This past weekend I spent a lot of time watching Olympic ice hockey. (I only watch hockey once every four years when the Winter Olympics rolls around.) I was delighted by the Canadian women's victory, but it doesn't look so good for the Canadian and US men's teams, which go up against Russia and unbeaten Finland, respectively, tomorrow.

I was surprised by the news of Larry Summers' resignation as Harvard president, because I never expected that he would be the type to willingly step down in the face of faculty opposition. I was happy to see him make that decision, but not as happy as I thought I would be. I think this is because to the rest of the world this instibility reflects poorly on Harvard, rather than on the Corporation for having chosen him. I also expect that the media will interpret his resignation as a result of the left-wing Harvard faculty being unable to tolerate his political incorrectness, and this will make Harvard look silly and intolerant. In reality, faculty rebelled against him due to his abrasive and domineering governing style, but I expect that his political statements will get more attention. Indeed this has so far been the case, although the New York Times emphasized his governing style and tendency to drive subordinate officials he disliked to resign. The Asahi Shinbun carried the story with the headline "Harvard president Summers resigns amidst strong opposition to his discriminatory statements". It would be nice if this were taken as an opportunity for Harvard Corporation reform (presidents are chosen solely by a board consisting of seven or so corporate executives with no faculty or student input), but that's the last thing I expect to come of this. It's been an odd and fruitless five years, but I hope that they do find someone who combines Summers' ambitious vision and energy with considerably more conciliatory interpersonal skills.