling the Runtime Fee - Matt Bromberg, UnityUnite Conference - UnityHasbro Game Night (for Switch)We Were Here Series - Total Mayhem Games, SteamLoopy: a tool for thinking in systems - Nicky CaseMachinations: Create digital twins for your systems, processes or economiesCommunicating Difficulty0:21:44Ellen Burns-JohnsonGame DesignReally Bad ChessPuzzmo - Orta Therox & Zach GageAggro Crab Studio"Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It" - David Duchovny & Stephen Dubner, Freakonomics Radio NetworkRemixed Play Modes0:40:35Mark LaCroixGame DesignMetro Nexus - Noble Robot10 Most Unique Multiplayer Modes In Video Games - James Kennedy, The GamerExtra game modes - Universal Videogame ListPARKS Board Game - 59 Parks

Today on AirTalk, fill in host Jacob Margolis takes an early look at the atmospheric river that will be hitting Los Angeles later this month. Also on the show, we explore how debris runoff could impact the ocean; we look at how rebuilding efforts may be impacted by tarrifs; journalist Stephen J. Dubner stops by to talk about their upcoming LAist live event; and more. Today on AirTalk: We check in on SoCal weather (0:15) How might debris runoff impact the ocean? (17:55) The latest on home insurance rates (33:14) Will tarrifs affect LA's fire rebuilds? (51:21) Rebuilding a fire-resistant property (1:09:05) Stephen J. Dubner talks 'Freakonomics' (1:18:40) Asteroid news (1:30:39)

Hank Green is an internet phenomenon and a master communicator, with a plan to reform higher education. He and Steve talk about the video blog that launched Hank's career, the economics of the internet, and how a cancer diagnosis prompted him to become a stand-up comedian. SOURCES:Hank Green, founder of Complexly and science communicator RESOURCES:ComplexlyCrashCourse YouTube ChannelSciShow YouTube ChannelVlogbrothers YouTube ChannelThe Show with Ze FrankStudy Hall"An Absolutely Remarkable Thing," by Hank Green (2018)"A Beautifully Foolish Endeavor," by Hank Green (2020)"So, I've got cancer," by Vlogbrothers (2023)"My Cancer Press Tier List," by Vlogbrothers (2023)"Between Two Kingdoms: A Memoir of a Life Interrupted" by Suleika Jaouad (2021)"The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime," by John Donohue III and Steve Levitt (The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2001)"Hoodwinked?" by Stephen Dubner and Steve Levitt (New York Times, 2006)"An Ancient Roman Shipwreck May Explain the Universe," by SciShow (2024) EXTRAS:"John Green's Reluctant Rocket Ship Ride," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2022)"Suleika Jaouad's Survival Mechanisms," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2024)

They used to be the N.F.L.'s biggest stars, with paychecks to match. Now their salaries are near the bottom, and their careers are shorter than ever. We speak with an analytics guru, an agent, some former running backs (including LeSean McCoy), and the economist Roland Fryer (a former Pop Warner running back himself) to understand why. SOURCES:Brian Burke, sports data scientist at ESPNRoland Fryer, professor of economics at Harvard UniversityLeSean McCoy, former running back in the N.F.L. and co-host for Fox's daily studio show, "The Facility"Robert Smith, former running back for the Minnesota Vikings and N.F.L. analystRobert Turbin, former running back, N.F.L. analyst for CBS Sports HQ, and college football announcerJeffery Whitney, founder and president at The Sports & Entertainment Group RESOURCES:"The Economics of Running Backs," by Roland Fryer (Wall Street Journal, 2024)"Confessions of a Hero-Worshiper," by Stephen Dubner (2007)"The Rest of the Iceberg: An Insider's View on the World of Sports and Celebrity," by Robert Smith (2004) EXTRAS:"Roland Fryer Refuses to Lie to Black America," by Freakonomics Radio (2022)"Why Does the Most Monotonous Job in the World Pay $1 Million?" by Freakonomics Radio (2022)

Stephen Dubner, live on stage, mixes it up with outbound mayor London Breed, and asks economists whether A.I. can be “human-centered” and if Tang is a gateway drug. SOURCES:London Breed, former mayor of San Francisco.Erik Brynjolfsson, professor of economics at Stanford UniversityKoleman Strumpf, professor of economics at Wake Forest University RESOURCES:"SF crime rate at lowest point in more than 20 years, mayor says," by George Kelly (The San Francisco Standard, 2025)"How the Trump Whale and Prediction Markets Beat the Pollsters in 2024," by Niall Ferguson and Manny Rincon-Cruz (Wall Street Journal, 2024)"Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery, and Product Innovation," by Aidan Toner-Rodgers (MIT Department of Economics, 2024) EXTRAS:"Why Are Cities (Still) So Expensive?" by Freakonomics Radio (2020)

Like tens of millions of people, Stephen Dubner thought he had a penicillin allergy. Like the vast majority, he didn't. This misdiagnosis costs billions of dollars and causes serious health problems, so why hasn't it been fixed? And how about all the other things we think we're allergic to? SOURCES:Kimberly Blumenthal, allergist-immunologist and researcher at Mass General Hospital and Harvard Medical School.Theresa MacPhail, associate professor of science and technology studies at Stevens Institute of Technology.Thomas Platts-Mills, professor of medicine at the University of Virginia.Elena Resnick, allergist and immunologist at Mount Sinai Hospital. RESOURCES:Allergic: Our Irritated Bodies in a Changing World, by Theresa MacPhail (2023)."Evaluation and Management of Penicillin Allergy: A Review," by Erica S. Shenoy, Eric Macy, and Theresa Rowe (JAMA, 2019)."The Allergy Epidemics: 1870–2010," by Thomas Platts-Mills (The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2016)."Randomized Trial of Peanut Consumption in Infants at Risk for Peanut Allergy," by George Du Toit, Graham Roberts, et al. (The New England Journal of Medicine, 2015). EXTRAS:Freakonomics, M.D.

Why are humans so bad at predicting the future? What exactly is college for? And does expensive wine really taste better? Those are among the many questions tackled by journalist Stephen Dubner and economist Steven Levitt over the years, since their bestselling book Freakonomics came out in 2005. We'll talk with Dubner about the duo's book and podcast empire which aims to reveal “the hidden side of everything” and about whether the field of behavioral economics has lived up to its promise. And we'll dive into Freakonomics Radio's recent series on the legal marijuana industry, and why it's such a mess. Guests: Stephen Dubner, Freakonomics Radio host and best-selling author

Welcome back for another episode of Nick's Non-fiction with your host Nick Muniz Freakonomics lived on the New York Times bestseller list for an astonishing two years. Now authors Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner return with more iconoclastic insights and observations in SuperFreakonomics—the long awaited follow-up to their New York Times Notable blockbuster. Based on revolutionary research and original studies SuperFreakonomics promises to once again challenge our view of the way the world really works. Subscribe, Share, Mobile links below! My Instagram: www.instagram.com/hairysh1t/?... My Patreon: www.patreon.com/TheNiche

This week, Ellen kicks things off with a chat about how games tell players, “This might be tough!” and how to make that fun and fair. Stephen and Mark jump in with their takes on what makes difficulty settings shine. Then, Mark thinks about the practice taking familiar game mechanics and twisting them into something fresh. Think pacifist runs or limited equipment modes. Why limit yourself to one way to play when you can remix the whole game? As always, there are some goofs in here, too.Unity 6 Preview is now available - Nancy Larue, UnityUnity is canceling the Runtime Fee - Matt Bromberg, UnityUnite Conference - UnityHasbro Game Night (for Switch)We Were Here Series - Total Mayhem Games, SteamLoopy: a tool for thinking in systems - Nicky CaseMachinations: Create digital twins for your systems, processes or economies0:21:44Communicating DifficultyReally Bad ChessPuzzmoOrta Therox & Zach GageAggro Crab Studio"Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It"David Duchovny & Stephen DubnerFreakonomics Radio Network0:40:35Remixed Play ModesMetro NexusNoble Robot10 Most Unique Multiplayer Modes In Video GamesJames KennedyThe GamerExtra game modesUniversal Videogame ListPARKS Board Game59 Parks

Artist Wendy MacNaughton knows the difficulty of sitting in silence and the power of having fun. She explains to Steve the lessons she's gleaned from drawing hospice residents, working in Rwanda, and reporting from Guantanamo Bay. SOURCE:Wendy MacNaughton, artist and graphic journalist. RESOURCES:"What Happens if Two Complete Strangers Draw Each Other?" video by the National Gallery of Art (2024).How to Say Goodbye, by Wendy MacNaughton (2023)."How to Have Fun Again," by Wendy MacNaughton (The New York Times, 2022)."Inside America's War Court: Clothing and Culture at Guantánamo Bay," by Carol Rosenberg and Wendy MacNaughton (The New York Times, 2019)."Drawing the Guantánamo Bay War Court," by Wendy MacNaughton (The New York Times, 2019).Think Like a Freak, by Steve Levitt and Stephen Dubner (2014).DrawTogether.The Grown-Ups Table.Zen Caregiving Project.DrawTogether Strangers. EXTRAS:"Rick Rubin on How to Make Something Great," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2023)."Does Death Have to Be a Death Sentence?" by People I (Mostly) Admire (2022)."Sendhil Mullainathan Explains How to Generate an Idea a Minute (Part 2)," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2021)."Sendhil Mullainathan Thinks Messing Around Is the Best Use of Your Time," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2021).

The Puzzler team is taking a short summer break, and in the meantime we're bringing you some of our favorite episodes from the archives. We'll be back with brand new episodes soon! Puzzling with us today: author, journalist, and podcaster Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics fame! Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask Chat GPT” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts!  "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas.  Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions.  Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Originally uploaded September 3rd. Jeffrey Mosher welcomes Andria Romkema, Senior Vice President of Marketing and Communications, The Right Place, Grand Rapids, MI. There were several things he wanted to find out in their conversation: Welcome back Andria, remind the Michigan business community about The Right Place? The Right Place is set to play a role in GR's Tech Week September 16th to the 21st, tell us about that event? We understand attendees of Tech Week can register for learning tracks for a customized experience? When we say "Tech Week Grand Rapids 2024" Tech doesn't just mean computers and the internet - tell us about its connection with health, design, AI and DEI? We understand one of the week's highlights will be Stephen Dubner's Kick-Off keynote address. Fill us in a bit on Dubner and Freakonomics? » Visit MBN website: www.michiganbusinessnetwork.com/ » Watch MBN's YouTube: www.youtube.com/@MichiganbusinessnetworkMBN » Like MBN: www.facebook.com/mibiznetwork » Follow MBN: twitter.com/MIBizNetwork/ » MBN Instagram: www.instagram.com/mibiznetwork/

Chapter 1:Summary of Freakonomics"Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything" is a non-fiction book written by economist Steven D. Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubner. It was first published in 2005 and explores the underlying economics and hidden motivations that drive various aspects of human behavior. The book challenges conventional wisdom by using economic analysis to uncover peculiar, puzzling, and sometimes controversial truths about everyday life and societal issues.The book is structured around several key questions, each of which forms the basis of a chapter that provides unexpected economic insights:1. What Do Schoolteachers and Sumo Wrestlers Have in Common?This chapter discusses how incentive systems can lead to cheating. The authors use data analysis to show patterns of cheating among Chicago schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers in Japan.2. How Is the Ku Klux Klan Like a Group of Real-Estate Agents?Levitt explores how information asymmetry can be used to wield control and power. He draws parallels between the Ku Klux Klan, whose power waned when their secret information was exposed, and real-estate agents who have a knowledge advantage over their clients.3. Why Do Drug Dealers Still Live with Their Moms?Levitt analyses the income hierarchy within drug-dealing gangs, discovering that the economic structure closely resembles that of a conventional business, but with most lower-level dealers earning below minimum wage, contrary to popular belief of lucrative profits.4. Where Have All the Criminals Gone?Perhaps the most controversial chapter, it posits that the sharp drop in crime rates in the U.S. during the 1990s was significantly influenced by the legalization of abortion following the Roe v. Wade decision, which led to fewer unwanted children who would have been at higher risk of becoming criminals.5. What Makes a Perfect Parent?By examining data, Levitt suggests that parenting strategies aren't as influential on a child's academic success as demographic factors and the parents' education levels.6. Perfect Parenting, Part II; or: Would a Roshanda by Any Other Name Smell as Sweet?This section discusses the socioeconomic patterns and impacts of naming children, revealing how names chosen for children differ across social and racial lines and how they could potentially impact a child's future.The common theme across all chapters is that economic tools and analysis can reveal the unexpected truths about the complex behaviors and operations of society. Levitt and Dubner's approach provides readers with a new perspective on how to think about the world, encouraging them to question the way things are and to understand better the factors that influence personal and societal decision-making.Chapter 2:The Theme of Freakonomics"Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything" is a nonfiction book written by economist Steven D. Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubner. Rather than a traditional novel with a plot and character development, "Freakonomics" examines a series of economic concepts and social theories through the lens of unconventional questions and scenarios. The book explores the hidden side of various interesting and, at times, mundane phenomena of everyday life. Below are some of the key themes, explored concepts, and intriguing questions that "Freakonomics" addresses:1. Incentives: A major theme throughout the book, Levitt and Dubner explore how incentives (financial, social, and moral) drive people to do what they do. From teachers cheating on standardized tests to real-estate agents selling their own homes, the concept of incentives is pivotal in understanding human behavior.2. Information Asymmetry: Another key theme, information asymmetry deals with situations where one party in a...

Also: are the most memorable stories less likely to be true? Stephen Dubner chats with Angela Duckworth in this classic episode from July 2020. SOURCES:Pearl S. Buck, 20th-century American novelist.Jack Gallant, professor of neuroscience and psychology at the University of California, Berkeley.Steve Levitt, professor emeritus of economics at the University of Chicago, host of People I (Mostly) Admire, and co-author of the Freakonomics books.George Loewenstein, professor of economics and psychology at Carnegie Mellon University.Deborah Small, professor of marketing at Yale University.Adin Steinsaltz, rabbi, philosopher, and author.Diana Tamir, professor of neuroscience and psychology at Princeton University. RESOURCES:"The Representation of Semantic Information Across Human Cerebral Cortex During Listening Versus Reading Is Invariant to Stimulus Modality," by Fatma Deniz, Anwar O. Nunez-Elizalde, Alexander G. Huth and Jack L. Gallant (Journal of Neuroscience, 2019)."Reading Fiction and Reading Minds: The Role of Simulation in the Default Network," by Diana Tamir, Andrew B. Bricker, David Dodell-Feder, and Jason P. Mitchell (Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2016).Think Like a Freak, by Stephen Dubner and Steve Levitt (2014).SuperFreakonomics, by Stephen Dubner and Steve Levitt (2009).Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure, by the Department of Defense (2009)."Stories or Statistics? Farmers' Attitudes Toward Messages in an Agricultural Safety Campaign," by S. E. Morgan, H. P. Cole, T. Struttmann, and L. Piercy (Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 2002)."Explaining the Identifiable Victim Effect," by Karen Jenni and George Loewenstein (Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1997)."Explanation-Based Decision Making: Effects of Memory Structure on Judgment," by N. Pennington and R. Hastie (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1988).The Good Earth, by Pearl S. Buck (1931). EXTRAS:"Abortion and Crime, Revisited (Update)," by Freakonomics Radio (2022)."This Is Your Brain on Podcasts," by Freakonomics Radio (2016).

The Puzzler team is taking a short summer break, and in the meantime we're bringing you some of our favorite episodes from the archives. We'll be back with brand new episodes soon! Hello, Puzzlers! Puzzling with us today: author, journalist, and podcaster Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics fame! Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask Chat GPT” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts!  "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas.  Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions.  Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Only a tiny number of “supertaskers” are capable of doing two things at once. The rest of us are just making ourselves miserable, and less productive. How can we put the — hang on a second, I've just got to get this.Come see Stephen Dubner live! “A Questionable Evening: A strategic interrogation from two people who ask questions for a living,” featuring Stephen Dubner and PJ Vogt from Search Engine.Thursday, Sept. 26th, at the Bell House in Brooklyn, NY. https://www.eventbrite.com/e/a-questionable-evening-evening-with-stephen-dubner-and-pj-vogt-tickets-1002544747327 SOURCES:Olivia Grace, senior product manager at Slack.Gloria Mark, professor of computer science at the University of California, Irvine.David Strayer, professor of cognition and neural science at the University of Utah. RESOURCES:"Immersion in Nature Enhances Neural Indices of Executive Attention," by Amy S. McDonnell and David L. Strayer (Nature: Scientific Reports, 2024)."Contribution to the Study on the ‘Right to Disconnect' From Work. Are France and Spain Examples for Other Countries and E.U. Law?" by Loïc Lerouge and Francisco Trujillo Pons (European Labour Law Journal, 2022)."Task Errors by Emergency Physicians Are Associated With Interruptions, Multitasking, Fatigue and Working Memory Capacity: A Prospective, Direct Observation Study," by Johanna I. Westbrook, Magdalena Z. Raban, Scott R. Walter, and Heather Douglas (BMJ Quality & Safety, 2018)."Supertaskers: Profiles in Extraordinary Multitasking Ability," by Jason M. Watson and David L. Strayer (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2010)."The Effects of Video Game Playing on Attention, Memory, and Executive Control," by Walter R. Boot, Arthur F. Kramer, Daniel J. Simons, Monica Fabiani, and Gabriele Gratton (Acta Psychologica, 2008)."'Constant, Constant, Multi-Tasking Craziness': Managing Multiple Working Spheres," by Victor M. González and Gloria Mark (Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI, 2004). EXTRAS:"Why Is the U.S. So Good at Killing Pedestrians?" by Freakonomics Radio (2023)."Why Did You Marry That Person?" by Freakonomics Radio (2022)."How Much Should We Be Able to Customize Our World?" by No Stupid Questions (2021).

Why does the U.S. use Fahrenheit when Celsius is better? Would you quit your job if a coin flip told you to? And how do you get an entire country to drive on the other side of the road? SOURCES:Christian Crandall, professor of psychology at the University of Kansas.Stephen Dubner, host of Freakonomics Radio and co-author of the Freakonomics books.Scott Eidelman, professor of psychology at the University of Arkansas.David Hume, 18th century Scottish philosopher.Ellen Langer, professor of psychology at Harvard University.Steve Levitt, professor emeritus of economics at the University of Chicago, host of People I (Mostly) Admire, and co-author of the Freakonomics books.John McWhorter, professor of linguistics, English, and comparative literature at Columbia University.Mark Twain, 19-20th century American writer. RESOURCES:"What Countries Use the Imperial System?" by William Harris and Sascha Bos (HowStuffWorks, 2023)."UK Quietly Drops Brexit Law to Return to Imperial Measurements," by George Parker (Financial Times, 2023)."Heads or Tails: The Impact of a Coin Toss on Major Life Decisions and Subsequent Happiness," by Steven D. Levitt (The Review of Economic Studies, 2021)."A ‘Thrilling' Mission to Get the Swedish to Change Overnight," by Maddy Savage (BBC, 2018)."Why We Can't Quit the QWERTY Keyboard," by Rachel Metz (MIT Technology Review, 2018)."Why Americans Still Use Fahrenheit Long After Everyone Else Switched to Celsius," by Zack Beauchamp (Vox, 2015)."The Intuitive Traditionalist: How Biases for Existence and Longevity Promote the Status Quo," by Scott Eidelman and Christian Crandall (Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2014)."What Scientific Concept Would Improve Everybody's Cognitive Toolkit?" (Edge, 2011)."Mars Probe Lost Due to Simple Math Error," by Robert Lee Hotz (Los Angeles Times, 1999). EXTRAS:"Would You Let a Coin Toss Decide Your Future?" by Freakonomics Radio (2013)."The Upside of Quitting," by Freakonomics Radio (2011).

Stephen Dubner appears as a guest on Fail Better, a new podcast hosted by David Duchovny. The two of them trade stories about failure, and ponder the lessons that success could never teach. SOURCES:David Duchovny, actor, director, writer, and musician. RESOURCES:"Martin Seligman and the Rise of Positive Psychology," by Peter Gibbon (Humanities, 2020)."Rick Reilly: ‘Donald Trump Will Cheat You on the Golf Course and Then Buy You Lunch,'" by Donald McRae (The Guardian, 2019)."How The X-Files Invented Modern Television," by Emily St. James (Vox, 2018)."Happiness & the Gorilla," by Scott Galloway (No Mercy/No Malice, 2018). EXTRAS:Fail Better with David Duchovny, podcast by Lemonada Media (2024)."How to Succeed at Failing," series by Freakonomics Radio (2023)."Annie Duke Thinks You Should Quit," by People I (Mostly) Admire (2022)."The Upside of Quitting," by Freakonomics Radio (2011).

Join us in this exclusive interview with Carly Reilly and Stephen Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, where he shares insights on his storytelling journey, the creation of the Freakonomics media empire, and his perspectives on various topics, including the challenges of brand management, the evolution of his podcast, and the intersection of economics with everyday life. The conversation covers how Dubner approaches complex topics like crime rates, political dynamics, and economic theories with a unique blend of empirical analysis and narrative storytelling, making them accessible and engaging for a broad audience. Humanity Forward Foundation and Freakonomics Radio are joining forces to launch a time banking initiative! To get involved, email time@humanityforwardfoundation.org. Watch the full episode on YouTube: https://youtu.be/QNPKXfJk2mE ---- Follow Stephen Dubner: https://x.com/dubnerstephen | https://x.com/freakonomics Follow Carly Reilly: https://x.com/carlypreilly | https://www.linkedin.com/in/carly-reilly-606ab166/ Follow Andrew Yang: https://andrewyang.com | https://x.com/andrewyang Get 50% off Factor at https://factormeals.com/yang50 Get an extra 3 months free at https://expressvpn.com/yang Get 20% off + 2 free pillows at https://helixsleep.com/yang code helixpartner20 ---- Subscribe to Forward: Apple — https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1508035243 Spotify — https://open.spotify.com/show/25cFfnG3lGuypTerKDxKia To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode, Andrew and Freakonomics Radio's Stephen Dubner explore the concept of Time Banking, a system where time is used as currency to exchange services within communities, promoting human interaction and communal support without relying on money. Andrew discusses the mechanics of Time Banking, where participants can offer services like tutoring in exchange for time credits, which can then be used to receive other services. Despite its historical roots dating back to the early 19th century and its presence in 42 countries, Time Banking remains a niche concept with around 40,000 active members globally. Could Time Banking help revive community engagement by making service more rewarding? Starting with local communities like New York City, can we grow it into a viable system that generates trillions of dollars in value by tapping into underutilized human resources in areas such as healthcare, education, and community services? Follow Stephen Dubner: https://x.com/dubnerstephen | https://x.com/freakonomics Follow Andrew Yang: https://andrewyang.com | https://x.com/andrewyang Get 50% off Factor at https://factormeals.com/yang50 Get an extra 3 months free at https://expressvpn.com/yang Get 20% off + 2 free pillows at https://helixsleep.com/yang code helixpartner20 Get 20% off your first order at https://ashanderie.com/ code yang ---- Subscribe to Forward: Apple — https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1508035243 Spotify — https://open.spotify.com/show/25cFfnG3lGuypTerKDxKia To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week I'm sharing a neat episode of Freakonomics Radio, hosted by past guest Stephen Dubner. His acclaimed podcast recently put out a series that really resonated with me — a series about failure, which is part of why I was so excited to talk with Stephen in the first place. You get to hear the first episode of that series, How to Succeed at Failing, right now. I think you'll enjoy it. We tend to think of tragedies as a single terrible moment, rather than the result of multiple bad decisions. Can this pattern be reversed? We try — with stories about wildfires, school shootings, and love.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week, our “4 Questions Journalist Spotlight” focuses on Gabriel Stovall, founder of the Newton County Journal.Important Things to Know About Gabriel:Coolest Thing: He's a Pastor and his son is top-ranked in TaekwondoFavorite Local Restaurant:  The Town House Cafe in CovingtonLast Book: "Think Life A Freak" by Stephen J. Dubner and Steven LevittFavorite Non-Work Hobby:  Video games, particular PS5 footballFavorite Local Getaway: Beaches like Tybee IslandFavorite Guilty Pleasure: Watching "The Golden Girls"!http://www.NewtonCountyJournal.comFacebook: @ncjonlineMitch's day job is providing public relations services, media training, and crisis communications, but he also operates Leff's Atlanta Media, an online database with contact info for thousands of Atlanta-based journalists, and Mitch's Media Match, a service that connects Atlanta journalists with local experts.

Stephen Dubner, host of Freakonomics Radio, has done more than change the way we think about economics — I consider him a spiritual guide of our time. But for all his success, he's got a laundry list of careers he's left behind, from rising-star musician to New York Times writer. We debate the merits of expecting the worst versus hoping for the best and discuss how to trade nuance for novelty as we get older. It's never too late to keep learning — or, according to him, to start a podcast. Follow me on Instagram at @davidduchovny. Stay up to date with Lemonada on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram at @LemonadaMedia. Joining Lemonada Premium is a great way to support our show and get bonus content. Subscribe today at bit.ly/lemonadapremium. And if you want to continue the conversation with other listeners, join the My Lemonada community at https://lemonadamedia.com/mylemonada/ For a list of current sponsors and discount codes for this and every other Lemonada show, go to lemonadamedia.com/sponsors.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ep. 35 Join Bossy Founders and Business Owners Kelly Bush and Kelly Metras as they discuss their favorite business books and share insights from a recent Women in Hospitality conference. They delve into the importance of knowing your "why" in business, the challenges of work-life balance, and the power of creating loyal customers. The mention of Charles Schwab's "Thanks for Coming In Today" highlights the transformative power of gratitude within the workplace, while "The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse" by Charlie Mackesy serves as a poignant reminder that business leaders are also human beings, deserving of compassion and self-care. This human-centric approach to business shines through the interactions between Kelly Bush and Kelly Metras, as they share anecdotes and wisdom. It's clear that empathetic leadership and a supportive environment can lead to greater employee engagement and customer loyalty, eventually driving the business forward. Key Takeaways: Embracing opportunities for reflection, such as traveling or stepping back from daily tasks, can spawn innovative solutions and strategies for business growth. Engaging with transformative ideas found in books about entrepreneurship and personal growth can greatly impact leadership style and business operations. Book Recommendations: Simon Sinek's "Start with Why" "Why We Can't Sleep" by Ada Calhoun "Buy Back Your Time" by Dan Martell Malcolm Gladwell's "The Tipping Point" "Zombie Loyalists" by Peter Shankman Disney's Approach to Quality Service (no specific URL given) "Big Magic" by Elizabeth Gilbert (recommended but not discussed in detail) "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (recommended but not discussed in detail) "Dirt Candy" by Amanda Cohen (cookbook mention with business story) "The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse" by Charlie Mackesy "The Alchemist" by Paul Coelho Chapters: 0:00 Insights From a Women in Hospitality Conference 2:01 Train Journeys as a Catalyst for Creative Solutions 4:17 Reflecting on Personal Growth and Business Philosophies 8:28 Midlife Crisis and Sleeplessness in Gen X Women 11:25 Generational Gaps in Learning to Type 14:07 Gen X Tech Troubles and Midlife Crises 15:29 Discovering an Unexpected Gem During Pregnancy 16:18 Creating Customer Loyalty Through Zombie Loyalism 17:35 Maximizing Productivity Through Prioritization and Time Management 21:38 Discussing Books That Influence Business and Creativity 25:31 Transforming Hotel Culture With Simple Gratitude 25:55 Reflections on Business, Books, and Personal Growth 29:53 Seeking Book Recommendations for the Bossy Library Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the author and podcast host of “Freakonomics,” Stephen Dubner spends a lot of time thinking about and studying what goes into good decision-making. In one of our favorite episodes from the vault, he gives Sam tips on balancing logic with emotion, offers ways to use your imagination to help you make a choice, and defends the coin-flip method. Follow Stephen Dubner @Freakonomics on X. Keep up with Samantha Bee @realsambee on Instagram and X. And stay up to date with us @LemonadaMedia on X, Facebook, and Instagram. For a list of current sponsors and discount codes for this and every other Lemonada show, go to lemonadamedia.com/sponsors. Joining Lemonada Premium is a great way to support our show and get bonus content. Subscribe today at bit.ly/lemonadapremium.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stephen Dubner, host of Freakonomics Radio, has long been fascinated by the great physicist Richard Feynman. As has Alan. Stephen has devoted a year to making a remarkable podcast series on Feynman, and Alan has played Feynman on the stage for a year. They compare notes on what they've come to learn about him.

Stephen Dubner is the New York Times best-selling author and host of the podcast Freakanomics. I met Stephen when he and his Freakanomics crew came to Esalen for an on-site interview that centered around deceased Nobel Prize winner and occasional Esalen lecturer Richard Feynman. Feynman assisted in the development of the atomic bomb during World War II; later in his career, he investigated the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. During the 1980s, in Big Sur, three women who had experience with underground psychedelic therapy, Debby Harlow, Barbara Berg, and Cheryl Haley, initiated Feynman through the psychedelic experience. Now, the Freakanomics team was interested in interviewing these three women, at Esalen, where they had initially met Feynman. We gathered together in the famed Fritz room at the southern most tip of the Esalen property, and I got to see Stephen do his work. He seemed fascinated with Feynman, not just as an intellect, but as a human being. And in many ways, as a person, Feynman exemplified the human potential project - he pursued expansion and fulfillment, right up to the very end of his life. I am thankful for Feynman, if only because it linked me to Stephen Dubner, one of my favorite writers, thinkers and interviewers alive today. In our conversation, we delve into the life of Feynman, but save a little time to talk AI, job loss, storytelling, the future of work, and the critical role of community. In this episode, I play some short clips from one of the recent Freakonmics episodes: "Mr Feynman Takes a Trip —But Doesn't Fall." I also play a few brief segments from one of Feynman's talks at Esalen Institute in 1984, which he called Tiny Machines. Enjoy Freakanomics: https://freakonomics.com/series/freakonomics-radio/

Stephen Dubner talks about their series on Richard Feynman, known for his work in theoretical physics and for his boundless curiosity.

Hello, Puzzlers! Puzzling with us today: author, journalist, and podcaster Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics fame! Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask Chat GPT” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts!  "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas.  Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions.  Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hello, Puzzlers! Puzzling with us today: author, journalist, and podcaster Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics fame! Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask Chat GPT” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts!  "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas.  Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions.  Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on AirTalk, Huntington Beach residents vote on ID at polls. Also on the show, the history of LA street art; the worst parking in LA; turning down promotions; and more. Voter ID At Polls? Huntington Beach Residents Will Vote On Controversial Measure To Require It In March Primary (00:17) SoCal History: Los Angeles' Guerrilla And Street Art (15:39) L.A. Has Some Nightmare Parking Lots. But Fixing Them Isn't Rocket Science. (50:48)   Freakonomics Radio's Stephen Dubner (1:08:22) Thanks, But No Thanks - Let's Talk About Why You Turned Down That Promotion (1:24:51)

Hello, Puzzlers! Puzzling with us today: author, journalist, and podcaster Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics fame! Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask Chat GPT” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts!  "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas.  Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions.  Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Enjoy this episode of Freakonomics Radio, where Michael Lewis sat down with Stephen Dubner to discuss his book “Going Infinite: The Rise and Fall of a New Tycoon.” Description from the original episode:Lewis got incredible access to Sam Bankman-Fried, the billionaire behind the spectacular FTX fraud. His book is a bestseller, but some critics say he went too easy on S.B.F. Lewis tells us why the critics are wrong — and what it's like to watch your book get turned into a courtroom drama.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hello, Puzzlers! Puzzling with us today: author, journalist, and podcaster Stephen J. Dubner of Freakonomics fame! Join host A.J. Jacobs and his guests as they puzzle–and laugh–their way through new spins on old favorites, like anagrams and palindromes, as well as quirky originals such as “Ask Chat GPT” and audio rebuses. Subscribe to The Puzzler podcast wherever you get your podcasts!  "The Puzzler with A.J. Jacobs" is distributed by iHeartPodcasts and is a co-production with Neuhaus Ideas.  Our executive producers are Neely Lohmann and Adam Neuhaus of Neuhaus Ideas, and Lindsay Hoffman of iHeart Podcasts. The show is produced by Jody Avirgan and Brittani Brown of Roulette Productions.  Our Chief Puzzle Officer is Greg Pliska. Our associate producer is Andrea Schoenberg.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We all like to throw around terms that describe human behavior — “bystander apathy” and “steep learning curve” and “hard-wired.” Most of the time, they don't actually mean what we think they mean. But don't worry — the experts are getting it wrong, too. SOURCES:Sharon Begley, senior science writer for Stat at The Boston Globe.Jerome Kagan, emeritus professor of psychology at Harvard University.Bibb Latané, social psychologist and senior fellow at the Center for Human Science.Scott Lilienfeld, professor of psychology at Emory University.James Solomon, director and producer of The Witness. RESOURCES:“Tech Metaphors Are Holding Back Brain Research,” by Anna Vlasits (Wired, 2017).Can't Just Stop: An Investigation of Compulsions, by Sharon Begley (2017).The Witness, film by James Solomon (2016).“Fifty Psychological and Psychiatric Terms to Avoid: a List of Inaccurate, Misleading, Misused, Ambiguous, and Logically Confused Words and Phrases,” by Scott Lilienfeld, Katheryn Sauvigne, Steven Jay Lynn, Robin Cautin, Robert Latzman, and Irwin Waldman (Frontiers in Psychology, 2015).SuperFreakonomics, by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner (2011).Fifty Great Myths of Popular Psychology, by Scott Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, John Ruscio, and Barry Beyerstein (2009).Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain, by Sharon Begley (2007).“Kitty, 40 Years Later,” by Jim Rasenberger (The New York Times, 2004).“37 Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police,” by Martin Gansberg (The New York Times, 1964). EXTRAS:"Academic Fraud," series by Freakonomics Radio (2024).“This Idea Must Die,”Freakonomics Radio (2015).

As the author and podcast host of “Freakonomics,” Stephen Dubner spends a lot of time thinking about and studying what goes into good decision-making. He gives Sam tips on balancing logic with emotion, offers ways to use your imagination to help you make a choice, and defends the coin-flip method. Follow Stephen Dubner @Freakonomics on X (formerly Twitter). Keep up with Samantha Bee @realsambee on Instagram and X (formerly Twitter). And stay up to date with us @LemonadaMedia on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and Instagram. For a list of current sponsors and discount codes for this and every other Lemonada show, go to lemonadamedia.com/sponsors. Joining Lemonada Premium is a great way to support our show and get bonus content. Subscribe today at bit.ly/lemonadapremium.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As we've been tackling different Wall Street careers, today we are focusing on the highly sought after and complex Sales and Distribution roles. We are joined by April Reppy Suydam and Inga Rachwald.  April Reppy Suydam is Head of Latin America Distribution at First Trust Portfolios. April has over a decade of experience in the financial services industry and spent half of her career supporting Vanguard's International Division. April has a Global MBA from the Thunderbird School of Global Management. She is fluent in both English and Spanish. April lives in Chicago with her husband and three small children.  Inga Rachwald is a Director and Senior Investment Portfolio Strategist supporting Schwab Asset Management. Prior to joining Schwab in 2016, she spent six years at RS Investments as a senior product manager and product specialist. Inga earned a Master of Business Administration in finance from Duke University and a Bachelor of Science in political science from the University of California, Berkeley. Inga lives in San Francisco and enjoys bike riding in her spare time.  Kristine Delano guides the conversation about utilizing organizational skills and communication best practices to establish work/life balance. Follow on Instagram kristine.delano.writer  Visit www.womeninetfs.com to find additional support in the ETF industry.  Go to www.kristinedelano.com for your Thrive Guide: a compilation of the most requested and insightful advice from our guests on Leadership and Advancement. In partnership with https://www.etfcentral.com/ Book recommendations:  - France: An Adventure History by Graham Robb - Battling Ward: The Life Story of a Greek Immigrant by Peter J. Douros - Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner

Stephen Dubner, host of "Freakonomics Radio" and the co-author of the Freakonomics books talks about what he's learned about failure, including how it is related to success.

Of the academic books that have become household names, “Freakonomics” must be at the top of the list. The 2005 book by University of Chicago scholar Steven Levitt and journalist Stephen Dubner created not only a whole new way of thinking about discovering answers to complex problems, but launched a media empire—from book sequel to a movie to a hit podcast.On this special episode, we sat down with Levitt during the inaugural UCPN Podcast Festival, to talk about the legacy of Freakonomics. Almost 20 years later, he told our audience how he views himself as a “data scientist” and not just an economist, what he's learned about using a coin flip to make hard decisions in life, and why he thinks he may have found the “holy grail” of solving crime. 

Stephen Dubner, the host of the Freakonomics Radio podcast and founder of the Freakonomics Radio Network, joins Scott to discuss the history of Adam Smith, the role of private equity in our society, and his thoughts on the Seven Deadly Sins. Scott opens by discussing the explosion in CEO pay and how it all trickles down to all sorts of inequality.  Algebra of Happiness: are you living in the moment? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Stephen Dubner (Freakonomics, No Stupid Questions) is an author, journalist, and podcaster. Stephen returns to the Armchair Expert to discuss why people often focus on the negative aspects of experiences, the maker vs manager conflict, and the struggles of religious fundamentalism. Stephen and Dax talk about the frustration of humans' inability to change, what the different types of large cats are, and why people want adoration from others of higher status. Stephen explains why creative people can be more prone to drug use, what a productivity trap is, and what his experience with cognitive behavioral therapy is. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A good game — whether it's a pro football playoff, or a family showdown on the kitchen table — can make you feel, at least for a little while, like your whole life hangs in the balance. This hour of Radiolab, Jad and Robert wonder why we get so invested in something so trivial. What is it about games that make them feel so pivotal? We hear how a recurring dream about football turned into a real-life lesson for Stephen Dubner, we watch a chessboard turn into a playground where by-the-book moves give way to totally unpredictable possibilities, and we talk to Dan Engber, a one time senior editor at Slate, now at The Atlantic, and a bunch of scientists about why betting on a longshot is so much fun. And finally, we talk to Malcolm Gladwell about why he loves the overdog. CITATIONS: Videos -  The Immaculate Reception (https://zpr.io/izhV3Sm88SWF) by Franco Harris on December 23, 1972. Harris was the Pittsburgh Steelers' fullback at the time. Books -  Stephen J. Dubner's book, Confessions of a Hero Worshipper (https://zpr.io/iQUwfF8vGArj) Our newsletter comes out every Wednesday. It includes short essays, recommendations, and details about other ways to interact with the show. Sign up (https://radiolab.org/newsletter)! Radiolab is supported by listeners like you. Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab (https://members.radiolab.org/) today. Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @radiolab, and share your thoughts with us by emailing radiolab@wnyc.org Leadership support for Radiolab's science programming is provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation Initiative, and the John Templeton Foundation. Foundational support for Radiolab was provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

In a special episode of No Stupid Questions, Stephen Dubner and Angela Duckworth discuss classroom design, open offices, and cognitive drift. 

As the Biden administration rushes to address climate change, Stephen Dubner looks at another, hidden cost of air pollution — one that's affecting how we think.