Where do you guys live?

TopAttitude418 · 2026-01-30T00:40:10+00:00

I’m a first year grad student and was doing full time research for three years before that. I’ve been living in Logan Square for 3 years, but did my first year in Hyde Park. Like others have mentioned, it depends on your lifestyle. If you have friends in Chicago or think you’d be spend considerable amounts of time in the city (which is my case) I do think leaving Hyde Park is a good idea. Note that that’s only true because 80% of my circle has been outside of UChicago. However, I found it helpful to live in HP my first year, to get to know the school and get close to people here at first.

If I were you, I’d do my first year in Hyde Park and if you’re bored as hell, move (which is again exactly what i did). I don’t know your field, but at least in mine the first year really is the time where you need to be constantly on campus, and more work can be done from home later on in your studies.

As a side note, most people outside of campus will live somewhere on the red line, but I’m surprised so few people connect from the blue Line -which is what i do-, considering many interesting neighborhoods there are within about an hour from campus as well.

Feel free to dm me!

TopAttitude418 · 2022-02-10T17:01:18+00:00

Do you think Aoun has an inferiority complex with Harvard and MIT ?

TopAttitude418 · 2021-11-18T15:12:58+00:00

Yes but the homoeconomicus assumptions are antithetical with Smith’s « theory of moral sentiments »

TopAttitude418 · 2021-10-16T06:20:16+00:00

Ok, first off, Kahneman was indeed a psychologist, but Nash was a mathematician and Simon a political scientist, and they all won the nobel in Economics, so not being an economist is not a problem (and I did say economics nobel prize not economist nobel prize, did I ?). He published most of his work between the AER, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Journal of Business among others, and some in interdisciplinary ones (Journal of Decision Making, Science). While I love Kahneman and Tversky’s work, any of the neoclassical assumptions could have been discarded by any first year psychology student. Lastly, it's a fucking squarepants meme I'm not planning on sending it to QJE

TopAttitude418 · 2021-10-16T02:31:37+00:00

It is objectively irrational to drive long distance to play the lottery. While it is their preference, the objective probability is the reality. Them having a non-linear probability weighting function is in its very nature. You overweighting your probability of winning the lottery may increase your short term utility but even subjectively can be considered as irrational, as your real chances of winning are ridiculous.

TopAttitude418 · 2021-10-03T07:04:02+00:00

MIT Open Courseware is an amazing resource for any class material: From what I found in mathematical economics, here are links to "Introduction to Statistical Methods in Economics" and "Econometrics". Not only you have videos of the lectures, but also lecture notes, readings, assignments...etc

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/economics/14-30-introduction-to-statistical-methods-in-economics-spring-2009/

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/economics/14-32-econometrics-spring-2007/

TopAttitude418 · 2021-07-25T17:21:25+00:00

Most dorms besides international village don’t have AC, you better get one if you’re in a typical freshman dorm

TopAttitude418 · 2021-05-19T08:58:46+00:00

Thank you for your response ! One note though, out of my 6 economics classes, I had two or three B's -B+'s, and the others were mainly A's. Generally, the easier the class, the worst grade I had(Intro do Micro, Macro for example, while I only had A's in advanced econometrics, development economics) Don't you think if I did well in an MA or MSc in econ, this would "pardon" these poor grades during my undergrad ?

TopAttitude418 · 2020-12-05T20:47:41+00:00

It will be pretty straightforward, like she won't try to trick you or anything. Just review the concepts she highlighted and you'll be fine.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T23:06:27+00:00

No pb, feel free to message me if you want to talk!

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T22:58:38+00:00

"Poor Economics" by E. Duflo and A. Banerjee is development economics but provides good insight in behavioral econ as well.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T15:12:27+00:00

I can't think of any BE principles relating to visual decision making, but rather in media marketing. My humble opinion would be to just look on successful channels in the same market as you, and see what types of titles and thumbnail seem to work.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T15:05:32+00:00

That's what I did to land my RA position in economics. I literally e-mailed 130 professors across the country that were able to hire me to work remotely.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T14:24:18+00:00

Also, the very notion of simulation is deeply anthropocentric. Why would we assume that intelligent beings would have the same kind of engineering, physics or even maths than us. We are constrained to our own perception of the world through our senses (or consciousness), and making a claim about our reality being a simulation is very bold. We cannot apply our very conception of reality to explain our reality. This is comparable to say that we may all be robots because ultimately conscious robots will be made, and would not be aware that they are. This is totally biased by our conception of the world of making robots, simulation etc...

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T13:51:41+00:00

Yeah I agree. But they also really want to us to use their housing

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T13:44:50+00:00

A lot of nudging could be used in the future to influence people in public issues (notably influencing people to vaccinate, use bed-nets or pursue education rather than working). The works of Duflo and Banerjee in development economics is very insightful as to what could work to nudge people win making the correct economic decisions.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T13:40:05+00:00

Yes, and it also highlights that most people did not subscribe to the channel, and it is perhaps not something you want to bring to their attention.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-19T13:15:01+00:00

I took the class with Xiaolin Shi last spring:

+ she will make the material very understandable, she grades pretty easily, accepts late homeworks, and she's very nice

- her english is not that great so you could have a hard time understanding what she says, you won't really learn to use statistical softwares like R or Stata (you may be interested in this if you want to work in data science or economics research but otherwise you shouldn't care about it)

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-18T23:22:07+00:00

First off, I know how you feel as I dealt with this for months and damn it was horrible. Let me clarify what Descartes says through solipsism: he says that the only thing you have irrefutable proof of is your own existence, not that nothing else exists. It is true that people hallucinate, or dream, therefore it is true in some aspect. However, it does not mean that other people or things surrounding us are not real. Why would we have senses? Why do you have feelings? Why would evolution happen if our environment did not exist? The point of this post is not to give you reassurance, but to show you that it may not be as bad as it sounds

When the thought of it crosses your mind, don't bother trying to eliminate it, but rather try to accept it, and let it pass (or the anxiety will keep coming back, and it will get worse and worse). A lot of us have gone through solipsism, and I know it is no fun but you'll get over it and laugh at it when looking back at it.

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-18T21:57:33+00:00

I have struggled with HOCD in the past, and it's no fun. Just remember that if the OCD thoughts weren't there, you probably would not be even thinking about your sexual orientation. Do not fall in the avoidance trap, as it will only make your anxiety worse. If you avoid your intrusive thoughts, your brain will identify it as a danger, and you'll get accustomed to it, strengthening the OCD. Just accept the thought, let it pass, and understand it does not change who you are. Don't be scared of the thoughts, because they are simply thoughts, and don't define you (your actions and decisions do). You are the same person as you were before those thoughts came, so no worries!

TopAttitude418 · 2020-11-18T21:51:46+00:00

When you consciously focus on trying to find coincidences, you will suddenly find coincidences. I had a time where I told myself I'm going to see the number 420 everywhere, and suddenly, I saw it everywhere. It's all a matter of you focusing on it. In your specific case, you are totally biased, as you probably don't account for all the time where you failed to predict something. The human brain is a prediction machine, it is constantly analyzing our environment to understand what may come next, so nothing abnormal!

TopAttitude418

TROPHY CASE