Bertolli did one better:
http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/bertolli-makes-most-barilla-chairmans-anti-gay-comments-152758

Cayenne pepper for me.

Ha! Nice one... wish I had mod points for you! :)

That's certainly true, but some fraction of them will be good teachers innately or from additional training. Given the current job market, where there are far more highly qualified candidates than you can even short-list for any tenure-track faculty position at even non-prestigious research universities, departments can afford to be picky when they hire. In other words, don't expect to get hired today if you're only a good researcher but not a good teacher, because someone else who applied for the job will both be a good researcher *and* a good teacher.

As a consequence, the past 5 years of tenure-track hires at pretty much any university are, on average, much better teachers than average hires have been before.

There was no Star Trek V - it jumped straight from IV to VI! Now if only they'd make the prequels to the Star Wars movies...

[TMB]

This would be horrible - the need the organization has for the employee and the rate they pay are only loosely connected depending on what the employee does and what other organizations pay someone equivalent.

For example, I am on H1B status. I am a professor of astrophysics at a state university. If I were a early-career software developer, I would make more than I currently do, and therefore would be more eligible to be here under your plan. But the university needs me as a professor with my particular skills more than it needs a random early-career software developer - but the prevailing wage for software developers is higher because they are also hired by companies who can afford to pay higher salaries.

(of course, I wouldn't object to the "pay professors more" solution, but because a significant fraction of the university's budget comes from the state, it is more limited and is much less sensitive to market pressures than the companies who hire software developers. Not that I think that's necessarily a good thing, but it's also not going to change any time soon)

Salt is an ingredient whose apparent strength depends strongly on how acclimated you are to it. So if you don't use much salt, it doesn't take much for food to taste like nothing but salt, but if you use a fair bit then you need a fair bit or food tastes bland.

Yeah, agreed. I migrated three times ever: DOS to Windows in '95 (pre-Win95 doesn't count as an OS), Windows to Linux in the late 90s, and Linux to OSX almost 10 years ago. How many times exactly is someone expected to do the same migration??

Oh to have mod points... come on someone, read this one and think about it!

Do you need scrollbars eating screen real estate when they aren't needed or you aren't scrolling? They appear when you scroll if you need them, just scroll a tiny bit and poof, there they are ... and they get larger if you hover near them so they are easier to hit. What EXACTLY is your complaint?

You're the first person I've heard who doesn't think this is the most vile thing ever done to their OS. Yes, you do. They provide information - where are you in a document. I don't want to need to change where I am in a document to find that out.

To any of you who think this is cool science and want to make sure more of it gets done: The GBT is under very severe threat of shutting down. In the recent NSF Portfolio Review, it was recommended that given the "current" funding situation (this was last year), the NSF divest itself of certain observatories including Green Bank. That means the telescope will shut down, unless a private consortium (i.e. of universities) can scrape together enough money to take it over.

Note also that the "current" funding situation referred to was even before the sequester, so the chances of getting the NSF to change their minds have dropped significantly - there is just not enough money in the budget. But please lobby your congressional representatives to restore funding for basic research if you think this is important!

If prepay is setup to do a la carte on the plans, then why does AT&T require a data plan for smartphones *even on prepay plans*? I don't have a cell phone right now because AT&T is the only carrier that has decent coverage at home, I only make about 2-3 calls a month so a monthly plan would obviously be ludicrous, but I want a smartphone to use wifi, which is available most everywhere I spend time.

The problem is that a lot of his uncertainty comes from systematics, not statistical error. If it was pure statistical error, then you could definitely do that based on 3 elections, but he was either going to get essentially every state right (if the systematics were small) or every state wrong by about the same amount (if they weren't).