Sam Handlin

1.6K posts

Sam Handlin banner
Sam Handlin

Sam Handlin

@shandlin

Swarthmore polisci prof. Elections/polarization/regimes. Currently working on digital surveillance, secret policing, and autocracy in Venezuela.

Katılım Haziran 2009
1.2K Takip Edilen914 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
Want to better understand the roots of polarization and democratic erosion in Venezuela and elsewhere in Latin America? My book is now available in (much more affordable) paperback from Cambridge University Press! cambridge.org/core/books/sta…
English
3
15
65
0
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@RevolutionandIR @DouthatNYT Iran has thousands of missiles and tens of thousands of drones left. The Houthis have advanced missile capabilities they could start firing from the other direction. GCC coastal energy infrastructure are big fat targets that are close to Iran and very hard to defend.
English
1
0
0
40
Ross Douthat
Ross Douthat@DouthatNYT·
Just a comment on the limits of Suez analogies here. What happened at Suez was that the U.S. issued a veto on British and French action, demonstrating that they could no longer conduct an independent foreign policy under the shadow of the American hegemon. With Iran and Hormuz, the (provisional) veto on Trumpian escalation came above all from domestic political constraints, the likelihood Americans would not endure ground-operation casualties or higher gas prices for the hazy objectives of this war. You can argue back and forth about what that domestic veto means for American empire, but being constrained by internal politics is meaningfully different from having your foreign policy plans vetoed by a new global hegemon.
English
56
126
1K
115.8K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@RevolutionandIR @DouthatNYT Iran would have destroyed GCC energy infrastructure, plunging the global economy into depression, and destroying a basis of US hegemony. This was MAD doctrine. Its a matter of political will in the same way that avoiding a nuclear exchange with NK is a matter of political will.
English
1
0
0
46
Paul Ewenstein
Paul Ewenstein@RevolutionandIR·
@shandlin @DouthatNYT But the US could have broken the blockade. The problem was it would've required a large ground deployment for which, as Ross said, the political will didn't exist.
English
1
0
2
49
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@omriceren Iranian Navy was always a joke and unimportant. Missile stocks depleted but still extant and easy to rebuild. No real progress on nuclear. No regime change. Iran with tighter control of Hormuz than before the war. US regional basing in tatters.
English
2
0
2
624
Omri Ceren
Omri Ceren@omriceren·
You guys are overthinking this. President Trump outlined four strategic goals and then Hormuz became a fifth. So - 1. Missiles ✅ 2. Navy ✅ 3. Proxies ☑️. The Houthis mostly kept their heads down and Hezbollah is not covered by the ceasefire. The answer back is that Iraq is still touch and go. The answer to the answer is that Iranian command and control has been degraded. Let's say 65/35 at worst. 4. Hormuz 🤷. That's the point of the ceasefire and what today is about. This is just an integer: the number of ships that transit. 5. Nuclear 🤷. That's the point of negotiations and what the next two weeks are about. This is a binary: either Iran gives up its highly enriched uranium or it doesn't.
English
27
38
188
20.7K
İyad el-Baghdadi | إياد البغدادي
İyad el-Baghdadi | إياد البغدادي@iyad_elbaghdadi·
Note for context: I was born & raised in the Gulf, and lived the first 37 years of my life in the UAE. I still have friends & family in the UAE & the rest of the Gulf who I love dearly and worry about daily. Anyway, on to it.
English
6
25
263
97.8K
İyad el-Baghdadi | إياد البغدادي
İyad el-Baghdadi | إياد البغدادي@iyad_elbaghdadi·
On Friday, I presented a risk assessment briefing re the Iran war to my team on an internal call. We thought it was worth sharing the notes (which were AI-transcribed & summarized), so here goes. Posting without much editing to save time.
English
52
330
1.2K
467.4K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@akoustov That (among other abuse I’ve seen you receive) is exactly what folks shouldn’t be doing. We need to be able to be open and honest and not to slam colleagues who have different perspectives. Nobody has the definitive answer.
English
1
0
4
118
Alexander Kustov
Alexander Kustov@akoustov·
I keep hearing the same bullshit from some academics: "Alex, we know you use AI, we do it too, but can't you just be quiet about it?" This has to stop. Explicitly advocating for universal hypocrisy as a professional norm is quite a take. If the tool is fine to use, why would honesty about using it be the problem? If the tool is not fine to use, just be open about it and say why. If it's not fine but you realize that people will use it anyway because...incentives, say how it can be used better.
alex bronzini-vender@alexbronzini

Journalists and columnists are inevitably gonna use AI to write. That’s impossible to police. But we should, at least, make it deeply taboo to admit it publicly

English
13
9
132
23.4K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@paulnovosad This last dynamics is how you get people explaining at length about how AI can't possibly be doing things, despite abundant evidence to the contrary, because its just predicting tokens.
English
0
0
1
28
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@paulnovosad We live in the age of tech-enabled motivated reasoning and this is a topic about which people have really high levels of motivation to "reason" toward conclusions that are less threatening to them. And the most educated are the most likely to engage in motivated reasoning.
English
2
0
2
160
Paul Novosad
Paul Novosad@paulnovosad·
The world model of many "stochastic parrot" folks was: We know who is good and bad, and bad people can't do good or interesting things. This model pervades social media and academic environments, and is deeply fallacious. I wonder how many people updating on ChatGPT are also updating on the world model that made them so wrong in the first place.
English
6
7
69
6.9K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
At least on Latin America, this is a remarkably ignorant paper that ignores decades of research and misses the most critical point: SAPs were a response to crisis in ISI economies. In most countries, the worst of the "lost decade" occurred prior to structural adjustment.
Jason Hickel@jasonhickel

I'm happy to announce this new paper — we compile evidence on the extraordinary harms caused by IMF and World Bank structural adjustment programmes in the global South since the 1980s. The empirical record is devastating: documented negative impacts on wages, poverty, inequality, maternal mortality, infant mortality, healthcare access, etc. SAPs inflicted misery on the periphery in order to curtail their consumption, scupper independent development, and make labour and resources more cheaply available for the core. gh.bmj.com/content/11/Sup…

English
0
1
1
145
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@JohnJSSoriano Beyond the issue of actually inferring impact, it is simply completely false that most SAPs were initiated in 1980, as the figure claims.
English
0
0
1
634
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@pkwestel XG difference under Carrick (by understat's model) is about 6.2 and about 3.6 of that is playing 11 v 10 against Spurs and Palace. That gets lost too...
English
1
0
1
1.3K
Pauly Kwestel
Pauly Kwestel@pkwestel·
Back in October I started writing a piece (that for one reason or another never made it past the drafts folder) about how Utd's good xG numbers after 7 games were pretty misleading because there was a lot of garbage time stat farming in there That gets lost in the context here
The xG Philosophy@xGPhilosophy

Man Utd’s xG Difference this season under… 🇵🇹 Amorim: +0.62(xG) per game 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Carrick: +0.54(xG) per game

English
7
30
342
61.9K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@arash_tehran If you can't reveal the name of your counterparty for fear they might be killed, that person does not actually have the authority to negotiate a deal.
English
0
0
4
682
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@thearsfamily97 They rarely pressed man 2 man. It was mainly just 4-2-4 zonal and the way to beat that is the keeper chipping the ball to the fullback on the touchline or playing line splitting passes to front players rolling into pockets of space. Kepa just wouldn’t do it.
English
1
0
21
2K
Uzumaki Tony
Uzumaki Tony@thearsfamily97·
Watch ONLY Ødegaard here. You see how deep he went into the box and even took the ball to the penalty spot... just to drag the press. And this is Brighton, one of the best pressing teams in the EPL. This is what Zubimendi should have done vs City. Go deeper and deeper. If they follow you, you have disrupted their M2M press. If they don't follow you, you can turn around and face forward, then dictate play from there via carrying or passing. Unfortunately, Arteta might know Zubimendi cannot do this or Zubimendi himself doesn't trust himself to be able to do this.
GIF
Uzumaki Tony@thearsfamily97

What annoyed me was that he never dropped super deep to lure the press. If his marker follows him deeper into the box, it leaves more space for Havertz to receive a direct pass from the GK. If his marker doesn't follow him deep, Zubimendi is able to receive the ball and turning around, facing forward, which allows him to dictate play better. This is what Ødegaard did countless times for us, which is why I'm surprised Arteta didn't tell Zubimendi to do it. Or perhaps Arteta doesn't feel Zubimendi can do it? I'm not sure what the issue is.

English
32
96
579
104.6K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@billycarpy The biggest issue was Kepa. You attack that kind of press with long linebreakers to players rolling into midfield from the front four or chipped passes to the FBs pushed up on the outside. He was unwilling to play either so we depended on hopeful punts and second balls.
English
0
0
7
695
Billy Carpenter
Billy Carpenter@billycarpy·
The midfield double-pivot was the least of my concerns on that one, really. Pep kept a flat, compact four-man front to deny them the ball. Rodri/Bernardo behind. That means space is elsewhere. It's on the others to take advantage.
English
20
39
471
27.5K
Sam Handlin
Sam Handlin@shandlin·
@scottjwillis @themagic_tophat These examples just show why focusing on the length of the throw is silly. The big difference with throws isn't the length of the throw, its whether the team moves all of its big players into the box (like with a corner) in a designed play. That didn't happen in either case.
English
0
0
0
142
Scott Willis
Scott Willis@scottjwillis·
@themagic_tophat This goal was the one that initially came to my mind but it was just short on the distance cut off (17 instead of 20+) even though it also is following a throw into the box.
English
6
0
23
7.3K

Keşfet

@RevolutionandIR @DouthatNYT @omriceren @iyad_elbaghdadi @threadreaderapp @akoustov @paulnovosad @conexionsegura