Saturday, August 18, 2018

Following Up On "Commodity traders superior to chimpanzees": The Importance of Pockets

We left Thursday's "Commodity traders superior to chimpanzees, research shows" with the observation that any advantage commodity traders had over their simian cousins could probably be ascribed to pockets or other forms of storage:
...The report becomes particularly readable when it speculates on the reasons why [chimps are lousy traders]: because of their lack of property ownership norms...

...or, for that matter, pockets.... ...chimpanzees in nature do not store property and thus would have little opportunity to trade commodities...
Here is further discussion of the importance of pockets and the disadvantage society places on half its members.
From The Pudding, August 2018:

Someone clever once said Women were not allowed Pockets
There are few things more frustrating than collecting your belongings only to realize that the pockets in your pants are too small to hold them. Or worse, the fabric designed to look like a pocket is merely for decoration and doesn’t open at all.

For wearers of women’s clothes, this struggle is so real. You don’t have to look far to find Twitter-rants, articles, and videos in which people are either complaining about not having pockets or rejoicing over that rare gem that is the “dress with pockets”. And sure, we could all carry handbags, which is likely what the 8 billion dollar purse industry hopes we’ll do, but not everyone wants to carry a bag. After all, men’s pants pockets are basically the pockets of our dreams.
But, like so many things on the internet, we could find complaints and anecdotes galore but little data illustrating just how inferior women’s pockets really are to men’s. So, we went there.
We measured the pockets in both men’s and women’s pants in 20 of the US’ most popular blue jeans brands. Take a look at what we found....
...MORE, the results of the investigation are actually a bit troubling.

HT: MetaFilter's Pockets Long suspected, now proven

If interested see also:

To Create A "1%" In A Social Hierarchy You Don't Need An Economic Surplus, Just A Storable Form Of Wealth 

So there I was, reading the abstract of "Hazelnut economy of early Holocene hunter–gatherers: a case study from Mesolithic Duvensee, northern Germany", thinking about Nutella and Frangelico when this grabbed my eye:
...High-resolution analyses of the excellently preserved and well-dated special task camps documented in detail at Duvensee, Northern Germany, offer an outstanding opportunity for case studies on Mesolithic subsistence and land use strategies. Quantification of the nut utilisation demonstrates the great importance of hazelnuts. These studies revealed very high return rates and allow for absolute assessments of the development of early Holocene economy. Stockpiling of the energy rich resource and an increased logistical capacity are innovations characterising an intensified early Mesolithic land use...
Stockpiling, storage, commodities, well that's right in our wheelhouse,* and if I can combine it with the last remnants of interest in Piketty's approach to inequality.....maybe I can synthesize something halfway original...

Yeah, it's already been done....Cereals, appropriability, and hierarchy...