Six years ago John Tierney and Garth Sundem came up with an equation that predicted how long a celebrity marriage was likely to last. The variables included how much more famous the wife was than the husband, the difference in their ages, the length of courtship, and how sexy the wife was perceived to be. They reported on the success of their predictions:

• The equation was correct about these marriages being doomed from the start:
  • Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher
  • Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock
  • Britney Spears and Kevin Federline
• The equation was also correct about the following marriages lasting a long time:
  • Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner
  • Matt Damon and Luciana Barroso
• The equation incorrectly predicted doom for Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes
• Current couples predicted to be married for more than 15 years include:
  • Kate and Prince William
  • Calista Flockhart and Harrison Ford
  • Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mezvinsky
  • Beyoncé Knowles and Jay-Z

The two analysts have gone back to their equation to modify it. To read about how they’ve made it more relevant, why men might be an enigma, and what happens when you calculate the chances of Khloe Kardashian and Lamar Odom’s marriage lasting, even to 15 decimal places, click here.

Source: The New York Times

Via: Kottke

Joshua E. Keating notes that the United States has become a training ground of sorts for military dictators. Examples include:

• Amadou Haya Sanogo who overthrew Mali’s government last month and received basic officer training in the United States.
• Yahya Jammeh who received military police training in Alabama and remains in power after a coup in The Gambia 18 years ago. He has told his critics to go to hell and has vowed to rule for a billion years.
• Michel Francois who received small arms and ammunition repair training in Maryland and helped lead a coup in Haiti in 1991.

To read many more examples, including the dictator who fled to the very place he swore to destroy, the School of the Americas that seems to produce a disproportionate number of coup leaders, and the man who survived 13 coup attempts, click here.

Source: Foreign Policy

Via: Freakonomics

Back in February OKcupid went through its database to find out the questions that can tell you the most about your prospects with a date. Highlights from Dina Spector’s report include:

• If your date likes the taste of beer they are 60% more likely to have sex on the first date across both genders.
• Men are more likely to be up for sex after the first-date if they think that starting a nuclear war could be exciting.
• 32% of successful couples have the same answers to the following questions:
  • Do you like horror movies?
  • Have you ever traveled around another country alone?
  • Wouldn’t it be fun to chuck it all and go live on a sailboat?

To read more about what it means if your date has a problem with bad grammar, how to subtly figure out the political orientation of your date, and the methodology of the study, click here.

Source: Business Insider

Via: Newmark’s Door

Stay in touch with Centives through Twitter or Facebook.

Quick, which is the richest country on earth? The fattest? It’s not the United States writes Haley Sweetland Edwards. It’s Qatar:

• Qatar has the highest per capita GDP in the world. Studies suggest that half of all adults and a third of all children are obese. The small Connecticut sized country also has high rates of diabetes and birth defects.
• The country became rich overnight, going from a small dusty city to a rich cosmopolitan metropolis. Suddenly Qataris could offer maids and workers, and could eat the finest foods, creating health issues.
• A strong tribal culture where inter-marriage between close family members is common has led to a concentration of the gene pool and an increase in genetic defects.
• Women in Qatar generally stay in-doors meaning that they don’t get enough exercise.

To read more about the steps that the government is taking to solve this problem, what the Qatar Olympic Committee has to say, and how health statistics in Qatar compare with the United States, click here.

Source: The Atlantic

Jason Palmer reports that when male flies have their sexual advances spurned by female flies they are more likely to turn to alcohol. Highlights of the study include:

• Flies were put into a box with either virgin females who were open to having sex or females that had already mated, and thus rejected the males.
• Those in the rejected box were more likely to drink a mixture that contained 15% alcohol.
• Scientists think that alcohol might give the flies the same high as sex thus satisfying their cravings.
• Humans share the same chemicals that are implicated in the production of this behaviour.

To read more about what happened when scientists directly altered the chemicals responsible in the flies’ brains, what this says about human interaction, and why alcohol hijacks our evolutionary mechanisms click here.

Source: BBC

Via: Freakonomics

When George Washington retired from public life, writes Emily Yoffe, he opted to be referred to by his military rank rather than as President Washington. This is in stark contrast to American public officials today who maintain their title even after they retire from office. Yoffe argues that there are several reasons why this is a practice that needs to be stopped and why when President Obama leaves office he should be referred to as Mr. Obama:

• The constitutionality of doing so is debatable. The constitution states that “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States” yet by referring to officials by their former titles, a new, separate, class of citizens is created, one with everlasting titles.
• In cases where the office is only held by one person at a time – such as the Presidency, it is rude to the current office-holder for previous office-holders to retain their title.
• It also opens up the possibility of corruption and abuse. Former Generals working in the private sector might mislead defense contractors into thinking they represent the government by introducing themselves as General.
• Current transgressors include Al Gore, Dick Cheney, George Bush and Jimmy Carter.

To read more about what it says about status anxiety, why the Senate wanted to refer to the President as “His Highness”, what Adams and Truman did differently, and why the title ‘congressman’ is incorrect click here.

Source: Slate

Matthew O’Brien argues against it wasn’t just De Beers that led to the widespread adoption of diamonds; the initial surge of diamond imports happened four years before De Beers launched its advertising campaign. The role of diamonds as a form of social insurance was also important:

• For a woman to get married it used to be extremely important for her to be a virgin. Yet most engaged couples reported having sex before the actual wedding.
• There used to be “Breach of Promise to Marry” laws that allowed women to sue former fiancés who walked out on them, thus making them pay for losing their virginity to them.
• When those laws were repealed diamonds became what we would think of as insurance. An engagement can be thought of as a loan in this time: the man is promising to marry the woman in the future in return for her companionship in the present. The diamond is collateral. In this time if the fiancé broke off the engagement the former bride-to be would keep the ring.
• Econometric analysis backs up this suggestion. States that repealed the Breach of Promise to Marry laws earlier were more likely to see a surge in diamond imports.

To read about how things are different now since women have their own careers and now earn both more degrees and more money, as well as some relationship advice when it comes to deciding whether or not you should buy a diamond for your girlfriend, click here.

Source: The Atlantic

Jordan Weissman discusses an emerging trend: the younger generation just doesn’t seem to be interested in driving. Not only are they buying fewer cars, fewer of them even have licenses. An outline of the problem incudes:

• Younger people now seem more interested in buying smart phones and gaming consoles rather than cars.
• Younger people also prefer living in urban environments where things are at a walking distance.
• The younger generation has also been through rough economic times and has learnt to make do without automobiles.
• GM has appointed a ‘youth emissary’ to remedy this problem.
• Chevrolet has started selling colours such as “techno pink”, “lemonade” and “denim” to appeal to a younger market.

To read about whether or not this shift is permanent, how successful the automobile-maker’s efforts have been, the types of cars that might appeal to the young, and what exactly Millenials are, click here.

Source: The Atlantic

Brian Hall believes that Android, Google’s mobile computer operating system, is hurting Google. Here’s why:

• The reviews of Google’s devices are negative compared to other smartphones. Both the iPhone and the Windows Phone provide a better experience.
• Despite the huge drain on its revenues, Google isn’t making much money from Android. Samsung, Android’s most popular device manufacturer might be making some money, but not Google.
• One estimate suggests that Google has made just $550 million from Android. Yet Google has spent up to $20 billion on Android.
• In fact, Android might be hurting Google’s core business of search from which it still derives the vast majority of its revenues, slowly killing the entire Google enterprise. Reasons include:
  • Google receives more search queries from the iPhone despite the iPhone having a smaller market share, suggesting that Android’s dominance has failed to help Google’s search business.
  • People don’t really search on their mobile phones anymore anyway. They use apps and Google makes no money from this.
  • Even if people did use Google search on Android the value of ads on small-screen smart phones is low.

To read what the future of smartphones is, why Android probably won’t figure in it, what Google should do, and why Amazon has benefitted from Google’s wastefulness click here.

Source: The Examiner

In an article in The New York Times and in a follow-up post on the Economix blog, Eduardo Porter showed why opposing child labour might be counter-productive. Highlights of his argument include:

• The best cure to poverty is economic development. By opposing child labour in your products, activists are saying that they value the satisfaction they get from being ‘moral’ more than the suffering this causes by removing from poor the chance to escape poverty.
• Countries that have received the most multi-national investment have reduced poverty and child-labour the most. China which has attracted a lot of foreign investment has decreased its poverty rate by more than 17%. Bangladesh which has been ignored by foreigners has not seen its poverty rate change.
• Even if companies convince their third-world subcontractors to improve working conditions, the costs are usually borne by the subcontractors themselves – forcing them to decrease already thin margins.
• Most children don’t work in manufacturing anyway. They work in dangerous industries such as carpet making. If they’re kicked out of factories then they have no choice but to work in places that are potentially deadly.

To read more specific statistics behind the argument, and why trying to get Apple to change its labour practices might not be a bad idea after all, check out the source links.

Source: New York Times, Economix